# Mechanised Divisions Pakistan Army



## Signalian

Some time back a member asked me if there are any armour regiments in Pakistan Army's mechanised divisions so i have some info to share. 

Pakistan Army has 2 Mechanised Divisions, 25th Mechanised Division and 26th Mechanised Divisions. The 17th and 14th still carry the designation of Infantry Divisions.

Theoretically the 25th and 26th are mechanised divisions but in fact these 2 divisions are heavily armoured and have more strength (in infantry) than even 1st Armoured and 6th Armoured Divisions of Pakistan Army. The reason the 25th and 26th Mechanised Divisions are called Mechanised because naming them Armoured Divisions will cause concern to India as well as to USA that:

1. PA has stationed an Armoured Division (26th Mechanised Div) near to border in Bahawalpur, Southern Punjab. Placing an armoured division next to border is the intent of attacking an enemy otherwise armoured assets considered as offensive forces are not kept next to borders. This is another reason why the 6th Armoured Division is placed in Gujranwala and not in Sialkot, whereas its main area of action is considered to be Sialkot region.

2. PA will have 4 Armoured Divisions (1st and 6th, 25th and 26th) while IA has 3 Armoured Divisions and this will cause further alarm in India and bring pressure from USA to downsize strength. This is why the V-Corps has a few Independent Armoured Brigades and it is considered that V-Corps Armoured assets will be used under one HQ in war as an Armoured Division. 

PA's Mechanised Division:

A Brigade: Armoured Regiment + Armoured Regiment + Mechanised Infantry Battalion. 

B Brigade: Armoured Regiment + Armoured Regiment + Mechanised Infantry Battalion.

C Brigade: Armoured Regiment + Mechanised Infantry Battalion + Mechanised Infantry Battalion.

Thats 5 X Armoured Regiments and 4 X Mechanised Infantry Battalions in one Mechanised Division. I havent included Support Brigades and Divisional troops. Each Mechanised Infantry Battalion has 50 APC.

Those who consider that Rahim yar Khan is an area where IA CSD can succeed should keep in mind that the whole stretch is protected by a Division which has 220 MBT at its disposal. plus an Independent Armoured Brigade having 88 MBT.

@Ulla @Northern @django @Mentee @Khafee @tps77 @CriticalThought @Baloch Pakistani

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
2 | Like Like:
43


----------



## Mentee

do Indians already know abiut the info yiu posted ?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## CriticalThought

This is very good planning by PA. But, at the same time, we need to plan for unlikely scenarios and rehearse for them, because the enemy will see the benefit of using a strategy that is least expected by us.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Tps43

Signalian said:


> Some time back a member asked me if there are any armour regiments in Pakistan Army's mechanised divisions so i have some info to share.
> 
> Pakistan Army has 2 Mechanised Divisions, 25th Mechanised Division and 26th Mechanised Divisions. The 17th and 14th still carry the designation of Infantry Divisions.
> 
> Theoretically the 25th and 26th are mechanised divisions but in fact these 2 divisions are heavily armoured and have more strength (in infantry) than even 1st Armoured and 6th Armoured Divisions of Pakistan Army. The reason the 25th and 26th Mechanised Divisions are called Mechanised because naming them Armoured Divisions will cause concern to India as well as to USA that:
> 
> 1. PA has stationed an Armoured Division (26th Mechanised Div) near to border in Bahawalpur, Southern Punjab. Placing an armoured division next to border is the intent of attacking an enemy otherwise armoured assets considered as offensive forces are not kept next to borders. This is another reason why the 6th Armoured Division is placed in Gujranwala and not in Sialkot, whereas its main area of action is considered to be Sialkot region.
> 
> 2. PA will have 4 Armoured Divisions (1st and 6th, 25th and 26th) while IA has 3 Armoured Divisions and this will cause further alarm in India and bring pressure from USA to downsize strength. This is why the V-Corps has a few Independent Armoured Brigades and it is considered that V-Corps Armoured assets will be used under one HQ in war as an Armoured Division.
> 
> PA's Mechanised Division:
> 
> A Brigade: Armoured Regiment + Armoured Regiment + Mechanised Infantry Battalion.
> 
> B Brigade: Armoured Regiment + Armoured Regiment + Mechanised Infantry Battalion.
> 
> C Brigade: Armoured Regiment + Mechanised Infantry Battalion + Mechanised Infantry Battalion.
> 
> Thats 5 X Armoured Regiments and 4 X Mechanised Infantry Battalions in one Mechanised Division. I havent included Support Brigades and Divisional troops. Each Mechanised Infantry Battalion has 50 APC.
> 
> Those who consider that Rahim yar Khan is an area where IA CSD can succeed should keep in mind that the whole stretch is protected by a Division which has 220 MBT at its disposal. plus an Independent Armoured Brigade having 88 MBT.
> 
> @Ulla @Northern @django @Mentee @Khafee @tps77 @CriticalThought @Baloch Pakistani


Nice piece of info.
BTW is only punjab covered like this or also anyother province as well?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Gryphon

Signalian said:


> Some time back a member asked me if there are any armour regiments in Pakistan Army's mechanised divisions so i have some info to share.
> 
> Pakistan Army has 2 Mechanised Divisions, 25th Mechanised Division and 26th Mechanised Divisions. The 17th and 14th still carry the designation of Infantry Divisions.
> 
> Theoretically the 25th and 26th are mechanised divisions but in fact these 2 divisions are heavily armoured and have more strength (in infantry) than even 1st Armoured and 6th Armoured Divisions of Pakistan Army. The reason the 25th and 26th Mechanised Divisions are called Mechanised because naming them Armoured Divisions will cause concern to India as well as to USA that:
> 
> 1. PA has stationed an Armoured Division (26th Mechanised Div) near to border in Bahawalpur, Southern Punjab. Placing an armoured division next to border is the intent of attacking an enemy otherwise armoured assets considered as offensive forces are not kept next to borders. This is another reason why the 6th Armoured Division is placed in Gujranwala and not in Sialkot, whereas its main area of action is considered to be Sialkot region.
> 
> 2. PA will have 4 Armoured Divisions (1st and 6th, 25th and 26th) while IA has 3 Armoured Divisions and this will cause further alarm in India and bring pressure from USA to downsize strength. This is why the V-Corps has a few Independent Armoured Brigades and it is considered that V-Corps Armoured assets will be used under one HQ in war as an Armoured Division.
> 
> PA's Mechanised Division:
> 
> A Brigade: Armoured Regiment + Armoured Regiment + Mechanised Infantry Battalion.
> 
> B Brigade: Armoured Regiment + Armoured Regiment + Mechanised Infantry Battalion.
> 
> C Brigade: Armoured Regiment + Mechanised Infantry Battalion + Mechanised Infantry Battalion.
> 
> Thats 5 X Armoured Regiments and 4 X Mechanised Infantry Battalions in one Mechanised Division. I havent included Support Brigades and Divisional troops. Each Mechanised Infantry Battalion has 50 APC.
> 
> Those who consider that Rahim yar Khan is an area where IA CSD can succeed should keep in mind that the whole stretch is protected by a Division which has 220 MBT at its disposal. plus an Independent Armoured Brigade having 88 MBT.
> 
> @Ulla @Northern @django @Mentee @Khafee @tps77 @CriticalThought @Baloch Pakistani



India maintains Mech. divisions (& RAPIDs) much larger than Pakistani Mech. divisions in armour strength (MBT+IFV/APC).

Things have improved for PA as 600+ APC's were procured from Italy. But, no IFV's are in sight.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Joe Shearer

Gryphon said:


> India maintains Mech. divisions (& RAPIDs) much larger than Pakistani Mech. divisions in armour strength (MBT+IFV/APC).
> 
> Things have improved for PA as 600+ APC's were procured from Italy. But, no IFV's are in sight.



@Signalian 

India has nearly 6,000 tanks in inventory; Pakistan has 4,000, to the best of my knowledge. Given that 1/3 of the inventory has to be committed to defend against attacks in the northern theatre, are you saying that because of the parity, Pakistan is ahead, as being committed to defence? I thought Pakistan Army doctrine was to make the first move and capture Indian territory, so as to be able to negotiate good terms at the bargaining to follow the short engagement of not more than two weeks.

This business of 3 Armoured Divisions against 4 Armoured Divisions confused me. Sometimes I feel that the separation of the Indian Army into strike and pivot corps has so confused most of us that we tend to ignore all these and concentrate on divisions. Is that what is happening here? Because RAPIDs are precisely intended for quick movement with almost purely mechanised divisions, pivot corps are supposed to be better equipped for defence, and will not have to move swiftly into action, just hold their own against pre-emptive attacks.

Please throw some light on these issues.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Inception-06

Mentee said:


> do Indians already know abiut the info yiu posted ?




They know more than him ! Should I show you ?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Inception-06

Mentee said:


> do Indians already know abiut the info yiu posted ?



So my friends there are thousands of such articels and information available to Indian Military not because of us or PDF but because from traitors in our own lines !

Traitors are:
The Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) in FATA and Waziristan

The Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) in South Waziristan (which also included Chechan and Uighur militants)

Against the anti-Shia Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ) and Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan in the sensitive Darra Adam Khel-Kohat area of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa or KPK (formerly NWFP) and the Shia-dominated Kurram Agency of FATA

The Tehrik-e-Nifaz-Shariat-e-Mohammadi (TNSM), headed by Maulana Fazlullah

The Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) in the Swat Valley of KPK.

The BLA which is active in Balochistan

Political traitors such as Altaf Hussain and the PPPs Zardari

the list is very long !

Check that, its from Hindu national Military organisation ! @django @Signalian also nice reading for you guys to understand the Hindus military perspective !

http://trishul-trident.blogspot.de/2016/10/gloves-are-finally-off-against-those.html



On paper, to the north, those Pakistan Army (PA) battle formations that are LoC-specific and Chicken’s Neck-specific are the Mangla-based I Corps that comprises the Gujranwala-based 6 Armoured Division, Kharian-based 17 Infantry Division, the 37 Mechanised Infantry Division also in Kharian, and the 8 Independent Armoured Brigade; and the Rawalpindi-based X Corps that includes the Gilgit-based Force Command Gilgit-Baltistan, Murree-based 12 Infantry Division, Mangla-based 19 Infantry Division, the Jhelum-based 23 Infantry Division, and the Rawalpindi-based 111 Independent Infantry Brigade. Formations allocated for operations along the ‘Shakargarh Bulge’ are the Gujranwala-based XXX Corps comprising the Sialkot-based 8 Infantry Division and 15 Infantry Division; Lahore-based IV Corps with its 10 and 11 Infantry Divisions, two semi-mechanised Independent Infantry Brigades (including the 212 Bde) and one Independent Armoured Brigade; and the Multan-based II Corps made up of the Multan-based 1 Armoured Division, and the Okara-based 14 Infantry Division, 40 Infantry Division and an Independent Armoured Brigade. Thus far, no significant forward deployments of any of these formations have taken place.






Down south, the battle formations arrayed against Rajasthan include the Bahawalpur-based XXXI Corps with its 26 Mechanised Division, 35 Infantry Division, two Independent Armoured Brigades and the 105 Independent Infantry Brigade; and the Karachi-based V Corps with its Pano Aqil-based 16 Infantry Division, Hyderabad-based 18 Infantry Division, Malir-based 25 Mechanised Division, plus three Independent Armoured Brigades at Malir, Pano Aqil and Hyderabad. So far, only some elements of the 25 and 26 Mechanised Divisions have been deployed opposite an area stretching from Jaisalmer to Fort Abbas and the PA has begun flying relentless sorties of its Shahpar (CH-3) tactical UAVs that were acquired from China’s CATIC in 2012.

This is probably a precautionary measure aimed at monitoring the IA’s upcoming Division-level armoured/mechanised infantry exercises that are held during wintertime. Along the Durand Line, formations that are deployed include the Peshawar-based XI Corps currently with its 7, 9, 14, 17 Divisions and part of 23 Division, along with two independent infantry brigades; and the Quetta-based XII Corps with the 33 and 41 Infantry Divisions).

*The PA, however, is most unlikely to attempt any form of escalation along either the LoC or the WB since it presently has a deployment ratio of 54.6%, while the resting and re-equipping ratio is 12.7%, and the remaining 33% is undergoing the training cycle. This trend will continue for at least another four years, since the defunct Durand Line too became active from mid-2014.*

It may be recalled that since March 2002, the PA has been forced by elements that later on went on to become the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) by 2006 to wage a three-front war against the TTP and the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) in South Waziristan (which also included Chechan and Uighur militants; against the anti-Shia Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ) and Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan in the sensitive Darra Adam Khel-Kohat area of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa or KPK (formerly NWFP) and the Shia-dominated Kurram Agency of FATA; and, against the Tehrik-e-Nifaz-Shariat-e-Mohammadi (TNSM), headed by Maulana Fazlullah, and the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) in the Swat Valley of KPK.

The TTP’s cadre base is more than 20,000 tribesmen and the Abdullah Mehsud group from the Alizai clan of the Mehsud tribe from South Waziristan commands about 5,000 fighters. Other militant groups within the TTP include Maulvi Nazir from the Kaka Khel sub-tribe of the Ahmadzai Waziri tribe (South Waziristan), Hafiz Gul Bahadur from the Ibrahim Khel clan of the Utmanzai Wazir tribe (North Waziristan), the Haqqani network using manpower from the Mezi sub-tribe of the Zadran tribe (North Waziristan), Mangal Bagh (Khyber), TNSM (Swat, Dir, Malakand), and Faqir Mohammad (Bajaur).

*Some 35% of PA troops (about 180,000 out of an end-strength of approximately 550,000 active-duty personnel and another 500,000 reservists) were engaged in LIC campaigns since 2007 till 2014 and are still literally bogged down throughout the entire 27,200 square kilometres of FATA.

Formations fully committed to LIC operations include the 37 Mechanised Infantry Division and 17 Infantry Division from Mangla-based I Corps in Swat, 19 Infantry Division from X Corps in northern Swat (based out of Jhelum), 7 Infantry Division from Rawalpindi-based X Corps in North Waziristan (based out of Mardan), 9 Infantry Division from Peshawar-based XI Corps in South Waziristan (based out of Kohat), 14 Division from Multan-based II Corps, Jhelum-based 23 Division (with 7 infantry brigades) of the X Corps, and 40 Infantry Division. The Gujranwala-based XXX Corps and the Bahawalpur-based XXXI Corps lent one Brigade each.*

*In all, there are approximately 17 infantry brigades or 45 infantry battalions, and 58 Frontier Corps (FC) wings now engaged in LIC operations. By mid-2011, 1,83,400 troops had a westward deployment orientation (it now stands at 206,000), while another 10,000 are now abroad on UN-related peacekeeping missions.*

*Clearly, therefore, the PA is most unlikely to stage large-scale land offensives involving manoeuvre warfare. Instead, the PA, whose MBT armoury presently comprises 550 Al Khalids, 320 Type 85IIAPs upgraded to Al Zarrar standard, 500 Type 59s upgraded to Al Zarrar standard, 380 Type 59s, 450 69IIAPs, and 320 T-80UDs, making for a total of 2,520 tanks, is likely to do what it did in both 1965 and 1971, i.e. use the combination of its armoured and mechanised infantry assets to swiftly transform Pakistan’s semi-urban and rural areas bordering India’s Jammu & Kashmir, Punjab and Rajasthan states into impregnable fortresses for the sake of blunting the Indian Army’s (IA) expected shallow-depth land offensives that could be launched from southern J & K and northern Punjab through the Chicken’s Neck and Shakargarh Bulge areas.*

Given Pakistan’s elongated geography, it is possible for the PA to use its interior lines of communications for deploying its warfighting assets to their forward concentration areas within 72 hours. To this end, the PA has since 2007 built a sprawling new central ammunition storage depot to the South of its Mangla Cantonment, and has also expanded the existing depot at Kharian. 

Therefore, the IA’s principal doctrinal challenge is to seek ways of enticing the PA to come out in the open so that its armoured/mechanised infantry formations are forced to engage in manoeuvre wars of attrition, during which the IA will be required to swiftly locate and destroy in detail the adversary’s warfighting assets and capabilities. Exactly how this can be achieved is explained below.



*Key Areas Requiring Attention*
It is obvious from the above-mentioned dispositions of the PA’s armoured/mechanised infantry formations that Pakistan’s heartland remains its province of Punjab, and nothing else. From this, one can deduce that the full conventional might of the PA will be utilised for denying the IA the much-needed space for deep AirLand battles. All talk, therefore, of the PA acquiring ‘full-spectrum’ nuclear deterrence through the deployment of TNWs to thwart large-scale IA land offensives is therefore utter baloney and boulderdash. This becomes starkly evident when analysing the IA’s objectives for its future AirLand campaigns that will most likely focus on ways and means of seizing back Azad Kashmir (Azad Kashmir) through multi-dimensional AirLand campaigns being launched from the southwest, east and to the north00all aimed at capturing the districts of Bagh, Bhimber, Kotli, Mirpur and Muzaffarabad. The PA will consequently be forced to commit the bulk of its offensive Strike Corps formations against those IA’s offensive formations poised for breakout throughout India’s Punjab State and the southern portion of Jammu & Kashmir State.


So my friends there are thousands of such articels and information available to Indian Military not because of us or PDF but because from traitors in our own lines !

Reactions: Like Like:
17


----------



## Inception-06

Gryphon said:


> Bs article by this self proclaimed expert. Mostly info gathered from Wikipedia and some Google books.




Yes you are right but when you check the Divisions and brigades which are and were stationed in KPK and FATA the informations are correct...its just a littel window to see what they now, even if some things are not correct, that does not mean we should ignore them !

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## paki_rambo

Joe Shearer said:


> India has nearly 6,000 tanks in inventory


joe bhai seriously!!
according to GFP Indian has 4456 tanks rest must be super duper arjun tanks driven by hanuman army. Maybe thats why the are not even visible to them
https://www.globalfirepower.com/armor-tanks-total.asp

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Inception-06

Gryphon said:


> Bs article by this self proclaimed expert. Mostly info gathered from Wikipedia and some Google books.




Its not a he or she but a whole brigade of workers which are building this trishul side, and they are always up to date when it comes to Pakistan Military, ignoring such organisations is very dangerous and naiv !

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Joe Shearer

BetterPakistan said:


> This could only be seen in your dreams because there is nothing like that on grounds
> 
> 6000 tanks



Yes, you are absolutely correct. I hope that will persuade you to go away.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Gryphon

Ulla said:


> Yes you are right but when you check the Divisions and brigades which are and were stationed in KPK and FATA the informations are correct...its just a littel window to see what they now, even if some things are not correct, that does not mean we should ignore them !



Everyone knows XI Corps is heavily reinforced by divisions and brigades on deputation from other Corps. for e.g. 21st Artillery Division has currently moved from Pano Aqil to Malakand.
It's usual for armies to monitor enemy deployments.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Joe Shearer

paki_rambo said:


> joe bhai seriously!!
> according to GFP Indian has 4456 tanks rest must be super duper arjun tanks driven by hanuman army. Maybe thats why the are not even visible to them
> https://www.globalfirepower.com/armor-tanks-total.asp



You are right, too, right on the target.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Khafee

Mentee said:


> do Indians already know abiut the info yiu posted ?


I'm sure they do.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Mentee

Gryphon said:


> Bs article by this self proclaimed expert. Mostly info gathered from Wikipedia and some Google books.


this flame bait trick has become quite outdated . Try harder ---

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Gryphon

Mentee said:


> this flame bait trick has become quite outdated . Try harder ---



My comment is intended for the blog writer.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## django

Ulla said:


> So my friends there are thousands of such articels and information available to Indian Military not because of us or PDF but because from traitors in our own lines !
> 
> Traitors are:
> The Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) in FATA and Waziristan
> 
> The Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) in South Waziristan (which also included Chechan and Uighur militants)
> 
> Against the anti-Shia Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ) and Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan in the sensitive Darra Adam Khel-Kohat area of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa or KPK (formerly NWFP) and the Shia-dominated Kurram Agency of FATA
> 
> The Tehrik-e-Nifaz-Shariat-e-Mohammadi (TNSM), headed by Maulana Fazlullah
> 
> The Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) in the Swat Valley of KPK.
> 
> The BLA which is active in Balochistan
> 
> Political traitors such as Altaf Hussain and the PPPs Zardari
> 
> the list is very long !
> 
> Check that, its from Hindu national Military organisation ! @django @Signalian also nice reading for you guys to understand the Hindus military perspective !
> 
> http://trishul-trident.blogspot.de/2016/10/gloves-are-finally-off-against-those.html
> 
> 
> 
> On paper, to the north, those Pakistan Army (PA) battle formations that are LoC-specific and Chicken’s Neck-specific are the Mangla-based I Corps that comprises the Gujranwala-based 6 Armoured Division, Kharian-based 17 Infantry Division, the 37 Mechanised Infantry Division also in Kharian, and the 8 Independent Armoured Brigade; and the Rawalpindi-based X Corps that includes the Gilgit-based Force Command Gilgit-Baltistan, Murree-based 12 Infantry Division, Mangla-based 19 Infantry Division, the Jhelum-based 23 Infantry Division, and the Rawalpindi-based 111 Independent Infantry Brigade. Formations allocated for operations along the ‘Shakargarh Bulge’ are the Gujranwala-based XXX Corps comprising the Sialkot-based 8 Infantry Division and 15 Infantry Division; Lahore-based IV Corps with its 10 and 11 Infantry Divisions, two semi-mechanised Independent Infantry Brigades (including the 212 Bde) and one Independent Armoured Brigade; and the Multan-based II Corps made up of the Multan-based 1 Armoured Division, and the Okara-based 14 Infantry Division, 40 Infantry Division and an Independent Armoured Brigade. Thus far, no significant forward deployments of any of these formations have taken place.
> View attachment 438179
> 
> 
> Down south, the battle formations arrayed against Rajasthan include the Bahawalpur-based XXXI Corps with its 26 Mechanised Division, 35 Infantry Division, two Independent Armoured Brigades and the 105 Independent Infantry Brigade; and the Karachi-based V Corps with its Pano Aqil-based 16 Infantry Division, Hyderabad-based 18 Infantry Division, Malir-based 25 Mechanised Division, plus three Independent Armoured Brigades at Malir, Pano Aqil and Hyderabad. So far, only some elements of the 25 and 26 Mechanised Divisions have been deployed opposite an area stretching from Jaisalmer to Fort Abbas and the PA has begun flying relentless sorties of its Shahpar (CH-3) tactical UAVs that were acquired from China’s CATIC in 2012.
> 
> This is probably a precautionary measure aimed at monitoring the IA’s upcoming Division-level armoured/mechanised infantry exercises that are held during wintertime. Along the Durand Line, formations that are deployed include the Peshawar-based XI Corps currently with its 7, 9, 14, 17 Divisions and part of 23 Division, along with two independent infantry brigades; and the Quetta-based XII Corps with the 33 and 41 Infantry Divisions).
> 
> *The PA, however, is most unlikely to attempt any form of escalation along either the LoC or the WB since it presently has a deployment ratio of 54.6%, while the resting and re-equipping ratio is 12.7%, and the remaining 33% is undergoing the training cycle. This trend will continue for at least another four years, since the defunct Durand Line too became active from mid-2014.*
> 
> It may be recalled that since March 2002, the PA has been forced by elements that later on went on to become the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) by 2006 to wage a three-front war against the TTP and the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) in South Waziristan (which also included Chechan and Uighur militants; against the anti-Shia Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ) and Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan in the sensitive Darra Adam Khel-Kohat area of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa or KPK (formerly NWFP) and the Shia-dominated Kurram Agency of FATA; and, against the Tehrik-e-Nifaz-Shariat-e-Mohammadi (TNSM), headed by Maulana Fazlullah, and the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) in the Swat Valley of KPK.
> 
> The TTP’s cadre base is more than 20,000 tribesmen and the Abdullah Mehsud group from the Alizai clan of the Mehsud tribe from South Waziristan commands about 5,000 fighters. Other militant groups within the TTP include Maulvi Nazir from the Kaka Khel sub-tribe of the Ahmadzai Waziri tribe (South Waziristan), Hafiz Gul Bahadur from the Ibrahim Khel clan of the Utmanzai Wazir tribe (North Waziristan), the Haqqani network using manpower from the Mezi sub-tribe of the Zadran tribe (North Waziristan), Mangal Bagh (Khyber), TNSM (Swat, Dir, Malakand), and Faqir Mohammad (Bajaur).
> 
> *Some 35% of PA troops (about 180,000 out of an end-strength of approximately 550,000 active-duty personnel and another 500,000 reservists) were engaged in LIC campaigns since 2007 till 2014 and are still literally bogged down throughout the entire 27,200 square kilometres of FATA.
> 
> Formations fully committed to LIC operations include the 37 Mechanised Infantry Division and 17 Infantry Division from Mangla-based I Corps in Swat, 19 Infantry Division from X Corps in northern Swat (based out of Jhelum), 7 Infantry Division from Rawalpindi-based X Corps in North Waziristan (based out of Mardan), 9 Infantry Division from Peshawar-based XI Corps in South Waziristan (based out of Kohat), 14 Division from Multan-based II Corps, Jhelum-based 23 Division (with 7 infantry brigades) of the X Corps, and 40 Infantry Division. The Gujranwala-based XXX Corps and the Bahawalpur-based XXXI Corps lent one Brigade each.*
> 
> *In all, there are approximately 17 infantry brigades or 45 infantry battalions, and 58 Frontier Corps (FC) wings now engaged in LIC operations. By mid-2011, 1,83,400 troops had a westward deployment orientation (it now stands at 206,000), while another 10,000 are now abroad on UN-related peacekeeping missions.*
> 
> *Clearly, therefore, the PA is most unlikely to stage large-scale land offensives involving manoeuvre warfare. Instead, the PA, whose MBT armoury presently comprises 550 Al Khalids, 320 Type 85IIAPs upgraded to Al Zarrar standard, 500 Type 59s upgraded to Al Zarrar standard, 380 Type 59s, 450 69IIAPs, and 320 T-80UDs, making for a total of 2,520 tanks, is likely to do what it did in both 1965 and 1971, i.e. use the combination of its armoured and mechanised infantry assets to swiftly transform Pakistan’s semi-urban and rural areas bordering India’s Jammu & Kashmir, Punjab and Rajasthan states into impregnable fortresses for the sake of blunting the Indian Army’s (IA) expected shallow-depth land offensives that could be launched from southern J & K and northern Punjab through the Chicken’s Neck and Shakargarh Bulge areas.*
> 
> Given Pakistan’s elongated geography, it is possible for the PA to use its interior lines of communications for deploying its warfighting assets to their forward concentration areas within 72 hours. To this end, the PA has since 2007 built a sprawling new central ammunition storage depot to the South of its Mangla Cantonment, and has also expanded the existing depot at Kharian.
> 
> Therefore, the IA’s principal doctrinal challenge is to seek ways of enticing the PA to come out in the open so that its armoured/mechanised infantry formations are forced to engage in manoeuvre wars of attrition, during which the IA will be required to swiftly locate and destroy in detail the adversary’s warfighting assets and capabilities. Exactly how this can be achieved is explained below.
> 
> 
> 
> *Key Areas Requiring Attention*
> It is obvious from the above-mentioned dispositions of the PA’s armoured/mechanised infantry formations that Pakistan’s heartland remains its province of Punjab, and nothing else. From this, one can deduce that the full conventional might of the PA will be utilised for denying the IA the much-needed space for deep AirLand battles. All talk, therefore, of the PA acquiring ‘full-spectrum’ nuclear deterrence through the deployment of TNWs to thwart large-scale IA land offensives is therefore utter baloney and boulderdash. This becomes starkly evident when analysing the IA’s objectives for its future AirLand campaigns that will most likely focus on ways and means of seizing back Azad Kashmir (Azad Kashmir) through multi-dimensional AirLand campaigns being launched from the southwest, east and to the north00all aimed at capturing the districts of Bagh, Bhimber, Kotli, Mirpur and Muzaffarabad. The PA will consequently be forced to commit the bulk of its offensive Strike Corps formations against those IA’s offensive formations poised for breakout throughout India’s Punjab State and the southern portion of Jammu & Kashmir State.
> 
> 
> So my friends there are thousands of such articels and information available to Indian Military not because of us or PDF but because from traitors in our own lines !


Of course India has it's assets over here and we also have our own assets in India or at least I bloody hope so , for all the hawkish Indian bluster about inflicting a defeat of magnitude similar to that of 71 in reality they know they have very little options other than the ones they are currently pursuing ie BLA, TTP, contract killers from a certain political party I shall not mention etc and these assets of theirs are on the backfoot due to measures put in place by initially Gen Raheel Sharif and subsequently Gen Bajwa,,,,thoughtful Indian defence analyst Col (retd) Ajai Shukla summed it up best, from 15:55 .Kudos bro
@Signalian @Mentee @Joe Shearer

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Joe Shearer

django said:


> Of course India has it's assets over here and we also have our own assets in India or at least I bloody hope so , for all the hawkish Indian bluster about inflicting a defeat of magnitude similar to that of 71 in reality they know they have very little options other than the ones they are currently pursuing ie BLA, TTP, contract killers from a certain political party I shall not mention etc and these assets of theirs are on the backfoot due to measures put in place by initially Gen Raheel Sharif and subsequently Gen Bajwa,,,,thoughtful Indian defence analyst Col (retd) Ajai Shukla summed it up best, from 15:55 .Kudos bro
> @Signalian @Mentee @Joe Shearer



He's right, in present circumstances, isn't he? Do we want to create a BLA or a TTP? Keeping aside, for a minute, the Pakistani credo that all who do not believe in Pakistan are Indian paid stooges?

The second thing to note is again something that Col. Shukla pointed out, we are facing an establishment that is totally uninhibited. I have said this before, and I will say it again, we cannot match Pakistan in its complete lack of self-control. 

The last thing that I want to point out is something that is not available to us, given our present outlook and attitude towards things internal, not towards things outside. Do you check your private mail?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Joe Shearer said:


> @Signalian
> 
> India has nearly 6,000 tanks in inventory; Pakistan has 4,000, to the best of my knowledge. Given that 1/3 of the inventory has to be committed to defend against attacks in the northern theatre, are you saying that because of the parity, Pakistan is ahead, as being *committed to defence*? I thought *Pakistan Army doctrine* was to make the first move and capture Indian territory, so as to be able to negotiate good terms at the bargaining to follow the short engagement of not more than two weeks.


Committed to defence in a way, yes, as these are not part of Strike Corps of PA. In saying that the area where they operate is desert and rapid movement by infantry is required for deployment and capturing purposes. The doctrine of capturing Indian territory remains, however that is not considered possible in every theatre of war. The capturing of Indian territory is mainly expected by Strike Corps assets, 1st and 6th Armoured Divisions. 

Pakistan is ahead and its not ahead also. Pakistani Armoured Divisions are smaller than Indian Armoured Divisions and Pakistan has raised Independent Armoured Brigades with an aim to support PA Armour Divisions with another role to support infantry Divisions. The Independent Armoured Brigades serves three purposes:
1. Beef up numbers of Armour Division if required when attached to Armour Division.
2. Operate separately from Armour Divisions and act as strategic reserve to defend the area from a possible IA counter attack.
3. Lead the attack when used in conjunction with Infantry Divisions. e.g. IV Corps in Lahore, Independent Armoured brigade operates with 10th and 11th Infantry Divisions. Similarly, XXX Corps in Sialkot, Independent Armoured brigade operates with 8th and 15th Infantry Divisions.



> This business of 3 Armoured Divisions against 4 Armoured Divisions confused me. Sometimes I feel that the separation of the Indian Army into strike and pivot corps has so confused most of us that we tend to ignore all these and concentrate on divisions. Is that what is happening here? Because RAPIDs are precisely intended for quick movement with almost purely mechanised divisions, pivot corps are supposed to be better equipped for defence, and will not have to move swiftly into action, just hold their own against pre-emptive attacks.
> 
> Please throw some light on these issues.



The 1st and 6th Armoured Divisions have no infantry of their own and derive infantry from their Infantry Divisions, 14th and 40th for 1st Armoured Div, 17th and 37th for 6th Armoured Div and all are part of Strike Corps. 

The 25th and 26th Mechanised Divisions are self sufficient (armour and infantry units within Divisions) in this regard and are not considered Strike Corps. Although both Divs have support of Infantry Div's yet they are flexible and independent enough to maneuver on their own. This way they are mainly poised for defence of the area but can also switch roles and turn to offensive role to enter enemy territory. With an IA RAPID deployed in Bikaner opposite Bahawalpur, there was a need to place a decent amount of PA Armour in the sector. 

The raising of these mechanised divisions has lifted the burden from PA strike Corps to turn south and defend the southern Punjab and Sindh regions, instead since these two regions are being defended by these mechanised Division with good armour and infantry ratio, the Strike Corps can now function suitably as an offensive force to enter Indian territory.

There is another possible chance that PA will raise Ad-Hoc HQ's (whether Div or Brigade level) during the course of war and these will be under-strength formations and could be formed with using para military forces even. In 1971 war, 2 Ad-Hoc Div HQ's were raised in East-Pak in similar fashion.



Assasin Ezio said:


> A division with only ~300 tanks cannot be called an armoured division.
> You need Atleast 700 tanks in an armoured division.


Do you know how many tanks are there in IA 33rd Armoured Division ? 

There is only 1 Armour regiment and 2 mechanised battalions in each of 3 brigades. With 59 tanks in one regiment, thats roughly 177 Tanks in IA 33rd Armoured Division.



Mentee said:


> do Indians already know abiut the info yiu posted ?


G bhai, Indian intelligence has a very good idea.



tps77 said:


> Nice piece of info.
> BTW is only punjab covered like this or also anyother province as well?



Sindh, V-Corps.

25th Mechanised Div
16th Infantry Div
18th Infantry Div.
Few other brigades including armour and mechanised.



Gryphon said:


> India maintains Mech. divisions (& RAPIDs) much larger than Pakistani Mech. divisions in armour strength (MBT+IFV/APC).
> 
> Things have improved for PA as 600+ APC's were procured from Italy. But, no IFV's are in sight.



IA formations are larger than PA counterparts.

PA Armour regiment, 44 MBT. IA Armour regiment, 59 MBT.

PA Armour Div, 5 Armour regiments. IA Armour Div, 7 Armour regiments (except 33rd Armoured Div).

Reactions: Like Like:
17


----------



## django

Joe Shearer said:


> He's right, in present circumstances, isn't he? Do we want to create a BLA or a TTP? Keeping aside, for a minute, the Pakistani credo that all who do not believe in Pakistan are Indian paid stooges?
> 
> The second thing to note is again something that Col. Shukla pointed out, we are facing an establishment that is totally uninhibited. I have said this before, and I will say it again, we cannot match Pakistan in its complete lack of self-control.
> 
> The last thing that I want to point out is something that is not available to us, given our present outlook and attitude towards things internal, not towards things outside. Do you check your private mail?


He was not referring to BLA or TTP but rather a RSS style "Sanatan Dharami" terrorist group which I imagine would try to develop a symbiotic relationship with the Pakistani Hindu population, so far it has not been attempted as far as I am aware, in regards to BLA and TTP do read up on Mr Doval and Gen Bikram Singh statements and even Scotland Yard corroborated the relations between certain political groups in Karachi and RAW.
BTW Joe you are facing an establishment that is quintessentially Machiavelllian, not unhinged that elements in hyper-nationalist Indian media like to project.Kudos Joe

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Gryphon

Signalian said:


> Sindh, V-Corps.
> 
> 25th Mechanised Div
> 16th Infantry Div
> 18th Infantry Div.
> Few other brigades including armour and mechanised.



+ 21st Artillery Division (Pano Aqil)

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Hakikat ve Hikmet

Ulla said:


> Its not a he or she but a whole brigade of workers which are building this trishul side, and they are always up to date when it comes to Pakistan Military, ignoring such organisations is very dangerous and naiv !


They better be!!!! And, I am pretty sure the Indian intelligence must be knowing how serious the Pak strategists are about the "end-game"!!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Joe Shearer

Signalian said:


> Committed to defence in a way, yes, as these are not part of Strike Corps of PA. In saying that the area where they operate is desert and rapid movement by infantry is required for deployment and capturing purposes. The doctrine of capturing Indian territory remains, however that is not considered possible in every theatre of war. The capturing of Indian territory is mainly expected by Strike Corps assets, 1st and 6th Armoured Divisions.
> 
> Pakistan is ahead and its not ahead also. Pakistani Armoured Divisions are smaller than Indian Armoured Divisions and Pakistan has raised Independent Armoured Brigades with an aim to support PA Armour Divisions with another role to support infantry Divisions. The Independent Armoured Brigades serves three purposes:
> 1. Beef up numbers of Armour Division if required when attached to Armour Division.
> 2. Operate separately from Armour Divisions and act as strategic reserve to defend the area from a possible IA counter attack.
> 3. Lead the attack when used in conjunction with Infantry Divisions. e.g. IV Corps in Lahore, Independent Armoured brigade operates with 10th and 11th Infantry Divisions. Similarly, XXX Corps in Sialkot, Independent Armoured brigade operates with 8th and 15th Infantry Divisions.
> 
> 
> 
> The 1st and 6th Armoured Divisions have no infantry of their own and derive infantry from their Infantry Divisions, 14th and 40th for 1st Armoured Div, 17th and 37th for 6th Armoured Div and all are part of Strike Corps.
> 
> The 25th and 26th Mechanised Divisions are self sufficient (armour and infantry units within Divisions) in this regard and are not considered Strike Corps. Although both Divs have support of Infantry Div's yet they are flexible and independent enough to maneuver on their own. This way they are mainly poised for defence of the area but can also switch roles and turn to offensive role to enter enemy territory. With an IA RAPID deployed in Bikaner opposite Bahawalpur, there was a need to place a decent amount of PA Armour in the sector.
> 
> The raising of these mechanised divisions has lifted the burden from PA strike Corps to turn south and defend the southern Punjab and Sindh regions, instead since these two regions are being defended by these mechanised Division with good armour and infantry ratio, the Strike Corps can now function suitably as an offensive force to enter Indian territory.
> 
> There is another possible chance that PA will raise Ad-Hoc HQ's (whether Div or Brigade level) during the course of war and these will be under-strength formations and could be formed with using para military forces even. In 1971 war, 2 Ad-Hoc Div HQ's were raised in East-Pak in similar fashion.
> 
> 
> Do you know how many tanks are there in IA 33rd Armoured Division ?
> 
> There is only 1 Armour regiment and 2 mechanised battalions in each of 3 brigades. With 59 tanks in one regiment, thats roughly 177 Tanks in IA 33rd Armoured Division.
> 
> 
> G bhai, Indian intelligence has a very good idea.
> 
> 
> 
> Sindh, V-Corps.
> 
> 25th Mechanised Div
> 16th Infantry Div
> 18th Infantry Div.
> Few other brigades including armour and mechanised.
> 
> 
> 
> IA formations are larger than PA counterparts.
> 
> PA Armour regiment, 44 MBT. IA Armour regiment, 59 MBT.
> 
> PA Armour Div, 5 Armour regiments. IA Armour Div, 7 Armour regiments (except 33rd Armoured Div).



Thank you very much. Pleasure reading such a clearly articulated note.



django said:


> He was not referring to BLA or TTP but rather a RSS style "Sanatan Dharami" terrorist group which I imagine would try to develop a symbiotic relationship with the Pakistani Hindu population, so far it has not been attempted as far as I am aware, in regards to BLA and TTP do read up on Mr Doval and Gen Bikram Singh statements and even Scotland Yard corroborated the relations between certain political groups in Karachi and RAW.
> BTW Joe you are facing an establishment that is quintessentially Machiavelllian, not unhinged that elements in hyper-nationalist Indian media like to project.Kudos Joe



@django 

I've dealt with these so-called Machiavellian characters and their plots through an intense period of work-life, and I never saw/detected anything that resembled the kind of thought process that you think they can generate. The leading element in decision-making is definitely unbalanced, a bunch of hysterical bigots. The implementing side is career bureaucrats, who know that if they don't make mistakes, they will get their full pension in due course of time.

If someone is thinking of an RSS style Sanatan Dharmi terrorist group, he needs urgent medical attention. The Pakistani Hindu minority is a crushed and abject group that has given up hopes of survival in any kind of civic sense, and will not support conspiracies.

About the BLA/TTP supposed connections, it is frustrating to discuss this with any Pakistani friend, because the conversation always comes down to the MQM connection, which I believe was very real at one time. But nowhere, other than Doval's self-promotion, do we know about links with BLA or the TTP. 

I hope intelligent Pakistanis who read this realise that under Desai, Gujral and Manmohan Singh, RAW operations were cut back severely, and their clandestine intelligence gathering operations were banned outright. I have asked you before, and I am asking you this again: do you think that it is possible to build up field resources, networks of informers and delivery capability in three years' time?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Gryphon

Signalian said:


> Committed to defence in a way, yes, as these are not part of Strike Corps of PA. In saying that the area where they operate is desert and rapid movement by infantry is required for deployment and capturing purposes. The doctrine of capturing Indian territory remains, however that is not considered possible in every theatre of war. The capturing of Indian territory is mainly expected by Strike Corps assets, 1st and 6th Armoured Divisions.



As the two Mechanized divisions are meant to operate in the deserts (Cholistan and Thar), PA should take the pains and induct tracked IFV's. The APC's and their dismounted infantry are not very useful in the desert. Even if PA equips soldiers in these APC's with portable anti-tank weapons like Alcotan 100.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Joe Shearer

Gryphon said:


> As the two Mechanized divisions are meant to operate in the deserts (Cholistan and Thar), PA should take the pains and induct tracked IFV's. The APC's and their dismounted infantry are not very useful in the desert. Even if PA equips soldiers in these APC's with portable anti-tank weapons like Alcotan 100.



The same thing applies to our formations on this side.

You probably know that the very carefully designed mechanisation of the PBI, formation of the RAPIDs, has been stalled or derailed by the dismal bureaucrats of Defence Ministry.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BetterPakistan

Joe Shearer said:


> Yes, you are absolutely correct. I hope that will persuade you to go away.



And I hope it will persuade you also in telling the number of tanks in your army.

6000 tanks   

Even PLA army never claimed to have 6000 operational tanks


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Gryphon said:


> As the two Mechanized divisions are meant to operate in the deserts (Cholistan and Thar), PA should take the pains and induct tracked IFV's. The APC's and their dismounted infantry are not very useful in the desert. Even if PA equips soldiers in these APC's with portable anti-tank weapons like Alcotan 100.


Agreed. I understand the cost of inducting many new armoured vehicles is expensive, fair, but the comparative cost of at least transitioning your primary production facility - HIT - to a new design isn't that much in the great scheme of things. Companies design these tracked IFVs for $50-100 m, that is roughly the cost of acquiring the blueprints and ensuring you have the right tooling. You can gradually induct these new IFVs over the long or very long-term (and in successive variants, each more advanced than the previous), _*exactly *_like what is being done with the al-Khalid. Just apply this to a new tracked IFV, 8x8 AFV and 4x4 MRAP/LAV.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Gryphon

Joe Shearer said:


> The same thing applies to our formations on this side.
> 
> You probably know that the very carefully designed mechanisation of the PBI, formation of the RAPIDs, has been stalled or derailed by the dismal bureaucrats of Defence Ministry.



IA has a large inventory of BMP's. And formation of RAPIDs is an ongoing exercise - the most recent being conversion of Akhnoor based infantry division into RAPID.

Things are not great for PA. Continues to rely on M-113 APC and derivatives. Acquired 600+ VCC-1 Camillino and VCC-2 from Italy few years ago to mechanize more infantry battalions.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Tps43

I request The @Mods to make this a sticky thread .

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Gryphon

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> Agreed. I understand the cost of inducting many new armoured vehicles is expensive, fair, but the comparative cost of at least transitioning your primary production facility - HIT - to a new design isn't that much in the great scheme of things. Companies design these tracked IFVs for $50-100 m, that is roughly the cost of acquiring the blueprints and ensuring you have the right tooling. You can gradually induct these new IFVs over the long or very long-term (and in successive variants, each more advanced than the previous), _*exactly *_like what is being done with the al-Khalid. Just apply this to a new tracked IFV, 8x8 AFV and 4x4 MRAP/LAV.



HIT should stop producing more of those M-113 variants. Those can be acquired from other countries at cheap rates - as the APC was widely adopted.

Chinese VN17 design should be inducted and license produced instead. IFV with cannon + ATGM will increase capability manifold when used with tanks & M-113 (which can dismount infantry) and fit a 12.7mm / ATGM / RBS-70.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Joe Shearer

BetterPakistan said:


> And I hope it will persuade you also in telling the number of tanks in your army.
> 
> 6000 tanks
> 
> Even PLA army never claimed to have 6000 operational tanks



lol.

Are you still stuck there? How does it matter? My question was about the impact of declaring the number of divisions and what was the thinking behind that. Please accept my condolences, but I am not into nit-picking; if you wish, in addition to other prizes and awards, please consider being the designated champion on PDF for picking rich, ripe, juicy nits. 

A unique honour, although it is not clear what you are measuring thereby.

[NB: Since it is an apparently critical component of communications for you, please feel free also to inject as many emoticons as you wish.]



tps77 said:


> I request The @Mods to make this a sticky thread .



Yes.

An excellent thread. Great suggestion.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Tps43

@The Eagle

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## niaz

Assasin Ezio said:


> A division with only ~300 tanks cannot be called an armoured division.
> You need Atleast 700 tanks in an armoured division.



Hon Sir,

In current organization, a U.S. tank company has 3 tank platoons of 4 tanks each for a total of 12 - plus 2 additional tanks in the company headquarter section. That makes 14 tanks in a tank company. There are 3 tank companies in every tank battalion for a total of 42 tanks - plus 2 additional tanks in the battalion headquarters for a total of 44 tanks.

Armoured brigade may have 2 to 3 tank battalions. An armoured division normally has 3 but could have 4 brigades which might have as many as 7 or 8 tank battalions altogether in the division. 7 armoured battalions makes 308 & 8 makes it 352. Adding 4 additional tanks for the Brigade HQ, means about 320 tanks in the US Armoured Div. with a maximum of 370.

British army regiment also has 44 tanks to the maximum of 58 tanks in the Royal Dragoon guards. There were a total of 343 tanks in the British 1st Armoured Div. during WW2.

During 1965 war Indian Army Ist Armoured Div. played a major role. To the best my info this Division consisted of 2 Royal Lancers, 4 Hodson’s Horse, 7 Light Cavalry, 16 'Black Elephant' Cavalry, 17 Cavalry [Poona Horse], 18 Cavalry and 62 Cavalry making 7 armoured battalions or a total of about 308 tanks. Russian tank division also has about 320 MBTs. German Panzer Division during WW2 also had between 300 to 350 tanks.

Pray tell me which army has 700 tanks (about 16 tanks battalions) in a single armoured division. It would be a great addition to my knowledge base.

Reactions: Like Like:
13 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Mrc

US first armour div has 350 - 380 tanks ... supported by mobile artillery... and a attack heli squad

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

PA 25th Mechanised Division and its role in combat. I think this Brigadier is COS (Chief of Staff) to Corps Commander. Explains about MIB's in Low intensity conflicts apart from Indian Threat. 






Operational capability of MIB's.






This one explains the good old M-113.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## BetterPakistan

Joe Shearer said:


> lol.
> 
> Are you still stuck there? How does it matter? My question was about the impact of declaring the number of divisions and what was the thinking behind that. Please accept my condolences, but I am not into nit-picking; if you wish, in addition to other prizes and awards, please consider being the designated champion on PDF for picking rich, ripe, juicy nits.
> 
> A unique honour, although it is not clear what you are measuring thereby.
> 
> [NB: Since it is an apparently critical component of communications for you, please feel free also to inject as many emoticons as you wish.]



What else could I expect from a human being like you other than badmouthing others. I am not interested in measuring anything but you definitely was & is because this is all what are you doing since you grown up.

You have stated many times about 6000 tanks but you never gave the source to me, I am still waiting for the source??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gryphon

Signalian said:


> PA 25th Mechanised Division and its role in combat. I think this Brigadier is COS (Chief of Staff) to Corps Commander. Explains about MIB's in Low intensity conflicts apart from Indian Threat.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Operational capability of MIB's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This one explains the good old M-113.



PA now has a Light Infantry Division too - the 34 Light Infantry Division (HQ at Rawalpindi). Popularly known as Special Security Division.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## niaz

BetterPakistan said:


> What else could I expect from a human being like you other than badmouthing others. I am not interested in measuring anything but you definitely was & is because this is all what are you doing since you grown up.
> 
> You have stated many times about 6000 tanks but you never gave the source to me, I am still waiting for the source??




Hon Better Pakistan.

Only a few would know exact details about the military equipment of Pakistan or of India. I can quote from the 'Military Balance 2016' published by the Institute of Strategic Studies London. It is normally acknowledged as the best source of information about military statistics of the entire world. However one must realize that the data therein is merely a very good estimate. Under Indian Army it gives the following information which most probably represents end 2015 data. By now (Nov 2017) the number would probably be a bit more.

Total Manpower 1,150,900. 14 Corps HQ of which 4 strike coprs. 8 Special Force battalions, 3 arm'd div, 8 ind armd bde, 6 mech inf divs, 2 ind mech bde, 15 light inf div, 7 ind inf bde, I inf div forming. 1 Para bde, 12 mountain div, 2 ind mt'n bde. In other words 37 divisions in total including 3 armoured & 6 mechanized. 20 Ind brigades including 8 arm'd & 2 mech and 8 special forces btn which are all para.

3 arty div, 1 ind arty bde, 8 air defence bde, 4 eng’r bde, 3 SSM rgm't with Brahmos, 2 msl gr'p with Agni, 2msl gr'p with Prithvi.

Tanks: 124 Arjun, 1,950 T-72, 900+ T-90, 1 with 1,100 in store (older models). Total 4,074 additional 236 T-90 & 118 Arjun on order. Making a total of 4,428 tanks.

AIFV 1,455; APC 336. Arty pieces 9,682


Pakistan has 2,561 tanks plus 270 M48 in storage. Total 2,831 with 110 Al Khalid on order. 4,472 arty pieces of all kind.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## ziaulislam

last 20 years things have changed
greater use of precision weapons mean that air power and air defense is the most important aspect of armed forces
we will also see use of modern smart artillery which has changed the whole dynamics

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## django

Joe Shearer said:


> *I've dealt with these so-called Machiavellian characters and their plots through an intense period of work-life,* and I never saw/detected anything that resembled the kind of thought process that you think they can generate. The leading element in decision-making is definitely unbalanced, a bunch of hysterical bigots. The implementing side is career bureaucrats, who know that if they don't make mistakes, they will get their full pension in due course of time.


 Then you will surely be aware of this gentleman.







Joe Shearer said:


> About the BLA/TTP supposed connections, it is frustrating to discuss this with any Pakistani friend, because the conversation always comes down to the MQM connection, which I believe was very real at one time. *But nowhere, other than Doval's self-promotion, do we know about links with BLA or the TTP.*











Joe Shearer said:


> *I hope intelligent Pakistanis who read this realise that under Desai, Gujral and Manmohan Singh, RAW operations were cut back severely, and their clandestine intelligence gathering operations were banned outright*. I have asked you before, and I am asking you this again: do you think that it is possible to build up field resources, networks of informers and delivery capability in three years' time?


 Actions to merely throw us off the scent, no one took it seriously then and no one takes it seriously now and in regard to your latter points according to my Govt, Mr Yadav first visited Pakistan in 2005 and was finally apprehended in 2016, he had 11 years to accumulate all kinds of players in the region and no one seriously doubts that Yadav was the only Indian RAW operative in Pakistan.Kudos Joe

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

django said:


> Then you will surely be aware of this gentleman.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actions to merely throw us off the scent, no one took it seriously then and no one takes it seriously now and in regard to your latter points according to my Govt, Mr Yadav first visited Pakistan in 2005 and was finally apprehended in 2016, he had 11 years to accumulate all kinds of players in the region and no one seriously doubts that Yadav was the only Indian RAW operative in Pakistan.Kudos Joe



From the last backwards, that's why I find these conversations frustrating. If you persist in seeing Indian actions through the same lens with which you view the actions of the Pakistani deep state, these misconceptions will arise. There is nothing that individuals like I can do, to bridge this gap. I've found through the last eight years of conversation that this is the single biggest barrier to understanding; Pakistanis keep thinking that the Government of India is just a Hindu version of the Government of Pakistan, and is identical in its thinking and behaviour.

RAW, for instance, is composed mostly of serving policemen seconded to the organisation, who are going back to serve in their parent cadres (that means to the state where they were assigned on completing their initial 6 months of training). In those subsequent assignments, they are wholly exposed to political action. Their postings are determined by their acquiescence with the actions that the politicians wish to see taken. They do not flout political wishes during their later careers; they do not build up clandestine positions hostile to the wishes of the government of the day during their stints in intelligence. The reason why Doval has influence today is because he is carrying out the wishes and aspirations of today's government, and the reason why that influence is not translated into vigorous and effective action is because he is working with tools that he did not choose, and with an organisation that has had to stop at various red lights, and start again thereafter, if they were asked to. Not even close to the uninterrupted support and encouragement that the ISI received, and not even remotely comparable to the good professional results that can happen through uninterrupted work in covert areas in the field.

Contrast that with the ISI. It is composed, from top to bottom, of serving Army officers, who work in an insulated atmosphere within the government, sheltered from political influence by a clear demarcation of its work as being beyond the remit of the civilian government, and who return to active military service and get posted to fighting posts. There is no comparison with the Indian condition. None whatever. But you, and other well-meaning individuals of integrity and genuine good intentions, persist in thinking that the two are the same. Just a different hue of ideology, just saffron instead of green.

I can't do a thing about this, because such an attitude is built out of a lifetime of experiences that the other side, that the body of individuals I am talking to, has gone through. No amount of reason or countervailing experience can change those attitudes.

We don't, for instance, have the equivalent of General Durrani. We didn't go through the exercise that the ISI has done in more than one case. In the tape, he talks about the location of OBL being known and about the morality involved in the operations of the ISI in Afghanistan. We had nothing equivalent. And I say this with a great deal, an unusual amount of insight and information about our dealings with the Bangladeshis.



django said:


> Then you will surely be aware of this gentleman.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actions to merely throw us off the scent, no one took it seriously then and no one takes it seriously now and in regard to your latter points according to my Govt, Mr Yadav first visited Pakistan in 2005 and was finally apprehended in 2016, he had 11 years to accumulate all kinds of players in the region and no one seriously doubts that Yadav was the only Indian RAW operative in Pakistan.Kudos Joe



Coming to Commander Yadav, it is according to your government that we learn that he 'visited' Pakistan in 2005. What is the source of this information? Confessional statements by Yadav? The evidence of an avowedly fake passport, of the sort that government backed clandestine operations produce in a routine manner, and that can be doctored to show any amount of supposed visiting of a hostile country? If so, surely you can draw your own conclusions. If you take me into custody, and after a period of time, produce my confessions before a magistrate that I have been stealing government funds for a period of twenty five years (disclaimer: I didn't; this is just an example), how much is that worth?

The man is said to have taken premature retirement and gone into private business. That rank and age is more or less the rank and time at which officers of field grade passed over for selection resign and try to make a career for themselves in other fields of life. Suddenly now we find that he has actually been in Pakistan for eleven years.

Tell me what you make of that.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Gryphon said:


> HIT should stop producing more of those M-113 variants. Those can be acquired from other countries at cheap rates - as the APC was widely adopted.
> 
> Chinese VN17 design should be inducted and license produced instead. IFV with cannon + ATGM will increase capability manifold when used with tanks & M-113 (which can dismount infantry) and fit a 12.7mm / ATGM / RBS-70.


There are many design options, e.g. NORINCO VN17, Otokar Tulpar, FNSS Kaplan 30, Ukrainian Berserk, Polish WPB Anders, etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

What I wrote about both RAW and ISI is about the upper echelons, and does not mean that these don't have permanent, non-transferable individuals at lower levels.


----------



## Signalian

Gryphon said:


> As the two Mechanized divisions are meant to operate in the deserts (Cholistan and Thar), PA should take the pains and induct tracked IFV's. The APC's and their dismounted infantry are not very useful in the desert. Even if PA equips soldiers in these APC's with portable anti-tank weapons like Alcotan 100.


Very doubtful that PA would use a battle-taxi as direct combatant in the form of IFV to engage enemy. If APC(or IFV) is destroyed in direct combat with enemy, the infantry will lose armoured transport capability jeopardizing the mission plan to keep up with the MBT advance. 
Dismounted infantry is used to capture and hold ground, there is no other option. To engage enemy MBT and IFV, PA will use TOW/Green Arrow equipped M113 variants. I do advocate IFV but PA's armoured doctrine supports APC's over IFV's. Hamza is wheeled and has 30mm cannon. Considering a 30mm cannon is used as anti-material weapon, it can damage some hard targets excluding MBT, but may not be able to completely take out a BMP-2. The solution to take out any IA AFV is ATGM or MBT Gun at a distance and maybe RPG variants at short range.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Signalian

Gryphon said:


> PA now has a Light Infantry Division too - the 34 Light Infantry Division (HQ at Rawalpindi). Popularly known as Special Security Division.


I guess no one really saw the videos that i posted probably considering that these vids are old and seen before. But the reason i posted them was because they hold information of all principles used by PA in mechanised warfare. had i found these videos before i would not have probably written a long post to reply to Joe Shearer instead posted videos as they mention most of the things he asked me.

The first video holds another information which is not usually seen in mechanised warfare. COS at around 2:20 of video starts a sentence and then mentions about Special Forces. This opens a new parameter of warfare in armoured and mechanised warfare, inclusion of SF in combat doctrine. 

COS is not an ordinary officer, he is a future GOC in most cases. He is given a staff position at Brigadier level to absorb as much experience of coordinating and handling various formations within the Corps HQ so he gets necessary experience to command a Division in future.

SF is generally a concept of light forces which means they lack heavy weapons like tanks and artillery and mostly use guerilla warfare tactics. The inclusion of SF means that PA mechanised forces will have an added advantage of the enemy. The insertion method is not specified but it could be either by APC's itself or by heli or para drop. Holding key bridges and key strategic points ahead of advance of mechanised forces can help in rapid movement of PA without encountering resistance. SF can also be used to destroy and harass enemy supplies and supply routes along with constantly providing recon and intelligence from behind enemy lines. The lessons learnt in Afrika Campaign of WW2 by useful deployment of SAS LRDG can still be useful today.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Rajput_Pakistani

Signalian said:


> Very doubtful that PA would use a battle-taxi as direct combatant in the form of IFV to engage enemy. If APC(or IFV) is destroyed in direct combat with enemy, the infantry will lose armoured transport capability jeopardizing the mission plan to keep up with the MBT advance.
> Dismounted infantry is used to capture and hold ground, there is no other option. To engage enemy MBT and IFV, PA will use TOW/Green Arrow equipped M113 variants. I do advocate IFV but PA's armoured doctrine supports APC's over IFV's. Hamza is wheeled and has 30mm cannon. *Considering a 30mm cannon is used as anti-material weapon, it can damage some hard targets excluding MBT, but may not be able to completely take out a BMP-2. The solution to take out any IA AFV is ATGM or MBT Gun at a distance and maybe RPG variants at short range*.


I disagree with highlighted part. 30mm rounds could easily pass through frontal armor of BMP-2 and from sides could kill the infantry inside. 30mm rounds would be useless against MBT from frontal. Could damage if from sides. Yes, it could damage the electronic components mounted on MBT, which would made an MBT blind hence increases chances to take out.



Signalian said:


> I guess no one really saw the videos that i posted probably considering that these vids are old and seen before. But the reason i posted them was because they hold information of all principles used by PA in mechanised warfare. had i found these videos before i would not have probably written a long post to reply to Joe Shearer instead posted videos as they mention most of the things he asked me.
> 
> The first video holds another information which is not usually seen in mechanised warfare. COS at around 2:20 of video starts a sentence and then mentions about Special Forces. This opens a new parameter of warfare in armoured and mechanised warfare, inclusion of SF in combat doctrine.
> 
> COS is not an ordinary officer, he is a future GOC in most cases. He is given a staff position at Brigadier level to absorb as much experience of coordinating and handling various formations within the Corps HQ so he gets necessary experience to command a Division in future.
> 
> SF is generally a concept of light forces which means they lack heavy weapons like tanks and artillery and mostly use guerilla warfare tactics. The inclusion of SF means that PA mechanised forces will have an added advantage of the enemy. The insertion method is not specified but it could be either by APC's itself or by heli or para drop. Holding key bridges and key strategic points ahead of advance of mechanised forces can help in rapid movement of PA without encountering resistance. SF can also be used to destroy and harass enemy supplies and supply routes along with constantly providing recon and intelligence from behind enemy lines. The lessons learnt in Afrika Campaign of WW2 by useful deployment of SAS LRDG can still be useful today.



In my opinion, role of SF in maneuvering battle would be to carry out probing patrols, combat patrols, establishing and identifying safe passages in minefields prior to an attack. Identifying and marking fortified positions or lit the targets with LTD for an air or artillery strike.



Joe Shearer said:


> From the last backwards, that's why I find these conversations frustrating. If you persist in seeing Indian actions through the same lens with which you view the actions of the Pakistani deep state, these misconceptions will arise. There is nothing that individuals like I can do, to bridge this gap. I've found through the last eight years of conversation that this is the single biggest barrier to understanding; Pakistanis keep thinking that the Government of India is just a Hindu version of the Government of Pakistan, and is identical in its thinking and behaviour.
> 
> RAW, for instance, is composed mostly of serving policemen seconded to the organisation, who are going back to serve in their parent cadres (that means to the state where they were assigned on completing their initial 6 months of training). In those subsequent assignments, they are wholly exposed to political action. Their postings are determined by their acquiescence with the actions that the politicians wish to see taken. They do not flout political wishes during their later careers; they do not build up clandestine positions hostile to the wishes of the government of the day during their stints in intelligence. The reason why Doval has influence today is because he is carrying out the wishes and aspirations of today's government, and the reason why that influence is not translated into vigorous and effective action is because he is working with tools that he did not choose, and with an organisation that has had to stop at various red lights, and start again thereafter, if they were asked to. Not even close to the uninterrupted support and encouragement that the ISI received, and not even remotely comparable to the good professional results that can happen through uninterrupted work in covert areas in the field.
> 
> Contrast that with the ISI. It is composed, from top to bottom, of serving Army officers, who work in an insulated atmosphere within the government, sheltered from political influence by a clear demarcation of its work as being beyond the remit of the civilian government, and who return to active military service and get posted to fighting posts. There is no comparison with the Indian condition. None whatever. But you, and other well-meaning individuals of integrity and genuine good intentions, persist in thinking that the two are the same. Just a different hue of ideology, just saffron instead of green.
> 
> I can't do a thing about this, because such an attitude is built out of a lifetime of experiences that the other side, that the body of individuals I am talking to, has gone through. No amount of reason or countervailing experience can change those attitudes.
> 
> We don't, for instance, have the equivalent of General Durrani. We didn't go through the exercise that the ISI has done in more than one case. In the tape, he talks about the location of OBL being known and about the morality involved in the operations of the ISI in Afghanistan. We had nothing equivalent. And I say this with a great deal, an unusual amount of insight and information about our dealings with the Bangladeshis.
> 
> 
> 
> Coming to Commander Yadav, it is according to your government that we learn that he 'visited' Pakistan in 2005. What is the source of this information? Confessional statements by Yadav? The evidence of an avowedly fake passport, of the sort that government backed clandestine operations produce in a routine manner, and that can be doctored to show any amount of supposed visiting of a hostile country? If so, surely you can draw your own conclusions. If you take me into custody, and after a period of time, produce my confessions before a magistrate that I have been stealing government funds for a period of twenty five years (disclaimer: I didn't; this is just an example), how much is that worth?
> 
> The man is said to have taken premature retirement and gone into private business. That rank and age is more or less the rank and time at which officers of field grade passed over for selection resign and try to make a career for themselves in other fields of life. Suddenly now we find that he has actually been in Pakistan for eleven years.
> 
> Tell me what you make of that.



If there is no credibility of confessions during custody, then sorry to say you are questioning the credibility of all police and judicial system. Starting from Ajmal Kasab to David Headley and KSM confessions under water boarding?
What do you say?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## cerberus

Joe Shearer said:


> What I wrote about both RAW and ISI is about the upper echelons, and does not mean that these don't have permanent, non-transferable individuals at lower levels.


This the prime reason why DIA created 
B Raman mentioned that in his books


----------



## Joe Shearer

Rajput_Pakistani said:


> I disagree with highlighted part. 30mm rounds could easily pass through frontal armor of BMP-2 and from sides could kill the infantry inside. 30mm rounds would be useless against MBT from frontal. Could damage if from sides. Yes, it could damage the electronic components mounted on MBT, which would made an MBT blind hence increases chances to take out.
> 
> 
> 
> In my opinion, role of SF in maneuvering battle would be to carry out probing patrols, combat patrols, establishing and identifying safe passages in minefields prior to an attack. Identifying and marking fortified positions or lit the targets with LTD for an air or artillery strike.
> 
> 
> 
> If there is no credibility of confessions during custody, then sorry to say you are questioning the credibility of all police and judicial system. Starting from Ajmal Kasab to David Headley and KSM confessions under water boarding?
> What do you say?



I can only point out two things, one, that confessions to the police are already inadmissible evidence in Indian courts. Two, that a confession from David Headley was not extricated from him by force, but as part of a plea-bargaining bid by him, to reduce his probable sentence. What he said about Mumbai attacks, about the mechanics of the training of the squad, about the presence of military personnel, and about the command and control structure of the LeT was not dictated by Indian agencies, but appeared - unsolicited - in his voluntary testimony.

The rest needs no detailed discussion. Ajmal Kasab did not have to confess; his role was videographed thousands of times in the media. His confession was not useful in the evidence leading to his sentence, it was useful in filling out the picture about the background to the massacre. 

I am against all forms of torture, and do not hold with water boarding.



niaz said:


> Hon Sir,
> 
> In current organization, a U.S. tank company has 3 tank platoons of 4 tanks each for a total of 12 - plus 2 additional tanks in the company headquarter section. That makes 14 tanks in a tank company. There are 3 tank companies in every tank battalion for a total of 42 tanks - plus 2 additional tanks in the battalion headquarters for a total of 44 tanks.
> 
> Armoured brigade may have 2 to 3 tank battalions. An armoured division normally has 3 but could have 4 brigades which might have as many as 7 or 8 tank battalions altogether in the division. 7 armoured battalions makes 308 & 8 makes it 352. Adding 4 additional tanks for the Brigade HQ, means about 320 tanks in the US Armoured Div. with a maximum of 370.
> 
> British army regiment also has 44 tanks to the maximum of 58 tanks in the Royal Dragoon guards. There were a total of 343 tanks in the British 1st Armoured Div. during WW2.
> 
> During 1965 war Indian Army Ist Armoured Div. played a major role. To the best my info this Division consisted of 2 Royal Lancers, 4 Hodson’s Horse, 7 Light Cavalry, 16 'Black Elephant' Cavalry, 17 Cavalry [Poona Horse], 18 Cavalry and 62 Cavalry making 7 armoured battalions or a total of about 308 tanks. Russian tank division also has about 320 MBTs. German Panzer Division during WW2 also had between 300 to 350 tanks.
> 
> Pray tell me which army has 700 tanks (about 16 tanks battalions) in a single armoured division. It would be a great addition to my knowledge base.



Sir,

I am sorry that you got sucked into this side-show, that started with my typing in the wrong figures that came from an entirely different professional exercise , nothing to do with PDF but concerned with financial restructuring. Afterwards, when the mistake was pointed out to me, I was too irritated by the triumphal tone to simply correct the mistake, and some unwary soul may have written a post that caught your attention.

My apologies for the confusion caused.

As ever, you never cease to astonish us with your breadth of knowledge.

Most respectfully,

'Joe'



cerberus said:


> This the prime reason why DIA created
> B Raman mentioned that in his books



You must have been laughing rolling on the floor as I did when some nincompoop printed a very poorly written internal memo about loss of morale in the Indian Army. It mentions that a study was conducted by the department of psychological operations (PSYOPS) within the Directorate of Military Intelligence. It did not route the letter properly, as an astute Pakistani reader, @MUSTAKSHAF, pointed out. But most of all, the author was apparently unaware th not to go into detail on these, although everything may have public but well spotted, all the same.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Adonis

CriticalThought said:


> This is very good planning by PA. But, at the same time, we need to plan for unlikely scenarios and rehearse for them, because *the enemy will see the benefit of using a strategy that is least expected by us.*



With all due respect, your enemy is already using the strategy that is least expected by you. 

Look around you, financial crisis, internal insurgency, diplomatic backlash on world forums, acceptance by countries about your state sponsoring terrorism, nuclear proliferation charges, internal political turmoil, huge external debt, collapsed govt machinery.......How it happened and why these issues are creeping up all together? .....this is called 5th generation war, that does more damage then an all out war for few days...... Mechanised infantry or armored divisions can remain where they are...they are redundant. 

My grandfather left Pakistan half a century back, but he always cherished the memories of his native country....He must really be sad seeing the current state of affairs up there

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Rajput_Pakistani said:


> I disagree with highlighted part. 30mm rounds could easily pass through frontal armor of BMP-2 and from sides could kill the infantry inside.


Penetration into BMP-2 frontal armor would require some range and angle. A few factors factors here:
1. Penetrating armor doesn't guarantee a kill and a handful of rounds maybe required. Firing all those rounds at same angle and distance to achieve penetration may and may not be possible.
2. Chances for kill by 30mm become greater if APSD-T rounds are used, but an IFV uses HE rounds against infantry. so why are we using an IFV here, to combat infantry or AFV? 
3. To guarantee a kill, a bigger caliber is required like MBT gun (105mm or 125mm) or ATGM (150mm).
4. BMP-2 can clearly score a kill using its ATGM before its killed by 30mm. 



> 30mm rounds would be useless against MBT from frontal. Could damage if from sides. Yes, it could damage the electronic components mounted on MBT, which would made an MBT blind hence increases chances to take out.


By the time 30mm blinds the MBT, the MBT would have toasted it with its main gun.


The point is, you use a weapon which is a sure shot kill, not just probability of damaging or penetrating.

@Penguin @Vergennes @jhungary I need your guidance on 30mm Vs IFV topic. Western Armies use 25mm and 30mm cannons. Assist please.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## CriticalThought

Adonis said:


> With all due respect, your enemy is already using the strategy that is least expected by you.
> 
> Look around you, financial crisis, internal insurgency, diplomatic backlash on world forums, acceptance by countries about your state sponsoring terrorism, nuclear proliferation charges, internal political turmoil, huge external debt, collapsed govt machinery.......How it happened and why these issues are creeping up all together? .....this is called 5th generation war, that does more damage then an all out war for few days...... Mechanised infantry or armored divisions can remain where they are...they are redundant.
> 
> My grandfather left Pakistan half a century back, but he always cherished the memories of his native country....He must really be sad seeing the current state of affairs up there



The comment was in the context of actual war.


----------



## jhungary

Didn't follow the topic so maybe what I said is off topic. I don't know 



Signalian said:


> Penetration into BMP-2 frontal armor would require some range and angle. A few factors factors here:
> 1. Penetrating armor doesn't guarantee a kill and a handful of rounds maybe required. Firing all those rounds at same angle and distance to achieve penetration may and may not be possible.
> 2. Chances for kill by 30mm become greater if APSD-T rounds are used, but an IFV uses HE rounds against infantry. so why are we using an IFV here, to combat infantry or AFV?
> 3. To guarantee a kill, a bigger caliber is required like MBT gun (105mm or 125mm) or ATGM (150mm).
> 4. BMP-2 can clearly score a kill using its ATGM before its killed by 30mm.



Range and Angle is important but it is not the sole consideration of the question on penetration. The type of rounds, and the Initial Velocity and also the distant play an important factor if you are talking about IFV vs IFV, it would not be any big different if you are talking about any type of Armour because it's going to be bounce off anyway.

There are an example which IFV Commander (like me) was trained with, coming from Operation Desert Storm, where a pair of M2 Bradley engage a T-72 while both expanded their TOW missile, the 25mm cannon from the M2 basically just bounce off the hull of the T-72, but since the M2 is cresting so what the M2 did were what we called a Reload Drill, One Bradley keep forward and backward and engage the T-72 drawing his attention away while the other get into turret down and reload their TOW, it's risky but it did the trick.

However, in an IFV v IFV scenario, 25mm and 30mm cannon make basically no different, beside the round use and the distant. 



> By the time 30mm blinds the MBT, the MBT would have toasted it with its main gun.



Explained above 



> The point is, you use a weapon which is a sure shot kill, not just probability of damaging or penetrating.
> 
> @Penguin @Vergennes @jhungary I need your guidance on 30mm Vs IFV topic. Western Armies use 25mm and 30mm cannons. Assist please.



Most country like 25mm because the round are smaller and you can carry more round, and the gun is about 1/3 smaller than 30mm (like Mk 44) which give the IFV a lower profile. However, some country do use 30mm chain gun instead of 25mm, CV90 (Swedish IFV being used in most Nordic Country and some Asian country uses Mk44) 

Most 30mm used by the US is on aerial platform, on AH-64, AC-130 and A-10.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Gryphon

Signalian said:


> Very doubtful that PA would use a battle-taxi as direct combatant in the form of IFV to engage enemy. If APC(or IFV) is destroyed in direct combat with enemy, the infantry will lose armoured transport capability jeopardizing the mission plan to keep up with the MBT advance.
> Dismounted infantry is used to capture and hold ground, there is no other option. To engage enemy MBT and IFV, PA will use TOW/Green Arrow equipped M113 variants. I do advocate IFV but PA's armoured doctrine supports APC's over IFV's. Hamza is wheeled and has 30mm cannon. Considering a 30mm cannon is used as anti-material weapon, it can damage some hard targets excluding MBT, but may not be able to completely take out a BMP-2. The solution to take out any IA AFV is ATGM or MBT Gun at a distance and maybe RPG variants at short range.



The doctrine that will lead us to defeat must change.

I don't advocate completely replacing APC's with IFV's but using both. While MBT's and IFV's lead, the APC's follow. The VN17 IFV has remote controlled cannon to engage enemy infantry and light armoured vehicles. And few ATGM's as well.

Hamza was not accepted by PA.



Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> There are many design options, e.g. NORINCO VN17, Otokar Tulpar, FNSS Kaplan 30, Ukrainian Berserk, Polish WPB Anders, etc.



The reason I mentioned VN17 is it could prove affordable for Pakistan. The Ukrainians provide worst after sale support and expensive spare parts & oil.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Inception-06

Joe Shearer said:


> The same thing applies to our formations on this side.
> 
> You probably know that the very carefully designed mechanisation of the PBI, formation of the RAPIDs, has been stalled or derailed by the dismal bureaucrats of Defence Ministry.




The BMP does not fit the role ?



BetterPakistan said:


> What else could I expect from a human being like you other than badmouthing others. I am not interested in measuring anything but you definitely was & is because this is all what are you doing since you grown up.
> 
> You have stated many times about 6000 tanks but you never gave the source to me, I am still waiting for the source??



let him go, enjoy the topic ! Even if he is indian, we should all behave gently !

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Gryphon said:


> The doctrine that will lead us to defeat must change.
> 
> I don't advocate completely replacing APC's with IFV's but using both. While MBT's and IFV's lead, the APC's follow. The VN17 IFV has remote controlled cannon to engage enemy infantry and light armoured vehicles. And few ATGM's as well.
> 
> Hamza was not accepted by PA.
> 
> 
> 
> The reason I mentioned VN17 is it could prove affordable for Pakistan. The Ukrainians provide worst after sale support and expensive spare parts & oil.


This time Pakistan has to make sure that it retains the means to fully manufacture and support. One of the advantages of the M113 has been that HIT is basically able to manufacture most of it (besides engine and some other dynamic components).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Gryphon

Signalian said:


> I guess no one really saw the videos that i posted probably considering that these vids are old and seen before. But the reason i posted them was because they hold information of all principles used by PA in mechanised warfare. had i found these videos before i would not have probably written a long post to reply to Joe Shearer instead posted videos as they mention most of the things he asked me.
> 
> The first video holds another information which is not usually seen in mechanised warfare. COS at around 2:20 of video starts a sentence and then mentions about Special Forces. This opens a new parameter of warfare in armoured and mechanised warfare, inclusion of SF in combat doctrine.
> 
> COS is not an ordinary officer, he is a future GOC in most cases. He is given a staff position at Brigadier level to absorb as much experience of coordinating and handling various formations within the Corps HQ so he gets necessary experience to command a Division in future.
> 
> SF is generally a concept of light forces which means they lack heavy weapons like tanks and artillery and mostly use guerilla warfare tactics. The inclusion of SF means that PA mechanised forces will have an added advantage of the enemy. The insertion method is not specified but it could be either by APC's itself or by heli or para drop. Holding key bridges and key strategic points ahead of advance of mechanised forces can help in rapid movement of PA without encountering resistance. SF can also be used to destroy and harass enemy supplies and supply routes along with constantly providing recon and intelligence from behind enemy lines. The lessons learnt in Afrika Campaign of WW2 by useful deployment of SAS LRDG can still be useful today.



I watched all the episodes a few months back. Watched those 3 again today.



Signalian said:


> Penetration into BMP-2 frontal armor would require some range and angle. A few factors factors here:
> 1. Penetrating armor doesn't guarantee a kill and a handful of rounds maybe required. Firing all those rounds at same angle and distance to achieve penetration may and may not be possible.
> 2. Chances for kill by 30mm become greater if APSD-T rounds are used, but an IFV uses HE rounds against infantry. so why are we using an IFV here, to combat infantry or AFV?
> 3. To guarantee a kill, a bigger caliber is required like MBT gun (105mm or 125mm) or ATGM (150mm).
> 4. BMP-2 can clearly score a kill using its ATGM before its killed by 30mm.
> 
> 
> By the time 30mm blinds the MBT, the MBT would have toasted it with its main gun.
> 
> 
> The point is, you use a weapon which is a sure shot kill, not just probability of damaging or penetrating.
> 
> @Penguin @Vergennes @jhungary I need your guidance on 30mm Vs IFV topic. Western Armies use 25mm and 30mm cannons. Assist please.



An IFV would prefer ATGM for neutralizing enemy IFV or MBT. Meanwhile, 25mm cannon fire can hold the dismounted troops.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Inception-06

Signalian said:


> Very doubtful that PA would use a battle-taxi as a direct combatant in the form of IFV to engage enemy. If APC(or IFV) is destroyed in direct combat with enemy, the infantry will lose armoured transport capability jeopardizing the mission plan to keep up with the MBT advance.
> Dismounted infantry is used to capture and hold ground, there is no other option. To engage enemy MBT and IFV, PA will use TOW/Green Arrow equipped M113 variants. I do advocate IFV but PA's armoured doctrine supports APC's over IFV's. Hamza is wheeled and has 30mm cannon. Considering a 30mm cannon is used as anti-material weapon, it can damage some hard targets excluding MBT, but may not be able to completely take out a BMP-2. The solution to take out any IA AFV is ATGM or MBT Gun at a distance and maybe RPG variants at short range.




Pakistani light mechanized Infantry workhorse transforming into a Heavy armed assault Force​
@Gryphon 

@Signalian and me and also many other respected Members have discussed many times the concept of the Pakistan Army doctrine "Battle taxi", and of course we did come to the conclusion that the M-113 does not really fit the role in an Indian war theater, what comes after dismounting the assault Infantry? Face the bulk of Indian formations (MBTs,BMPs,Infantry) with RPG-7 (short range, cant penetrate modern MBT in the first shoot),12.7mm (M-113 will not follow the infantry to the hot zone so that's also a restricted defensive weapon), 60mm Mortar which is a WW2 weapon (inaccurate). I don't think that the Pakistani Military does have the budge to replace the M-113 or will change its doctrine of "Battle taxi", but what they can do and that might be also economical and reallistic, is to modernize the mechanized Infantry Soldiers quipment. If Assault Infantry alone has to face the Indian BMPs, MBTs, and enemy Infantry, obstacles, enemy bunkers, enemy trenches. then why not transforming that light Infantry into a heavy one: that means adding to every squat like @Gryphon said new and modern weapons like the Alcotan. 

The Pakistani squad/section assault Infantry level needs more and higher precise firepower, which can be given through:

- under-barrel grenade launcher, close fire support against point and area targets(every Soldiers weapon should be equipped with that) 

-one-man portable, single-use anti-tank rocket launcher (which have bought, but I doubt it was meant for the mechanized Infantry Battalions)

- more and modern hand grenades

- a better and modern Infantry rifle (which adds better targeting/aiming systems)

- sophisticated night vision equipment 

The Pakistani Concept at the moment looks like that, check the Infantry they seem to have very rudimentary equipment.

*







*


*Compare that to the US Army mechanized Infantry equipment:*



*



*


@Signalian I have seen that show from W.S Khan "We are Soldiers" during my own military service that was around 2010, but their equipment is still not update after 8 years!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Gryphon

Bilal Khan (Quwa) said:


> This time Pakistan has to make sure that it retains the means to fully manufacture and support. One of the advantages of the M113 has been that HIT is basically able to manufacture most of it (besides engine and some other dynamic components).



I think Army does realize that acquiring used M-113's from other countries (like Italy) is much cheaper than manufacturing at HIT.

They should just license a flexible IFV design and build the infrastructure for manufacturing and maintenance.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## niaz

Gryphon said:


> PA now has a Light Infantry Division too - the 34 Light Infantry Division (HQ at Rawalpindi). Popularly known as Special Security Division.



I understood from the ‘Light Infantry’ as being the unit of soldiers having no attached tank units, IFVs, APC or artillery pieces. Therefore I consider all air transportable troops such that the Commandos, Paras as well as the Mountain Infantry as the light infantry. Hence no need for a separate light infantry brigades or divisions.

During the Falkland war of 1982, all of us read about the famous ‘Yomp ’, basically 50 mile long march with full gear by the Royal Marines. Subsequently, I came across this article while perusing New York Times on the internet some 30 years ago. Since then I have been curious about concept of Light Infantry in the modern army. .

http://www.nytimes.com/1984/11/25/w...the-army-is-bringing-back-light-infantry.html

As I understand it, key feature of the light infantry being the mobility and being quickly deployable. Similar to a competent guerrilla force; such units would be extremely useful for the recce as well as raids / ambush & probing attacks; thus ideal for the counter insurgency operations such as fight against Taliban, where a squad or platoon of soldiers armed with hand held weapons only can be quickly air lifted to deal with the crisis situation.

However, because such units would lack fire power to face the normal infantry supported by tanks, IFVs’ and artillery, one wonders why there is need for the large divisions size formations. Why not large number of battalion size units either operating autonomously or attached as an auxiliary to the Division / Corps HQ?

One can probably justify the requirement for Lt Inf. Div. in the US army; where an entire division, ready to fight as soon they get on the ground, can be moved to a trouble spot thousands of miles away in a fleet of C-130 /C141 aeroplanes. However, India has 15 Lt Infantry Div. in addition to the 12 Mountain Infantry Div. and now Pakistan has also created one.

In my humble opinion, concept of a quickly deployable light infantry division, say 10 to 12,000 soldiers is good, but unless you equip the light infantry soldier with man portable weapons of the capability that such a division can successfully defend a tactically important location against a division size force of the heavy/ mechanised infantry until friendly support arrives, true potential of Lt Infantry will not be realised.

Would military professional member enlighten me about advantage of a Lt Inf Div over the 101 Airborne Div of the US army?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## django

Joe Shearer said:


> From the last backwards, that's why I find these conversations frustrating. If you persist in seeing Indian actions through the same lens with which you view the actions of the Pakistani deep state, these misconceptions will arise. There is nothing that individuals like I can do, to bridge this gap. I've found through the last eight years of conversation that this is the single biggest barrier to understanding; Pakistanis keep thinking that the Government of India is just a Hindu version of the Government of Pakistan, and is identical in its thinking and behaviour.
> 
> RAW, for instance, is composed mostly of serving policemen seconded to the organisation, who are going back to serve in their parent cadres (that means to the state where they were assigned on completing their initial 6 months of training). In those subsequent assignments, they are wholly exposed to political action. Their postings are determined by their acquiescence with the actions that the politicians wish to see taken. They do not flout political wishes during their later careers; they do not build up clandestine positions hostile to the wishes of the government of the day during their stints in intelligence. The reason why Doval has influence today is because he is carrying out the wishes and aspirations of today's government, and the reason why that influence is not translated into vigorous and effective action is because he is working with tools that he did not choose, and with an organisation that has had to stop at various red lights, and start again thereafter, if they were asked to. Not even close to the uninterrupted support and encouragement that the ISI received, and not even remotely comparable to the good professional results that can happen through uninterrupted work in covert areas in the field.
> 
> Contrast that with the ISI. It is composed, from top to bottom, of serving Army officers, who work in an insulated atmosphere within the government, sheltered from political influence by a clear demarcation of its work as being beyond the remit of the civilian government, and who return to active military service and get posted to fighting posts. There is no comparison with the Indian condition. None whatever. But you, and other well-meaning individuals of integrity and genuine good intentions, persist in thinking that the two are the same. Just a different hue of ideology, just saffron instead of green.
> 
> I can't do a thing about this, because such an attitude is built out of a lifetime of experiences that the other side, that the body of individuals I am talking to, has gone through. No amount of reason or countervailing experience can change those attitudes.
> 
> We don't, for instance, have the equivalent of General Durrani. We didn't go through the exercise that the ISI has done in more than one case. In the tape, he talks about the location of OBL being known and about the morality involved in the operations of the ISI in Afghanistan. We had nothing equivalent. And I say this with a great deal, an unusual amount of insight and information about our dealings with the Bangladeshis.


Those deputed policemen or what not proved to be extremely effective at nurturing Mukti Bani, Mr Modi pretty much acknowledged this as does the book "Mission RA&W" by former RAW operative R.K Yadav, we have a proven and acknowledged history of RAW and it's very effective operations against Pakistan, forgive us for being hyper-vigilant, it should be perfectly understandable .Kudos Joe

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Gryphon said:


> An IFV would prefer ATGM for neutralizing enemy IFV or MBT. Meanwhile, 25mm cannon fire can hold the dismounted troops.



12.7mm can do the same?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## django

Joe Shearer said:


> Coming to Commander Yadav, it is according to your government that we learn that he 'visited' Pakistan in 2005. What is the source of this information? Confessional statements by Yadav? The evidence of an avowedly fake passport, of the sort that government backed clandestine operations produce in a routine manner, and that can be doctored to show any amount of supposed visiting of a hostile country? If so, surely you can draw your own conclusions. If you take me into custody, and after a period of time, produce my confessions before a magistrate that I have been stealing government funds for a period of twenty five years (disclaimer: I didn't; this is just an example), how much is that worth?
> 
> The man is said to have taken premature retirement and gone into private business. That rank and age is more or less the rank and time at which officers of field grade passed over for selection resign and try to make a career for themselves in other fields of life. Suddenly now we find that he has actually been in Pakistan for eleven years.
> 
> Tell me what you make of that.


I never said Mr Yadav spent 11 concurrent years in Pakistan, he was moving back and forth, in regards to his passport and how he acquired it, the Indian government should check with the appropriate Indian organisation that issues them out, a very simple query indeed and why has the Indian govt not taken up the case of the kidnapping of Hussain Mubarik Patel with the Iranian govt, you see he entered Iran under that name and with the passport that was issued by Indian govt, whether one believes that Yadav is a RAW operative or not surely Joe a thoughtful chap like yourself will be most curious about the mysterious Mr Yadav AKA Hussain Mubarik Patel.Kudos Joe


----------



## Signalian

Gryphon said:


> The doctrine that will lead us to defeat must change.
> 
> I don't advocate completely replacing APC's with IFV's but using both. While MBT's and IFV's lead, the APC's follow. The VN17 IFV has remote controlled cannon to engage enemy infantry and light armoured vehicles. And few ATGM's as well.
> 
> Hamza was not accepted by PA.
> 
> 
> 
> The reason I mentioned VN17 is it could prove affordable for Pakistan. The Ukrainians provide worst after sale support and expensive spare parts & oil.



If its the firepower of an IFV which can engage infantry or MBT, then even Maaz is also a probable candidate, Its armed with 12.7mm gun to engage infantry and ATGM to engage MBT. Just like Bradley, it will need to stop to fire the ATGM.

The problem in direct engagement could be the armor of the M-113 and its variants like Talha, Maaz etc, which is aluminium and catches fire easily. To counter this, caged side covering or steel plates or other kind of protective covering on side has been used. 

what kind of armor does VN17 have to survive direct engagement? It looks similar to a CV-90. With the armament, it again comes down to 12.7mm vs 30mm in engaging infantry. VN17 doesnt have a 7.62mm MG. would 30mm be an over kill?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Gryphon

Ulla said:


> Pakistani light mechanized Infantry workhorse transforming into a Heavy armed assault Force​
> @Gryphon
> 
> @Signalian and me and also many other respected Members have discussed many times the concept of the Pakistan Army doctrine "Battle taxi", and of course we did come to the conclusion that the M-113 does not really fit the role in an Indian war theater, what comes after dismounting the assault the Infantry? Face the bulk of Indian formations (MBTs,BMPs,Infantry) with RPG-7 (short range, cant penetrate modern MBT in the first shoot),12.7mm (M-113 will not follow the infantry to the hot zone so that's also a restricted defensive weapon), 60mm Mortar which is a WW2 weapon (inaccurate). I don't think that the Pakistani Military does have the budge to replace the M-113 or will change its doctrine of "Battle taxi", but what they can do and that might be also economical and reallistic, is to modernize the mechanized Infantry Soldiers quipment. If Assault Infantry alone has to face the Indian BMPs, MBTs, and enemy Infantry, obstacles, enemy bunkers, enemy trenches. then why not transforming that light Infantry into a heavy one: that means adding to every squat like @Gryphon said new and modern weapons like the Alcotan.
> 
> The Pakistani squad/section assault Infantry level needs more and higher precise firepower, which can be given through:
> 
> - under-barrel grenade launcher, close fire support against point and area targets(every Soldiers weapon should be equipped with that)
> 
> -one-man portable, single-use anti-tank rocket launcher (which have bought, but I doubt it was meant for the mechanized Infantry Battalions)
> 
> - more and modern hand grenades
> 
> - a better and modern Infantry rifle (which adds better targeting/aiming systems)
> 
> - sophisticated night vision equipment
> 
> The Pakistani Concept at the moment looks like that, check the Infantry they seem to have very rudimentary equipment.
> 
> *
> View attachment 438573
> View attachment 438574
> *
> 
> 
> *Compare that to the US Army mechanized Infantry equipment:*
> 
> 
> 
> *
> View attachment 438575
> *
> 
> 
> @Signalian I have seen that show from W.S Khan "We are Soldiers" during my own military service that was around 2010, but their equipment is still not update after 8 years!



Correct on all counts.

Each mechanized division can easily absorb 2,000 pcs of Alcotan-AT (the anti-tank version PA acquired in small numbers).
Western militaries are switching to disposable anti-tank rockets as well.



Signalian said:


> 12.7mm can do the same?



12.7mm is too heavy for a soldier to carry. Neither do HMG equipped M-113 APC's fight in the hot zone as @Ulla mentioned above.



Signalian said:


> If its the firepower of an IFV which can engage infantry or MBT, then even Maaz is also a probable candidate, Its armed with 12.7mm gun to engage infantry and ATGM to engage MBT. Just like Bradley, it will need to stop to fire the ATGM.
> 
> The problem in direct engagement could be the armor of the M-113 and its variants like Talha, Maaz etc, which is aluminium and catches fire easily. To counter this, caged side covering or steel plates or other kind of protective covering on side has been used.
> 
> what kind of armor does VN17 have to survive direct engagement? It looks similar to a CV-90. With the armament, it again comes down to 12.7mm vs 30mm in engaging infantry. VN17 doesnt have a 7.62mm MG. would 30mm be an over kill?



Maaz ATGM Carrier







12.7mm is not visible (at least with this example)





_The new VN-17 infantry-fighting vehicle (IFV) uses a heavily modified version of the 33-ton VT-5 light tank's chassis. It has an unmanned (read: remotely controlled) turret with two large, multi-lens electro-optical and infrared sensors (one each for the gunner and commander). Those sensors come in handy when the system needs to use its 35mm cannon, 7.62mm machine gun, or medium-range HJ-12 anti-tank missiles. The VN-17 is also well protected, with reactive armor on the lower front hull, and significant side-skirt armor alongside its tracks. All this, plus its capacity to carry seven infantry, makes it likely in the 30-35 ton weight class.

It shares some similarity with the People's Liberation Army's mysterious new infantry-fighting vehicle, which will reportedly have an unmanned turret, augmented displays for crew helmets, and a hybrid-electrical engine for fuel efficiency and stealth. In terms of armament, protection, and sensors, both the VN-17 and the unnamed PLA IFV compare quite favorably to the U.S. Army's M2A3 Bradley IFV. But unlike the 35-year-old Bradley, China's brand new battle taxis have plenty of margin to grow into future upgrades like more advanced armor, better weapons, APS, sensors, and deploying unmanned partners.
_
_https://www.popsci.com/china-has-fleet-new-armor-vehicles_



Cannon can fire HE fragmentation rounds which are excellent weapon for dealing with infantry troops.



niaz said:


> One can probably justify the requirement for Lt Inf. Div. in the US army; where an entire division, ready to fight as soon they get on the ground, can be moved to a trouble spot thousands of miles away in a fleet of C-130 /C141 aeroplanes. However, India has 15 Lt Infantry Div. in addition to the 12 Mountain Infantry Div. and now Pakistan has also created one.



IA has Light Infantry regiments. Their battalions perform normal infantry role & are distributed among all Corps.

There is no Light Inf. Div. in IA.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

django said:


> Those deputed policemen or what not proved to be extremely effective at nurturing Mukti Bani, Mr Modi pretty much acknowledged this as does the book "Mission RA&W" by former RAW operative R.K Yadav, we have a proven and acknowledged history of RAW and it's very effective operations against Pakistan, forgive us for being hyper-vigilant, it should be perfectly understandable .Kudos Joe



RAW was *not at all* involved with the Mukti Bahini. That was purely an Indian Army operation, and a specific Major General, a Bengali, in Eastern Command, was put in charge. I forget his name. Besides his coordination attempts with the Mukti Bahini - not an easy task, with a tough guy like Osmani insisting that they had a completely independent command and control structure, and that they would fight to their own plans - he was also responsible for marshalling and deploying Indian Army individuals deputed to fight supporting MB formations or to play supporting roles in the field. That means individuals, outstanding officers of field rank, were attached to company level or battalion level formations of the MB to stiffen their tactical handling. The MB had organised themselves into various sectors, and jealously guarded their operational independence. 

However, this go-it-alone policy, which was implemented by Osmani and his 'sector commanders', had failed by August-September; the PA were effectively back on top. This phase did, however, keep the PA busy and by the end, they were fatigued at fighting a counter-insurgency war at full pitch for four months at a stretch. The Pakistan Army that turned to fight the Indian Army in November was exhausted.

I have not read Mission R&W. Most of what is talked about is self-glorification by Kao-boys who have read too many James Bond books.



django said:


> I never said Mr Yadav spent 11 concurrent years in Pakistan, he was moving back and forth, in regards to his passport and how he acquired it, the Indian government should check with the appropriate Indian organisation that issues them out, a very simple query indeed and why has the Indian govt not taken up the case of the kidnapping of Hussain Mubarik Patel with the Iranian govt, you see he entered Iran under that name and with the passport that was issued by Indian govt, whether one believes that Yadav is a RAW operative or not surely Joe a thoughtful chap like yourself will be most curious about the mysterious Mr Yadav AKA Hussain Mubarik Patel.Kudos Joe



I really would appreciate this sub-thread of ours going independent, if you would be so kind, @django. Too many of my posts fail to pass muster; must be my bad breath.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## BetterPakistan

niaz said:


> Tanks: 124 Arjun, 1,950 T-72, 900+ T-90, 1 with 1,100 in store (older models). Total 4,074 additional 236 T-90 & 118 Arjun on order. Making a total of 4,428 tanks.



Yes that person is quoting 6000 tanks and i have questioned him source many times before but I didn't got answer ever  

I don't think those stored 1100 tanks in indian army can be made operational.

M48 stored of Pak army couldn't be made operational too


----------



## Mumm-Ra

@Joe Shearer @django...Gentlemen, you both are among the finest posters on this forum. Please do not derail an excellent thread. The Yadav saga can be discussed in its respective thread

@Signalian ...hats off for a thorough and impartial analysis

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## django

Xlvee01 said:


> @Joe Shearer @django...Gentlemen, you both are among the finest posters on this forum. *Please do not derail an excellent thread. The Yadav saga can be discussed in its respective thread*
> 
> @Signalian ...hats off for a thorough and impartial analysis


Roger.Kudos yaar.



Joe Shearer said:


> RAW was *not at all* involved with the Mukti Bahini. That was purely an Indian Army operation, and a specific Major General, a Bengali, in Eastern Command, was put in charge. I forget his name. Besides his coordination attempts with the Mukti Bahini - not an easy task, with a tough guy like Osmani insisting that they had a completely independent command and control structure, and that they would fight to their own plans - he was also responsible for marshalling and deploying Indian Army individuals deputed to fight supporting MB formations or to play supporting roles in the field. That means individuals, outstanding officers of field rank, were attached to company level or battalion level formations of the MB to stiffen their tactical handling. The MB had organised themselves into various sectors, and jealously guarded their operational independence.
> 
> However, this go-it-alone policy, which was implemented by Osmani and his 'sector commanders', had failed by August-September; the PA were effectively back on top. This phase did, however, keep the PA busy and by the end, they were fatigued at fighting a counter-insurgency war at full pitch for four months at a stretch. The Pakistan Army that turned to fight the Indian Army in November was exhausted.
> 
> I have not read Mission R&W. Most of what is talked about is self-glorification by Kao-boys who have read too many James Bond books.
> 
> 
> 
> I really would appreciate this sub-thread of ours going independent, if you would be so kind, @django. Too many of my posts fail to pass muster; must be my bad breath.


An interesting discussion that no doubt will be discussed in a more appropriate thread, I suspect their are a few of those dangling already.Kudos Joe and @Signalian bro thank you for your patience. much obliged.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Joe Shearer

Xlvee01 said:


> @Joe Shearer @django...Gentlemen, you both are among the finest posters on this forum. Please do not derail an excellent thread. The Yadav saga can be discussed in its respective thread
> 
> @Signalian ...hats off for a thorough and impartial analysis



I agree. @django, please open a thread for this. @Signalian, wonderful thread.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hellfire

Signalian said:


> Those who consider that Rahim yar Khan is an area where IA CSD can succeed should keep in mind that the whole stretch is protected by a Division which has 220 MBT at its disposal. plus an Independent Armoured Brigade having 88 MBT.
> 
> @Ulla @Northern @django @Mentee @Khafee @tps77 @CriticalThought @Baloch Pakistani



I see the capture of Islamgarh fort by a single unit of aindian Army in 1971 was taken too seriously perhaps? The company commander responsible for the defence of the fort should be shot IMO. He surrendered to a single infantry battalion which was spread in a frontage of 3 kms, mistaking the spread as the advance of a Brigade sized attacking force 

@Joe Shearer this tidbit I mentioned earlier if you recall. The unit is 3rd Battalion Rajputana Rifles. Only 1 guy was injured in this capture of Fort at Islamgarh on the night of attack on Longewala. The whole division had pulled back due to PA attack and unit was incommunicado and unaware. Pressed on with its attack 



Mentee said:


> do Indians already know abiut the info yiu posted ?




This and much more. Don’t take it too seriously. Composition and equipment to even lot numbers of ammunition and nuts and bolts is known to each other.



BetterPakistan said:


> This could only be seen in your dreams because there is nothing like that on grounds
> 
> 6000 tanks



Perhaps you can suggest a figure?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## BetterPakistan

hellfire said:


> Perhaps you can suggest a figure?




At max 4000.

Operational + Stored


----------



## cerberus

BetterPakistan said:


> Offcourse.
> 
> At max 4000.
> 
> Operational + Stored


Great Write Me Down I Will Give To Senior Director CGDA Mod

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

hellfire said:


> I see the capture of Islamgarh fort by a single unit of aindian Army in 1971 was taken too seriously perhaps? The company commander responsible for the defence of the fort should be shot IMO. He surrendered to a single infantry battalion which was spread in a frontage of 3 kms, mistaking the spread as the advance of a Brigade sized attacking force
> 
> @Joe Shearer this tidbit I mentioned earlier if you recall. The unit is 3rd Battalion Rajputana Rifles. Only 1 guy was injured in this capture of Fort at Islamgarh on the night of attack on Longewala. The whole division had pulled back due to PA attack and unit was incommunicado and unaware. Pressed on with its attack
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This and much more. Don’t take it too seriously. Composition and equipment to even lot numbers of ammunition and nuts and bolts is known to each other.
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps you can suggest a figure?



Yes, so you did. I went and looked it up later. What surprises me is the complete lack of aerial reconnaissance inputs.

IIRC, Z. A. Khan has written about that encounter from the Pakistani point of view.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hellfire

BetterPakistan said:


> At max 4000.
> 
> Operational + Stored



Okay.

@niaz gave you a number in an earlier post.

I will just add for a ballpark figure:


Officially 62 Armoured Units in Indian Army. That is 62 x 59 1st line held. So, 3658 tanks in 1st line.

Add to it a figure of 1100 held as stocks as mentioned earlier. That is 3rd line. So, 4758 so far 

Interesting, the 2nd Line? Assume 1/10th is reserve for all 1st line. That gives 365 tanks more. So 5123.

Now we have forgotten Operational T-55s (Combat Engineers use them for eg) and additional numbers of same held as mothballed have not been catered to in the figure.

So, you might find about 500 odd more over and above the figure listed earlier; to be a closer approximation. That makes it 5623. Of course I shall not include a few Centurions held either.

@Joe Shearer 

And that is a conservative rough estimate from my side.

There is a reason why PA went in for HAT-LAT concept. Try looking at that. You will understand that 6000 figure is not at all off.

PS: I may have my figures of approximation wrong by virtue of underestimating. Apologies for same.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Basel

Signalian said:


> Very doubtful that PA would use a battle-taxi as direct combatant in the form of IFV to engage enemy. If APC(or IFV) is destroyed in direct combat with enemy, the infantry will lose armoured transport capability jeopardizing the mission plan to keep up with the MBT advance.
> Dismounted infantry is used to capture and hold ground, there is no other option. To engage enemy MBT and IFV, PA will use TOW/Green Arrow equipped M113 variants. I do advocate IFV but PA's armoured doctrine supports APC's over IFV's. Hamza is wheeled and has 30mm cannon. Considering a 30mm cannon is used as anti-material weapon, it can damage some hard targets excluding MBT, but may not be able to completely take out a BMP-2. The solution to take out any IA AFV is ATGM or MBT Gun at a distance and maybe RPG variants at short range.



With DU rounds 30mm can be deadly against armour units, for example US use 30mm DU rounds in A-10 to take out enemy armour.



Ulla said:


> Pakistani light mechanized Infantry workhorse transforming into a Heavy armed assault Force​
> @Gryphon
> 
> @Signalian and me and also many other respected Members have discussed many times the concept of the Pakistan Army doctrine "Battle taxi", and of course we did come to the conclusion that the M-113 does not really fit the role in an Indian war theater, what comes after dismounting the assault Infantry? Face the bulk of Indian formations (MBTs,BMPs,Infantry) with RPG-7 (short range, cant penetrate modern MBT in the first shoot),12.7mm (M-113 will not follow the infantry to the hot zone so that's also a restricted defensive weapon), 60mm Mortar which is a WW2 weapon (inaccurate). I don't think that the Pakistani Military does have the budge to replace the M-113 or will change its doctrine of "Battle taxi", but what they can do and that might be also economical and reallistic, is to modernize the mechanized Infantry Soldiers quipment. If Assault Infantry alone has to face the Indian BMPs, MBTs, and enemy Infantry, obstacles, enemy bunkers, enemy trenches. then why not transforming that light Infantry into a heavy one: that means adding to every squat like @Gryphon said new and modern weapons like the Alcotan.
> 
> The Pakistani squad/section assault Infantry level needs more and higher precise firepower, which can be given through:
> 
> - under-barrel grenade launcher, close fire support against point and area targets(every Soldiers weapon should be equipped with that)
> 
> -one-man portable, single-use anti-tank rocket launcher (which have bought, but I doubt it was meant for the mechanized Infantry Battalions)
> 
> - more and modern hand grenades
> 
> - a better and modern Infantry rifle (which adds better targeting/aiming systems)
> 
> - sophisticated night vision equipment
> 
> The Pakistani Concept at the moment looks like that, check the Infantry they seem to have very rudimentary equipment.
> 
> *
> View attachment 438573
> View attachment 438574
> *
> 
> 
> *Compare that to the US Army mechanized Infantry equipment:*
> 
> 
> 
> *
> View attachment 438575
> *
> 
> 
> @Signalian I have seen that show from W.S Khan "We are Soldiers" during my own military service that was around 2010, but their equipment is still not update after 8 years!



PA also need something like HJ-12 ATGM for infantry, it will add lethal punch.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## BetterPakistan

hellfire said:


> Okay.
> 
> @niaz gave you a number in an earlier post.
> 
> I will just add for a ballpark figure:
> 
> 
> Officially 62 Armoured Units in Indian Army. That is 62 x 59 1st line held. So, 3658 tanks in 1st line.
> 
> Add to it a figure of 1100 held as stocks as mentioned earlier. That is 3rd line. So, 4758 so far
> 
> Interesting, the 2nd Line? Assume 1/10th is reserve for all 1st line. That gives 365 tanks more. So 5123.
> 
> Now we have forgotten Operational T-55s (Combat Engineers use them for eg) and additional numbers of same held as mothballed have not been catered to in the figure.
> 
> So, you might find about 500 odd more over and above the figure listed earlier; to be a closer approximation. That makes it 5623. Of course I shall not include a few Centurions held either.
> 
> @Joe Shearer
> 
> And that is a conservative rough estimate from my side.
> 
> There is a reason why PA went in for HAT-LAT concept. Try looking at that. You will understand that 6000 figure is not at all off.
> 
> PS: I may have my figures of approximation wrong by virtue of underestimating. Apologies for same.



WOW

Now do you have any source to prove it?

Why do you think that those T-55 would be operational as of today?

Niaz told 4000 tanks and 300-400 on order and this is what it could be at MAX. No more than this.

IA have T-72, T-90 and Arjun left. T-55s can't be operational as of today. And that junk doesn't matter at all.



cerberus said:


> Great Write Me Down I Will Give To Senior Director CGDA Mod



He already knows this so you don't need to bother about it


----------



## randomradio

BetterPakistan said:


> IA have T-72, T-90 and Arjun left. T-55s can't be operational as of today. And that junk doesn't matter at all.



There are hundreds of T-55s still operational.

In any case, you should stop worrying about how many tanks India has and start looking at your own inventory of tanks and wonder how many can actually fight the Indian T-55s, let alone the 72s and 90s.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hellfire

BetterPakistan said:


> WOW
> 
> Now do you have any source to prove it?



Heard of Combat Engineers? 

I don't think, I know.

There is a difference in speculation and in giving a ballpark figure.

Lets ignore T-55 for you, okay? 

62 Armored Regiments is an open source. No new raisings being counted.

Just do a mathematical calculation @ 59 tanks per regiment. They are first line. That is 3658.

Then use the 1100 figure in storage of older variety .. and I did give you a conservative 10% of overall 1st line being reserve for 1st line that of 2nd line for your understanding. Lets ignore the 2nd line here.

They exceed your 4 k ... by a figure of 758 best case scenario for you 

And not even counting those on orders.

Ofcourse you can ask your professionals here about my ball park calculation (and ask my background at the time too) 

Cheers.



randomradio said:


> There are hundreds of T-55s still operational.
> 
> In any case, you should stop worrying about how many tanks India has and start looking at your own inventory of tanks and wonder how many can actually fight the Indian T-55s, let alone the 72s and 90s.



They had Vijayants pounding them in DF role in post Uri scenario ... and that is the so called old stock

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Signalian

Gryphon said:


> 12.7mm is too heavy for a soldier to carry. Neither do HMG equipped M-113 APC's fight in the hot zone as @Ulla mentioned above.


i meant 12.7mm compared to 25mm or 30mm on an AFV.




> Maaz ATGM Carrier
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 12.7mm is not visible (at least with this example)
> 
> _The new VN-17 infantry-fighting vehicle (IFV) uses a heavily modified version of the 33-ton VT-5 light tank's chassis. It has an unmanned (read: remotely controlled) turret with two large, multi-lens electro-optical and infrared sensors (one each for the gunner and commander). Those sensors come in handy when the system needs to use its 35mm cannon, 7.62mm machine gun, or medium-range HJ-12 anti-tank missiles. The VN-17 is also well protected, with reactive armor on the lower front hull, and significant side-skirt armor alongside its tracks. All this, plus its capacity to carry seven infantry, makes it likely in the 30-35 ton weight class.
> 
> It shares some similarity with the People's Liberation Army's mysterious new infantry-fighting vehicle, which will reportedly have an unmanned turret, augmented displays for crew helmets, and a hybrid-electrical engine for fuel efficiency and stealth. In terms of armament, protection, and sensors, both the VN-17 and the unnamed PLA IFV compare quite favorably to the U.S. Army's M2A3 Bradley IFV. But unlike the 35-year-old Bradley, China's brand new battle taxis have plenty of margin to grow into future upgrades like more advanced armor, better weapons, APS, sensors, and deploying unmanned partners.
> _
> _https://www.popsci.com/china-has-fleet-new-armor-vehicles_
> 
> 
> 
> Cannon can fire HE fragmentation rounds which are excellent weapon for dealing with infantry troops.
> 
> 
> 
> IA has Light Infantry regiments. Their battalions perform normal infantry role & are distributed among all Corps.
> 
> There is no Light Inf. Div. in IA.


The talha/M-113 can be modified in different ways. Maaz with Green Arrow and 12.7mm.






The three main aspects of an AFV. Fire power, mobility and protection. In this case, transport also which both IFV and APC are capable of.

IFV's are usually less armoured than an MBT, except a few like IDF APC/IFV Namer. This makes them vulnerable in direct combat. This is where the difference between direct confrontation and just a battle taxi role comes into play. The weight of an AFV increases as more armor, weapons, ammo, electronic gadgets are put onto it for protection and modernisation. The T-55 MBT started at around 35-56 Ton. The modernised variants are over 40 T. Namer IFV is 60 T. Acharzit APC is based on T-55 and is 44T. 
This gives an idea that PA is confident bringing in 36+ Ton AFV like T-59, T-69 etc into direct combat. The other MBt's are 40+ T. 

VN-17 is based on light tank VT-5. This light tank has been made out of necessity to operate in regions where heavier MBT's find difficult to operate. Still the Chinese brought it up to 33+ T weight category taking it to 36 T with armor upgrade package which makes it equal to T-59 in weight. VN-17 is 30 T in weight with 1000 HP engine so adding more weight (armor) and bringing it upto 35-36 T should not affect its mobility to a great extent. 

VN-17 has a reactive armor, what kind? ERA or NERA. It shouldnt be ERA which is harmful to infantry. 

Coming to fire power, VN-17's ATGM capability is good against armored targets and its 35mm auto cannon can be a good AAA weapon to combat UAV's or light helicopters just like AD Bofors guns. Against ground targets it could take out light vehicles and provide fire power at a good range. The 7.62mm can be used to engage infantry.

The major issue still stays. 

If the IFV is lost in direct combat, how will the soldiers be transported to keep pace with the advance. Although this can still apply to M-113 also which can be lost in combat to mines and indirect fire but the probability of M-113 survival remains more because it might not be used in direct combat. The Maaz series don't carry troops so losing an ATGM carrier is still a loss but wont affect operational capability to a massive extent. 

The cost and price factor will always be there. 
Firstly because VN-17 carries lesser troops than M-113 so a VN-17 mechanised battalion would require more vehicles than an M-113 mechanised battalion. 
Secondly, the cost price of a VN-17 is more than that of M-113. PA can probably raise 3-4 M-113 battalions instead of 1-2 VN-17 battalions. Conversely, PA can raise another MBT regiment instead of raising 1-2 VN-17 battalions. And this another factor to be considered, at nearly the same cost, PA can modernise more T-59 to AZ standard than inducting new VN-17's. Inducting an MBt will increase PA's offensive capability than inducting an IFV.

Another point is that the need of the hour is an MRAP, not exactly an IFV.

How would you place a mix of APC/IFV in a mechanised brigade or mechanised division considering operational capabilities?



hellfire said:


> I see the capture of Islamgarh fort by a single unit of aindian Army in 1971 was taken too seriously perhaps? The company commander responsible for the defence of the fort should be shot IMO. He surrendered to a single infantry battalion which was spread in a frontage of 3 kms, mistaking the spread as the advance of a Brigade sized attacking force


The discussions which i have had with you in the past and the intelligent calibre that you possess, i expected a better reply from you 



Basel said:


> With DU rounds 30mm can be deadly against armour units, for example US use 30mm DU rounds in A-10 to take out enemy armour.



A-10 uses gattling cannon which is different. Also A-10 angle of attack is from top aiming for turret top where armor is thinnest.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## HRK

Signalian said:


> PA can modernise more T-59 to AZ standard than inducting new VN-17's.


I think its better to convert remaining T-59/69 for heavy APC/AFV roles same as VN-11 or BMP-55, currently as we have seen Type-85II are undergoing modernization upto Al Zarar standards which mean after the modernization of all of Type-85II our fleet of AZ tanks will be around ~800-1000


Signalian said:


> The cost and price factor will always be there.


Conversion of Type-59/69 into APC/AFV might the cheapest option available to us

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mumm-Ra

HRK said:


> I think its better to convert remaining T-59/69 for heavy APC/AFV roles same as VN-11 or BMP-55, currently as we have seen Type-85II are undergoing modernization upto Al Zarar standards which mean after the modernization of all of Type-85II our fleet of AZ tanks will be around ~800-1000


Wasn't the AZ an upgrade for Type-59 only? By my knowledge the Type-85II already had significant upgrades over the Type-59/69 with regards to main gun and other subsystems. But I guess, upgrading the Type-85II makes more sense as they can in service for more time than the old tanks regardless of whatever upgrades they may get. Can you mention what types of up-gradation will the Type 85-II get to bring it to AZ standard as on paper they look quite similar..



hellfire said:


> Heard of Combat Engineers?
> 
> I don't think, I know.
> 
> There is a difference in speculation and in giving a ballpark figure.
> 
> Lets ignore T-55 for you, okay?
> 
> 62 Armored Regiments is an open source. No new raisings being counted.
> 
> Just do a mathematical calculation @ 59 tanks per regiment. They are first line. That is 3658.
> 
> Then use the 1100 figure in storage of older variety .. and I did give you a conservative 10% of overall 1st line being reserve for 1st line that of 2nd line for your understanding. Lets ignore the 2nd line here.
> 
> They exceed your 4 k ... by a figure of 758 best case scenario for you
> 
> And not even counting those on orders.
> 
> Ofcourse you can ask your professionals here about my ball park calculation (and ask my background at the time too)
> 
> Cheers.



Getting embroiled in petty discussion over numbers is needless in my view. To each his own number of tanks, I say. We would all like to hear what is your take on how the IA plans to deal with PA mechanised forces and use of IA owns mech. forces. @Joe Shearer ..your comments would be appreciated as well..


----------



## Hellfire

Signalian said:


> i meant 12.7mm compared to 25mm or 30mm on an AFV.
> 
> 
> 
> The talha/M-113 can be modified in different ways. Maaz with Green Arrow and 12.7mm.
> 
> View attachment 439335
> 
> 
> The three main aspects of an AFV. Fire power, mobility and protection. In this case, transport also which both IFV and APC are capable of.
> 
> IFV's are usually less armoured than an MBT, except a few like IDF APC/IFV Namer. This makes them vulnerable in direct combat. This is where the difference between direct confrontation and just a battle taxi role comes into play. The weight of an AFV increases as more armor, weapons, ammo, electronic gadgets are put onto it for protection and modernisation. The T-55 MBT started at around 35-56 Ton. The modernised variants are over 40 T. Namer IFV is 60 T. Acharzit APC is based on T-55 and is 44T.
> This gives an idea that PA is confident bringing in 36+ Ton AFV like T-59, T-69 etc into direct combat. The other MBt's are 40+ T.
> 
> VN-17 is based on light tank VT-5. This light tank has been made out of necessity to operate in regions where heavier MBT's find difficult to operate. Still the Chinese brought it up to 33+ T weight category taking it to 36 T with armor upgrade package which makes it equal to T-59 in weight. VN-17 is 30 T in weight with 1000 HP engine so adding more weight (armor) and bringing it upto 35-36 T should not affect its mobility to a great extent.
> 
> VN-17 has a reactive armor, what kind? ERA or NERA. It shouldnt be ERA which is harmful to infantry.
> 
> Coming to fire power, VN-17's ATGM capability is good against armored targets and its 35mm auto cannon can be a good AAA weapon to combat UAV's or light helicopters just like AD Bofors guns. Against ground targets it could take out light vehicles and provide fire power at a good range. The 7.62mm can be used to engage infantry.
> 
> The major issue still stays.
> 
> If the IFV is lost in direct combat, how will the soldiers be transported to keep pace with the advance. Although this can still apply to M-113 also which can be lost in combat to mines and indirect fire but the probability of M-113 survival remains more because it might not be used in direct combat. The Maaz series don't carry troops so losing an ATGM carrier is still a loss but wont affect operational capability to a massive extent.
> 
> The cost and price factor will always be there.
> Firstly because VN-17 carries lesser troops than M-113 so a VN-17 mechanised battalion would require more vehicles than an M-113 mechanised battalion.
> Secondly, the cost price of a VN-17 is more than that of M-113. PA can probably raise 3-4 M-113 battalions instead of 1-2 VN-17 battalions. Conversely, PA can raise another MBT regiment instead of raising 1-2 VN-17 battalions. And this another factor to be considered, at nearly the same cost, PA can modernise more T-59 to AZ standard than inducting new VN-17's. Inducting an MBt will increase PA's offensive capability than inducting an IFV.
> 
> Another point is that the need of the hour is an MRAP, not exactly an IFV.
> 
> How would you place a mix of APC/IFV in a mechanised brigade or mechanised division considering operational capabilities?
> 
> 
> The discussions which i have had with you in the past and the intelligent calibre that you possess, i expected a better reply from you
> 
> 
> 
> A-10 uses gattling cannon which is different. Also A-10 angle of attack is from top aiming for turret top where armor is thinnest.




@Signalian 

Ha, I expected YOU to understand what has NOT been said.  Its boring to try and explain A, B, C when message needs to be only read by select few who can understand the entire composition.

Think hard on that one, you will get the point that is NOT said.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HRK

Xlvee01 said:


> Wasn't the AZ an upgrade for Type-59 only? By my knowledge the Type-85II already had significant upgrades over the Type-59/69 with regards to main gun and other subsystems. But I guess, upgrading the Type-85II makes more sense as they can in service for more time than the old tanks regardless of whatever upgrades they may get. Can you mention what types of up-gradation will the Type 85-II get to bring it to AZ standard as on paper they look quite similar..


No detail is reveled officially so we can only make a guess related to Optronics, BMS FCS ets ....


----------



## alimobin memon

Type 85 are underestimated tanks IMHO but they are still good against any tanks.



HRK said:


> I think its better to convert remaining T-59/69 for heavy APC/AFV roles same as VN-11 or BMP-55, currently as we have seen Type-85II are undergoing modernization upto Al Zarar standards which mean after the modernization of all of Type-85II our fleet of AZ tanks will be around ~800-1000
> 
> Conversion of Type-59/69 into APC/AFV might the cheapest option available to us


Terminator style conversion is possible

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Sheraz Patriot

Comparing the fire power indian army has thousands of ifvs and we do not have ifvs to support our infantry. Talha or m113 is only an apc and cannot be considered as ifvs after installing an mg3 on it. This one serious shortage never looked at. 
Thanks


----------



## Gryphon

Signalian said:


> i meant 12.7mm compared to 25mm or 30mm on an AFV.



Cannon can fire HE fragmentation as well as armour piercing tungsten rounds. That is much more firepower than a 12.7mm. 



Signalian said:


> The talha/M-113 can be modified in different ways. Maaz with Green Arrow and 12.7mm.
> 
> View attachment 439335



As per my understanding, ATGM mounted M113 (or derivatives) are meant to target enemy tanks while employing some camouflage methods (bushes or natural obstacles). The pic I posted is of an in service Maaz, not an illustration.



Signalian said:


> The three main aspects of an AFV. Fire power, mobility and protection. In this case, transport also which both IFV and APC are capable of.
> 
> IFV's are usually less armoured than an MBT, except a few like IDF APC/IFV Namer. This makes them vulnerable in direct combat. This is where the difference between direct confrontation and just a battle taxi role comes into play. The weight of an AFV increases as more armor, weapons, ammo, electronic gadgets are put onto it for protection and modernisation. The T-55 MBT started at around 35-56 Ton. The modernised variants are over 40 T. Namer IFV is 60 T. Acharzit APC is based on T-55 and is 44T.
> This gives an idea that PA is confident bringing in 36+ Ton AFV like T-59, T-69 etc into direct combat. The other MBt's are 40+ T.
> 
> VN-17 is based on light tank VT-5. This light tank has been made out of necessity to operate in regions where heavier MBT's find difficult to operate. Still the Chinese brought it up to 33+ T weight category taking it to 36 T with armor upgrade package which makes it equal to T-59 in weight. VN-17 is 30 T in weight with 1000 HP engine so adding more weight (armor) and bringing it upto 35-36 T should not affect its mobility to a great extent.
> 
> VN-17 has a reactive armor, what kind? ERA or NERA. It shouldnt be ERA which is harmful to infantry.
> 
> Coming to fire power, VN-17's ATGM capability is good against armored targets and its 35mm auto cannon can be a good AAA weapon to combat UAV's or light helicopters just like AD Bofors guns. Against ground targets it could take out light vehicles and provide fire power at a good range. The 7.62mm can be used to engage infantry.
> 
> The major issue still stays.
> 
> If the IFV is lost in direct combat, how will the soldiers be transported to keep pace with the advance. Although this can still apply to M-113 also which can be lost in combat to mines and indirect fire but the probability of M-113 survival remains more because it might not be used in direct combat. The Maaz series don't carry troops so losing an ATGM carrier is still a loss but wont affect operational capability to a massive extent.
> 
> The cost and price factor will always be there.
> Firstly because VN-17 carries lesser troops than M-113 so a VN-17 mechanised battalion would require more vehicles than an M-113 mechanised battalion.
> Secondly, the cost price of a VN-17 is more than that of M-113. PA can probably raise 3-4 M-113 battalions instead of 1-2 VN-17 battalions. Conversely, PA can raise another MBT regiment instead of raising 1-2 VN-17 battalions. And this another factor to be considered, at nearly the same cost, PA can modernise more T-59 to AZ standard than inducting new VN-17's. Inducting an MBt will increase PA's offensive capability than inducting an IFV.
> 
> Another point is that the need of the hour is an MRAP, not exactly an IFV.
> 
> How would you place a mix of APC/IFV in a mechanised brigade or mechanised division considering operational capabilities?



How many tank regiments does PA have??

Considering that PA wants to induct heavier tanks (say Oplot with 1500 hp engine), the M113's will not catch up with Oplot's speed in the desert. I feel a new IFV platform is inevitable. VN-17 is just a suggestion from my side. It's power to weight ratio is good enough.

If you look at Indian RAPIDs, there are 2x tank regiments (100 MBT) + 2x IFV regiments (100 BMP). It is possible that PA will mirror a similar arrangement with independent armoured brigade groups - as the initial MBT order is to be for 100+ tanks. IFV (with 7 troops) packs more firepower than an APC (with 11 troops).

Regarding the loss of transport to infantry, I have the opinion that in any contact with enemy, troops will be lost as well besides armoured assets.



HRK said:


> Conversion of Type-59/69 into APC/AFV might the cheapest option available to us



As per MoDP Yearbooks 2008-10, 132 Type 69 tanks, i.e., 3 regiments were fitted with 100mm gun and handed over to FC.

The total number of Type 69 tanks in PA was at least 290. So, nearly half the inventory is replaced.



alimobin memon said:


> Type 85 are underestimated tanks IMHO but they are still good against any tanks.



Yes, those are good enough to serve another 10-15 years.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## HRK

Gryphon said:


> Regarding the loss of transport to infantry, I have the opinion that in any contact with enemy, troops will be lost as well besides armoured assets.


its understandable but question is to keep the losses to sustainable level for the duration of war ... specially in the light of cold start doctrine which have the objective to hold the captured Pakistani territory for the period suitable to Indian political objectives

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## alimobin memon

Gryphon said:


> Cannon can fire HE fragmentation as well as armour piercing tungsten rounds. That is much more firepower than a 12.7mm.
> 
> 
> 
> As per my understanding, ATGM mounted M113 (or derivatives) are meant to target enemy tanks while employing some camouflage methods (bushes or natural obstacles). The pic I posted is of an in service Maaz, not an illustration.
> 
> 
> 
> How many tank regiments does PA have??
> 
> Considering that PA wants to induct heavier tanks (say Oplot with 1500 hp engine), the M113's will not catch up with Oplot's speed in the desert. I feel a new IFV platform is inevitable. VN-17 is just a suggestion from my side. It's power to weight ratio is good enough.
> 
> If you look at Indian RAPIDs, there are 2x tank regiments (100 MBT) + 2x IFV regiments (100 BMP). It is possible that PA will mirror a similar arrangement with independent armoured brigade groups - as the initial MBT order is to be for 100+ tanks. IFV (with 7 troops) packs more firepower than an APC (with 11 troops).
> 
> Regarding the loss of transport to infantry, I have the opinion that in any contact with enemy, troops will be lost as well besides armoured assets.
> 
> 
> 
> As per MoDP Yearbooks 2008-10, 132 Type 69 tanks, i.e., 3 regiments were fitted with 100mm gun and handed over to FC.
> 
> The total number of Type 69 tanks in PA was at least 290. So, nearly half the inventory is replaced.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, those are good enough to serve another 10-15 years.



If updated yes. Better be a good upgrade then alzarrar. Although I have heard Al Zarrar Should now be considered 3rd generation tanks instead of 2nd for their war capabilities.


----------



## BetterPakistan

hellfire said:


> Heard of Combat Engineers?
> 
> I don't think, I know.
> 
> There is a difference in speculation and in giving a ballpark figure.
> 
> Lets ignore T-55 for you, okay?
> 
> 62 Armored Regiments is an open source. No new raisings being counted.
> 
> Just do a mathematical calculation @ 59 tanks per regiment. They are first line. That is 3658.
> 
> Then use the 1100 figure in storage of older variety .. and I did give you a conservative 10% of overall 1st line being reserve for 1st line that of 2nd line for your understanding. Lets ignore the 2nd line here.
> 
> They exceed your 4 k ... by a figure of 758 best case scenario for you
> 
> And not even counting those on orders.
> 
> Ofcourse you can ask your professionals here about my ball park calculation (and ask my background at the time too)
> 
> Cheers.



  
Not good enough.


Niaz presented a good figure up and I myself believe that figure. I couldn't find anywhere that IA have 6000 tanks in total

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Basel

Signalian said:


> i meant 12.7mm compared to 25mm or 30mm on an AFV.
> 
> 
> 
> The talha/M-113 can be modified in different ways. Maaz with Green Arrow and 12.7mm.
> 
> View attachment 439335
> 
> 
> The three main aspects of an AFV. Fire power, mobility and protection. In this case, transport also which both IFV and APC are capable of.
> 
> IFV's are usually less armoured than an MBT, except a few like IDF APC/IFV Namer. This makes them vulnerable in direct combat. This is where the difference between direct confrontation and just a battle taxi role comes into play. The weight of an AFV increases as more armor, weapons, ammo, electronic gadgets are put onto it for protection and modernisation. The T-55 MBT started at around 35-56 Ton. The modernised variants are over 40 T. Namer IFV is 60 T. Acharzit APC is based on T-55 and is 44T.
> This gives an idea that PA is confident bringing in 36+ Ton AFV like T-59, T-69 etc into direct combat. The other MBt's are 40+ T.
> 
> VN-17 is based on light tank VT-5. This light tank has been made out of necessity to operate in regions where heavier MBT's find difficult to operate. Still the Chinese brought it up to 33+ T weight category taking it to 36 T with armor upgrade package which makes it equal to T-59 in weight. VN-17 is 30 T in weight with 1000 HP engine so adding more weight (armor) and bringing it upto 35-36 T should not affect its mobility to a great extent.
> 
> VN-17 has a reactive armor, what kind? ERA or NERA. It shouldnt be ERA which is harmful to infantry.
> 
> Coming to fire power, VN-17's ATGM capability is good against armored targets and its 35mm auto cannon can be a good AAA weapon to combat UAV's or light helicopters just like AD Bofors guns. Against ground targets it could take out light vehicles and provide fire power at a good range. The 7.62mm can be used to engage infantry.
> 
> The major issue still stays.
> 
> If the IFV is lost in direct combat, how will the soldiers be transported to keep pace with the advance. Although this can still apply to M-113 also which can be lost in combat to mines and indirect fire but the probability of M-113 survival remains more because it might not be used in direct combat. The Maaz series don't carry troops so losing an ATGM carrier is still a loss but wont affect operational capability to a massive extent.
> 
> The cost and price factor will always be there.
> Firstly because VN-17 carries lesser troops than M-113 so a VN-17 mechanised battalion would require more vehicles than an M-113 mechanised battalion.
> Secondly, the cost price of a VN-17 is more than that of M-113. PA can probably raise 3-4 M-113 battalions instead of 1-2 VN-17 battalions. Conversely, PA can raise another MBT regiment instead of raising 1-2 VN-17 battalions. And this another factor to be considered, at nearly the same cost, PA can modernise more T-59 to AZ standard than inducting new VN-17's. Inducting an MBt will increase PA's offensive capability than inducting an IFV.
> 
> Another point is that the need of the hour is an MRAP, not exactly an IFV.
> 
> How would you place a mix of APC/IFV in a mechanised brigade or mechanised division considering operational capabilities?
> 
> 
> The discussions which i have had with you in the past and the intelligent calibre that you possess, i expected a better reply from you
> 
> 
> 
> A-10 uses gattling cannon which is different. Also A-10 angle of attack is from top aiming for turret top where armor is thinnest.



Then 40 or 60mm gun can be adopted to enhance effects of DU rounds.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Avijit

Signalian said:


> Some time back a member asked me if there are any armour regiments in Pakistan Army's mechanised divisions so i have some info to share.
> 
> Pakistan Army has 2 Mechanised Divisions, 25th Mechanised Division and 26th Mechanised Divisions. The 17th and 14th still carry the designation of Infantry Divisions.
> 
> Theoretically the 25th and 26th are mechanised divisions but in fact these 2 divisions are heavily armoured and have more strength (in infantry) than even 1st Armoured and 6th Armoured Divisions of Pakistan Army. The reason the 25th and 26th Mechanised Divisions are called Mechanised because naming them Armoured Divisions will cause concern to India as well as to USA that:
> 
> 1. PA has stationed an Armoured Division (26th Mechanised Div) near to border in Bahawalpur, Southern Punjab. Placing an armoured division next to border is the intent of attacking an enemy otherwise armoured assets considered as offensive forces are not kept next to borders. This is another reason why the 6th Armoured Division is placed in Gujranwala and not in Sialkot, whereas its main area of action is considered to be Sialkot region.
> 
> 2. PA will have 4 Armoured Divisions (1st and 6th, 25th and 26th) while IA has 3 Armoured Divisions and this will cause further alarm in India and bring pressure from USA to downsize strength. This is why the V-Corps has a few Independent Armoured Brigades and it is considered that V-Corps Armoured assets will be used under one HQ in war as an Armoured Division.
> 
> PA's Mechanised Division:
> 
> A Brigade: Armoured Regiment + Armoured Regiment + Mechanised Infantry Battalion.
> 
> B Brigade: Armoured Regiment + Armoured Regiment + Mechanised Infantry Battalion.
> 
> C Brigade: Armoured Regiment + Mechanised Infantry Battalion + Mechanised Infantry Battalion.
> 
> Thats 5 X Armoured Regiments and 4 X Mechanised Infantry Battalions in one Mechanised Division. I havent included Support Brigades and Divisional troops. Each Mechanised Infantry Battalion has 50 APC.
> 
> Those who consider that Rahim yar Khan is an area where IA CSD can succeed should keep in mind that the whole stretch is protected by a Division which has 220 MBT at its disposal. plus an Independent Armoured Brigade having 88 MBT.
> 
> @Ulla @Northern @django @Mentee @Khafee @tps77 @CriticalThought @Baloch Pakistani


India has 7-8 Armoured Divisions by that logic. 3 Armd Divs and 4-5 RAPIDs (which are Mech Divs, basically). India has a 44-battalion strong Mech force. That's 5 Divs. Add to that 60+ Armd Regts. Some are obviously distributed amongst various other Inf Divs and Independent Armd/Inf Bdes and Bde Gps. Also, India is expanding its Mech force by making more RAPIDs.


----------



## Signalian

Gryphon said:


> Cannon can fire HE fragmentation as well as armour piercing tungsten rounds. That is much more firepower than a 12.7mm.


Agreed,the utilisation of a bigger cannon is certainly there. PA already uses a combination of mortars and RPG to provide effective firepower to take out all targets.


> As per my understanding, ATGM mounted M113 (or derivatives) are meant to target enemy tanks while employing some camouflage methods (bushes or natural obstacles). The pic I posted is of an in service Maaz, not an illustration.


Maaz is used as a defensive weapon. It needs to stand still to fire ATGM. Can HJ-12 fire on the move?


> How many tank regiments does PA have??


Not enough, unfortunately.



> Considering that PA wants to induct heavier tanks (say Oplot with 1500 hp engine), the M113's will not catch up with Oplot's speed in the desert.


If its a race, then yes.
MBT has a much bigger role to play, being an offensive weapon it stays ahead of APC so needs to be faster. While the APC needs to get from point A to pint B, the MBT has to attack, flank, maneuver to engage enemy etc.


> I feel a new IFV platform is inevitable. VN-17 is just a suggestion from my side. It's power to weight ratio is good enough.


VN-17 is a good suggestion no doubt. An indigenous platform of SAAD APC with an extra road wheel and bigger engine is also available as a platform.



> If you look at Indian RAPIDs, there are 2x tank regiments (100 MBT) + 2x IFV regiments (100 BMP). It is possible that PA will mirror a similar arrangement with independent armoured brigade groups - as the initial MBT order is to be for 100+ tanks. IFV (with 7 troops) packs more firepower than an APC (with 11 troops).


Most modern armies use the 3+1 config instead of 2+2 in armored brigades. Thats 3 armor regiments and 1 mechanised infantry battalion. The addition of an extra armored regiment gives additional punch.



> Regarding the loss of transport to infantry, I have the opinion that in any contact with enemy, troops will be lost as well besides armoured assets.


Its a bit easier to send in troops as reinforcement rather equipment, which is usually short. There are half million reserve men to fill in for suffered casualties but not much replaceable equipment.



Basel said:


> Then 40 or 60mm gun can be adopted to enhance effects of DU rounds.


why not just use a 125mm gun 



Avijit said:


> India has 7-8 Armoured Divisions by that logic. 3 Armd Divs and 4-5 RAPIDs (which are Mech Divs, basically). India has a 44-battalion strong Mech force. That's 5 Divs. Add to that 60+ Armd Regts. Some are obviously distributed amongst various other Inf Divs and Independent Armd/Inf Bdes and Bde Gps. Also, India is expanding its Mech force by making more RAPIDs.


The "logic" was political, not statistical.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## alimobin memon

if i have learned right. 12.7mm is capable of penetrating IFV type armors.


----------



## Basel

Signalian said:


> Agreed,the utilisation of a bigger cannon is certainly there. PA already uses a combination of mortars and RPG to provide effective firepower to take out all targets.
> 
> Maaz is used as a defensive weapon. It needs to stand still to fire ATGM. Can HJ-12 fire on the move?
> 
> Not enough, unfortunately.
> 
> 
> If its a race, then yes.
> MBT has a much bigger role to play, being an offensive weapon it stays ahead of APC so needs to be faster. While the APC needs to get from point A to pint B, the MBT has to attack, flank, maneuver to engage enemy etc.
> 
> VN-17 is a good suggestion no doubt. An indigenous platform of SAAD APC with an extra road wheel and bigger engine is also available as a platform.
> 
> 
> Most modern armies use the 3+1 config instead of 2+2 in armored brigades. Thats 3 armor regiments and 1 mechanised infantry battalion. The addition of an extra armored regiment gives additional punch.
> 
> 
> Its a bit easier to send in troops as reinforcement rather equipment, which is usually short. There are half million reserve men to fill in for suffered casualties but not much replaceable equipment.
> 
> 
> why not just use a 125mm gun
> 
> 
> The "logic" was political, not statistical.



125mm DU rounds will be used by PA tanks and APC need lighter caliber then 125mm to have space, also see how effective Bradleys are with 25mm guns. 

PA also have 105mm DU rounds to tackle enemy armour, to me 60mm is good caliber as USSR have also used it on its BMPs too.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Gryphon

Signalian said:


> Maaz is used as a defensive weapon. It needs to stand still to fire ATGM. Can HJ-12 fire on the move?
> 
> Not enough, unfortunately.
> 
> 
> If its a race, then yes.
> MBT has a much bigger role to play, being an offensive weapon it stays ahead of APC so needs to be faster. While the APC needs to get from point A to pint B, the MBT has to attack, flank, maneuver to engage enemy etc.



Not much details about HJ-12 available.

Al-Khalid: 324 (7 regiments)
T-80UD: 320 (7 regiments)
Al-Zarrar: 504 (11 regiments)
Type 85-IIAP: 267 (6 regiments)
Al-Khalid 1: 21* (1 regiment - to receive more tanks).
So, that is 32 regiments. How many left with Type 59/69 given that hundreds of such tanks were transferred to FC?

If PA acquires MBTs with better mobility, won't slower APC's force tanks to move slow as well - as infantry is required for most missions?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Signalian

Gryphon said:


> Not much details about HJ-12 available.
> 
> Al-Khalid: 324 (7 regiments)
> T-80UD: 320 (7 regiments)
> Al-Zarrar: 504 (11 regiments)
> Type 85-IIAP: 267 (6 regiments)
> Al-Khalid 1: 21* (1 regiment - to receive more tanks).
> So, that is 32 regiments. How many left with Type 59/69 given that hundreds of such tanks were transferred to FC?
> 
> If PA acquires MBTs with better mobility, won't slower APC's force tanks to move slow as well - as infantry is required for most missions?



You have been ignoring most of my questions while im replying to all of yours  Chalo, kher hay.

M-60 had 750 HP Engine and was supported by 275 HP engined M-113.

M1 Abrams has 1500 HP engine supported by M2 Bradley having 600 HP engine.
*Thats a difference of 900 HP between MBT and IFV/APC.*

Now compare USA armor with PA armor.
T-80 UD has 1000 HP Engine supported by 275-330 HP engined Talha. Difference is 670- 725 HP.
AK has 1200 HP Engine supported by 275-330 HP engined Talha. Difference is 870-925 HP
AZ has 730 HP Engine supported by 275-330 HP engined Talha. Difference is 400-455 HP.

The power to weight ratio is good, i doubt the APC would be slow. The APC's should be able to keep up. The top speeds also match for MBT and APC, almost around 65-70 km/h. 
If a bigger engined APC is required, SAAD is built in-house having 450 HP engine. VN-17 is built on Light tank design which is why it has a 1000 HP Engine. 
If PA goes for a 1500 HP MBT, even then an APC having 500-700 HP should be suitable.

MBT have a bigger engine because their responsibility and scope is much more than of an APC. They are required to do more tasks, which i mentioned before. APC usually has to travel from point A to point B, then sit tight in rear till dismounted infantry and MBT's clear the area of enemy.So while the MBT sees constant action, the APC just transports infantry. 

The Type-59 and Type-69 MBT have been used with Armor regiments of infantry Divs for infantry support. Somewhere around 500 Type-59 and 400 Type-69, after AZ upgrade. Subtract a few hundred more of these which were given to FC and the figure could be 500-600 both types.



Basel said:


> 125mm DU rounds will be used by PA tanks and APC need lighter caliber then 125mm to have space, also see how effective Bradleys are with 25mm guns.
> 
> PA also have 105mm DU rounds to tackle enemy armour, to me 60mm is good caliber as USSR have also used it on its BMPs too.



Bradley M2 was designed to take on the BMP-2, the 25mm can damage a BMP-2 but cannot take out a MBT. If it could take out a MBT with 25mm then there would be no need to fit in TOW launchers. Then the distance is another factor. At a longer range, the MBT frontal armor could deflect the 25mm. TOW has a range of 4000m, a good distance to take out enemy MBT.

MBT's armor is not same everywhere.The three places where the MBt armor is thinnest is:
Turret top (vulnerable to top attack ATGM)
Rear, where the engine is (Vulnerable to ambush by infantry)
Bottom/floor (Vulnerable to mines) 

If the M2 Bradley gets behind MBT and attacks its rear with 25mm, a probable chance that it will destroy the MBT. Attacking MBT from the front or sides, M2 itself has more chances of being destroyed if it runs out of TOW and MBT detects it and fires it main gun 125mm.

35/40/50/60 mm cannons are good as AAA or against light armored vehicles like APC. If you keep increasing caliber, the space for ammo keeps getting cramped up and smaller amounts of ammo can be carried then.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Gryphon

Signalian said:


> You have been ignoring most of my questions while im replying to all of yours  Chalo, kher hay.



Except when I have a similar opinion, all of your comments are replied by me.

Regarding ERA/NERA on VN-17, there is dearth of reliable information available online, though steel+NERA is plausible.




Signalian said:


> M-60 had 750 HP Engine and was supported by 275 HP engined M-113.
> 
> M1 Abrams has 1500 HP engine supported by M2 Bradley having 600 HP engine.
> *Thats a difference of 900 HP between MBT and IFV/APC.*
> 
> Now compare USA armor with PA armor.
> T-80 UD has 1000 HP Engine supported by 275-330 HP engined Talha. Difference is 670- 725 HP.
> AK has 1200 HP Engine supported by 275-330 HP engined Talha. Difference is 870-925 HP
> AZ has 730 HP Engine supported by 275-330 HP engined Talha. Difference is 400-455 HP.
> 
> The power to weight ratio is good, i doubt the APC would be slow. The APC's should be able to keep up. The top speeds also match for MBT and APC, almost around 65-70 km/h.
> If a bigger engined APC is required, SAAD is built in-house having 450 HP engine. VN-17 is built on Light tank design which is why it has a 1000 HP Engine.
> If PA goes for a 1500 HP MBT, even then an APC having 500-700 HP should be suitable.



Sounds good. Thank you.



Signalian said:


> The Type-59 and Type-69 MBT have been used with Armor regiments of infantry Divs for infantry support. Somewhere around 500 Type-59 and 400 Type-69, after AZ upgrade. Subtract a few hundred more of these which were given to FC and the figure could be 500-600 both types.



PA had 42 tank regiments some years back. If the number is same today, that would be 42-32=10 regiments of Type 59/69 (i.e. upto 500 tanks need to be replaced asap).

Assuming that 20 regiments are with 2x Armoured Div's & 2x Mech. Div's, that leaves 22 regiments which give a total of 11 Independent Armoured Brigades.

So, one IABG with each Corps and 2 each with V Corps & XXX Corps.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Reichsmarschall

@Signalian @Gryphon how 1650 T-90s and 2410 T-72s(which are very good) will be confronted by our mere 1500 modern tanks?








*Pakistani Top Tanks*




@Areesh @DESERT FIGHTER @naveedullahkhankhattak

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## CoffeeByte

Out of 1650 T-90s, 1322 delivered so far.
T-90 production has significantly picked up though.
While 227 were delivered till June 2013, 435 more were delivered between Jun 2013-Nov 2017.


----------



## Gryphon

Jon-Snow said:


> @Signalian @Gryphon how 1650 T-90s and 2410 T-72s(which are very good) will be confronted by our mere 1500 modern tanks?
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 441770
> 
> *Pakistani Top Tanks*
> View attachment 441771
> 
> @Areesh @DESERT FIGHTER @naveedullahkhankhattak



Pakistan can't match India in numbers though a sizable number of Indian tanks are deployed near the Chinese border. India maintains more (and larger) tank regiments.

To counter every Indian armoured/mech. brigade stationed near the border, PA has deployed an armoured/mechanized/anti-tank brigade.

Light anti-tank (LAT) regiments have 4x4 jeeps equipped with Baktar-Shikan ATGM's while heavy anti-tank (HAT) regiments use M901/M113 with TOW/Talha with Baktar-Shikan.

Still, it's not enough as IA will mobilize it's Strike Corps deployed in Central India. In recent years, PA reportedly raised few more tank regiments to have a total of 49. Regiments with Type 59/69 have been attached to infantry divisions while the armoured div's/mechanized div's and few Independent armoured/mechanized brigades have T-80UD/AZ/Al-Khalid/T-85IIAP.

As such, the situation calls for better tanks with 1500 hp engine which can outmanoeuvre any tank IA fields.

@Signalian @Ulla

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Reichsmarschall

Gryphon said:


> Pakistan can't match India in numbers though a sizable number of Indian tanks are deployed near the Chinese border. India maintains more (and larger) tank regiments.
> 
> To counter every Indian armoured/mech. brigade stationed near the border, PA has deployed an armoured/mechanized/anti-tank brigade.
> 
> Light anti-tank (LAT) regiments have 4x4 jeeps equipped with Baktar-Shikan ATGM's while heavy anti-tank (HAT) regiments use M901/M113 with TOW/Talha with Baktar-Shikan.
> 
> Still, it's not enough as IA will mobilize one of it's Strike Corps deployed in Central India. In recent years, PA reportedly raised few more tank regiments to have a total of 49. Regiments with Type 59/69 have been attached to infantry divisions while the armoured div's/mechanized div's and few Independent armoured/mechanized brigades have T-80UD/AZ/Al-Khalid/T-85IIAP.
> 
> As such, the situation calls for better tanks with 1500 hp engine which can outmanoeuvre any tank IA fields.
> 
> @Signalian @Ulla


we desperately need more tanks or results will be devastating we cannot afford to lose a war
, why can't they pace up the production of AK?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mrc

any one seen what happened to T72S in Syria??







educate your selves

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Reichsmarschall

Mrc said:


> any one seen what happened to T72S in Syria??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> educate your selves


they are also inducting more advance FnF ATGM will our tanks survive against them?


----------



## Basel

Jon-Snow said:


> @Signalian @Gryphon how 1650 T-90s and 2410 T-72s(which are very good) will be confronted by our mere 1500 modern tanks?
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 441770
> 
> *Pakistani Top Tanks*
> View attachment 441771
> 
> @Areesh @DESERT FIGHTER @naveedullahkhankhattak



Tanks are not just confronted with tanks, there are ATGMs, Attack helicopters, different type of artillery, mines etc are also used tackle tanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mrc

Jon-Snow said:


> they are also inducting more advance FnF ATGM will our tanks survive against them?




Well t 90 in Syria seems to do well against atgms

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Jon-Snow said:


> @Signalian @Gryphon how 1650 T-90s and 2410 T-72s(which are very good) will be confronted by our mere 1500 modern tanks?
> @Areesh @DESERT FIGHTER @naveedullahkhankhattak



Most effective against IA MBT's.
1. ATGM (TOW/TOW II, GREEN ARROW)

Other Effective measures against IA MBT's.
2. Gunships (AH-1, Mi-24)
3. UCAV (Burraq)
4. Artillery (there was a presentation in 2003/4 of using rounds which vector towards enemy tanks, forgot basic details even, but something like that exists) 
5. PA MBT's.
6. PAF CAS aircrafts
7. Mines and other explosives set as traps.

8. MLRS

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## ziaulislam

Mrc said:


> Well t 90 in Syria seems to do well against atgms







i am not an expert so not sure this is actually a TOW
but clearly disables the t 90 tank


----------



## Reichsmarschall

ziaulislam said:


> i am not an expert so not sure this is actually a TOW
> but clearly disables the t 90 tank


The missile hit the front armor, ERA worked that's why there was no penetration. The crew, apparently, was still alive, the tank did not catch fire and most likely have preserved fighting capability

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ziaulislam

Jon-Snow said:


> The missile hit the front armor, ERA worked that's why there was no penetration. The crew, apparently, was still alive, the tank did not catch fire and most likely have preserved fighting capability


i doubt it, i have seen videos where its hit by RPG/antitank weapons and tanks backs up to safety or cover or replys
*when crew abandons the tank its almost always because the tank cannot move and hence disabled*

there might not be penetration or total destruction but it still got disabled

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Reichsmarschall

ziaulislam said:


> i doubt it, i have seen videos where its hit by RPG/antitank weapons and tanks backs up to safety or cover or replys
> *when crew abandons the tank its almost always because the tank cannot move and hence disabled*
> 
> there might not be penetration or total destruction but it still got disabled


There was no penetration. The gunner jumped out because he made the mistake of leaving his hatch open and the blast from the missile and era exploding probably blew out his eardrums. If he had been riding with his hatch closed nothing would have happened to him as there was no penetration. T-90 armor held very well against the TOW missile the crew just has to me better trained not loiter in one spot for so long without securing the field of fire. I am sure the tank can be repaired and put back into service quickly. At most just a few of the optics and era plates need to be changed and it will be ready to go again.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ziaulislam

i guess 2000 tanks are more than enough with more focus on mobility and mobile anti tank weapons and fire and forget system to compliment that

assumptions are that we have approx 400-500 of each t-59 updated alzarrar to atleast level of t-72, t-80 which are better than t-72s but supposedly inferior to t90, t-85 which are slightly inferior to t 72 and alkhalid 1 which are nearly as good as t 90 but still inferior according to some anaylst

what we need know is another modern tank with number atleast 500



Jon-Snow said:


> There was no penetration. The gunner jumped out because he made the mistake of leaving his hatch open and the blast from the missile and era exploding probably blew out his eardrums. If he had been riding with his hatch closed nothing would have happened to him as there was no penetration. T-90 armor held very well against the TOW missile the crew just has to me better trained not loiter in one spot for so long without securing the field of fire. I am sure the tank can be repaired and put back into service quickly. At most just a few of the optics and era plates need to be changed and it will be ready to go again.


disable means disable, tank didnt move
what wills top some one shooting another TOW up its ***
therefore when tank is disable, crew most of time abandone it
if its not disable it moves fast

yes it might be repaired but for now its counted as disable, assuming this was latest generation TOW, a single shot to most armored area, this is not bad result at all

with increase in precision based weapons, things have completed changed
the side with strong air force will dictate alot of things
as single jet can disable dozens of tanks with single guided cluster bomb





PAF needs more funding in my opinion

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Gryphon

Signalian said:


> Most effective against IA MBT's.
> 1. ATGM (TOW/TOW II, GREEN ARROW)
> 
> Other Effective measures against IA MBT's.
> 2. Gunships (AH-1, Mi-24)
> 3. UCAV (Burraq)
> 4. Artillery (there was a presentation in 2003/4 of using rounds which vector towards enemy tanks, forgot basic details even, but something like that exists)
> 5. PA MBT's.
> 6. PAF CAS aircrafts
> 7. Mines and other explosives set as traps.
> 
> 8. MLRS



Don't rule out portable anti-tank rockets. Very capable as seen in the video posted on the previous page. That tank is toasted.

Regarding artillery, PA uses 203 mm M110 in Strike Corps because they can damage or overturn enemy armoured assets, thus providing valuable gains in battle.

No. of MLRS launchers has increased in recent years, most of them 122 mm.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Cuirassier

We'll need to get those t-129s with an assembly line here. In case of an IA armoured offensive, our troops should be equipped with demolition stuff like RPGs and AGLs, and MANPADS as they'll use CAS. Our ATGM stock is pretty solid, if used in proper formation, it will do the job. How you utilize your formations is upto the skill of the commander, and that skill is tested on field.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Basel

randomradio said:


> The crew hatch was open, the guy got shell shocked and ran out. The tank was in fighting condition. Nothing happened to the tank. If you notice even Shtora was turned off. The crew was probably sent out into the field without proper training.
> 
> 
> 
> PA won't get that lucky when facing India. We don't plan to operate inside urban areas and Indian tanks will have better air support.
> 
> MLRS and artillery are area effect weapons. It's not easy to employ against tanks because you need that extremely rare direct hit. Counter battery and air support can take out the MLRS and artillery systems.



Even in WW-2 artillery was very deadly weapon against tanks. Get your facts right.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Signalian

Gryphon said:


> Don't rule out portable anti-tank rockets. Very capable as seen in the video posted on the previous page. That tank is toasted.


If you are talking about Alcotan or RPG types, they have limitations in guidance and range (just a few hundred meters). Its almost suicidal to approach an MBT in open with these weapons in a fast paced desert battle.

Alcotan was procured for western front and LOC, as it can be fired from confined spaces. It has advantage of bigger calibre over RPG-7 series, 100mm to 40mm.


> Regarding artillery, PA uses 203 mm M110 in Strike Corps because they can damage or overturn enemy armoured assets, thus providing valuable gains in battle.


M-110 was basically a counter battery weapon but yes it fires a huge shell. 



> No. of MLRS launchers has increased in recent years, most of them 122 mm.



MLRS is best used when enemy equipment is being replenished with supplies like ammunition and fuel. Assembly areas, where the force gathers before an assault as well as repair workshops are good targets too.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Reichsmarschall

Signalian said:


> Alcotan was procured for western front and LOC, as it can be fired from confined spaces. It has advantage of bigger calibre over RPG-7 series, 100mm to 40mm.


dont you think Pakistan should buy Advance FnF ATGM like FGM-148?


----------



## Signalian

Basel said:


> Even in WW-2 artillery was very deadly weapon against tanks. Get your facts right.


Correct.

Artillery also forces an MBT to keep changing positions when the pounding starts. Immobilised MBT's are easy targets for artillery. A good way to use artillery against MBT is when MBT enters a minefield and exploding mine damages its tracks, immobilising it. 

An underestimated weapon in PA is the mortar when used in conjunction with armoured forces. Most modern armies have 120mm mortar placed in M-113 and its a very effective weapon with good range (6-7 km)



Jon-Snow said:


> dont you think Pakistan should buy Advance FnF ATGM like FGM-148?


yes PA should.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Gryphon

Signalian said:


> If you are talking about Alcotan or RPG types, they have limitations in guidance and range (just a few hundred meters). Its almost suicidal to approach an MBT in open with these weapons in a fast paced desert battle.
> 
> *Alcotan was procured for western front and LOC*, as it can be fired from confined spaces. It has advantage of bigger calibre over RPG-7 series, 100mm to 40mm.



I don't think so. Alcotan is offered in four variants. Visit the below link for details

http://instalaza.com/producto/alcotan/?lang=en

Pakistan acquired the anti-tank version. IMO, it should be issued to all infantry and mechanized infantry battalions (under holding corps) facing enemy MBT/IFV threat.



Signalian said:


> M-110 was basically a counter battery weapon but yes it fires a huge shell.



Yep. Effective against incoming enemy tanks as well.



Signalian said:


> An underestimated weapon in PA is the mortar when used in conjunction with armoured forces. Most modern armies have 120mm mortar placed in M-113 and its a very effective weapon with good range (6-7 km)



PA has 4x 60 mm mortar operators in each M-113. Isn't the 120 mm mortar too heavy?



Jon-Snow said:


> dont you think Pakistan should buy Advance FnF ATGM like FGM-148?



Pakistan should stop producing more Baktar-Shikan's and move to HJ-12 or Ingwe.

The former can be used as a man portable ATGM as well as mounted on 4x4 vehicles/APC's/Type 59 chassis.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Reichsmarschall

Gryphon said:


> I don't think so. Alcotan is offered in four variants. Visit the below link for details
> 
> http://instalaza.com/producto/alcotan/?lang=en
> 
> Pakistan acquired the anti-tank version. IMO, it should be issued to all infantry and mechanized infantry battalions (under holding corps) facing enemy MBT/IFV threat.
> 
> 
> 
> Yep. Effective against incoming enemy tanks as well.
> 
> 
> 
> PA has 4x 60 mm mortar operators in each M-113. Isn't the 120 mm mortar too heavy?
> 
> 
> 
> Pakistan should stop producing more Baktar-Shikan's and move to HJ-12 or Ingwe.
> 
> The former can be used as a man portable ATGM as well as mounted on 4x4 vehicles/APC's/Type 59 chassis.


we have 24000+ BS but it's too heavy for troops to carry


----------



## Basel

Signalian said:


> Correct.
> 
> Artillery also forces an MBT to keep changing positions when the pounding starts. Immobilised MBT's are easy targets for artillery. A good way to use artillery against MBT is when MBT enters a minefield and exploding mine damages its tracks, immobilising it.
> 
> An underestimated weapon in PA is the mortar when used in conjunction with armoured forces. Most modern armies have 120mm mortar placed in M-113 and its a very effective weapon with good range (6-7 km)
> 
> 
> yes PA should.



This how effective German Flak 88 was against Tanks in WW2, now PA have DU rounds for 105 Howitzers too, you can do the math.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Signalian

Gryphon said:


> I don't think so. Alcotan is offered in four variants. Visit the below link for details
> 
> http://instalaza.com/producto/alcotan/?lang=en
> 
> Pakistan acquired the anti-tank version. IMO, it should be issued to all infantry and mechanized infantry battalions (under holding corps) facing enemy MBT/IFV threat.


Probably AT version was acquired due to highest penetration value, still capable of damaging a bunker and some fragmentation but at limited range of 600m and no worthwhile guidance, its only a suitable replacement for RPG-7. Cannot come close to an ATGM's performance in range and guidance. 



> PA has 4x 60 mm mortar operators in each M-113. Isn't the 120 mm mortar too heavy?


Range is more and payload is bigger.



Basel said:


> This how effective German Flak 88 was against Tanks in WW2, now PA have DU rounds for 105 Howitzers too, you can do the math.



88 was an AD gun, a howitzer or field gun would be different.

Tanks had thinner armor in WW2 but artillery calibres were same as of today, like 105mm and 155mm.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Basel

Signalian said:


> Probably AT version was acquired due to highest penetration value, still capable of damaging a bunker and some fragmentation but at limited range of 600m and no worthwhile guidance, its only a suitable replacement for RPG-7. Cannot come close to an ATGM's performance in range and guidance.
> 
> 
> Range is more and payload is bigger.
> 
> 
> 
> 88 was an AD gun, a howitzer or field gun would be different.
> 
> Tanks had thinner armor in WW2 but artillery calibres were same as of today, like 105mm and 155mm.



Germans had Anti armor rounds for flak 88 and that gun was able to fire at high velocity which make it lethal anti tank gun during WW2, flak 88 gun was used in tanks too it was most widely used gun in German military during WW2.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## randomradio

Basel said:


> Germans had Anti armor rounds for flak 88 and that gun was able to fire at high velocity which make it lethal anti tank gun during WW2, flak 88 gun was used in tanks too it was most widely used gun in German military during WW2.



The King Tiger II tank had less than 200mm armour, I would recommend checking the armour on modern tanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ziaulislam

randomradio said:


> The crew hatch was open, the guy got shell shocked and ran out. The tank was in fighting condition. Nothing happened to the tank. If you notice even Shtora was turned off. The crew was probably sent out into the field without proper training.
> 
> 
> 
> PA won't get that lucky when facing India. We don't plan to operate inside urban areas and Indian tanks will have better air support.
> 
> MLRS and artillery are area effect weapons. It's not easy to employ against tanks because you need that extremely rare direct hit. Counter battery and air support can take out the MLRS and artillery systems.


So i have to belive that tank operator doesnt know the first thung about tactics...really alot of assumptions 
Clearly it was disabled and abandoned

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ziaulislam

randomradio said:


> The crew hatch was open, the guy got shell shocked and ran out. The tank was in fighting condition. Nothing happened to the tank. If you notice even Shtora was turned off. The crew was probably sent out into the field without proper training.
> 
> 
> 
> PA won't get that lucky when facing India. We don't plan to operate inside urban areas and Indian tanks will have better air support.
> 
> MLRS and artillery are area effect weapons. It's not easy to employ against tanks because you need that extremely rare direct hit. Counter battery and air support can take out the MLRS and artillery systems.


Smart wespons have changed the field but i agree with airsupport

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ziaulislam

Basel said:


> Even in WW-2 artillery was very deadly weapon against tanks. Get your facts right.


And that too unguided....things have changed now

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Basel

randomradio said:


> The King Tiger II tank had less than 200mm armour, I would recommend checking the armour on modern tanks.



I was only referring to anti tank capability of artillery in general as some one here was saying that artillery is not good weapon against tanks, also IA armor will be facing 105mm & 125mm DU rounds from artillery & tanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gryphon

Signalian said:


> Probably AT version was acquired due to highest penetration value, still capable of damaging a bunker and some fragmentation but at limited range of 600m and no worthwhile guidance, its only a suitable replacement for RPG-7. Cannot come close to an ATGM's performance in range and guidance.
> 
> 
> Range is more and payload is bigger.
> 
> 
> 
> 88 was an AD gun, a howitzer or field gun would be different.
> 
> Tanks had thinner armor in WW2 but artillery calibres were same as of today, like 105mm and 155mm.



If it was intended for bunkers, why not acquire the anti-bunker variant? The anti-tank version has no fragments.

Replacement for RPG-7, I would think no. These rockets cost roughly US$ 10,000 each and only 1,413 pcs were purchased in the initial batch. RPG's are much cheaper.

IMO, the intention is to use those against MBT/IFV targets - in areas allowing cover and/or having a few rockets in APC's allowing better engagement of MBT/IFV by the dismounted infantry.

Regarding 120 mm mortar in APC, the ones used by PA are very heavy. Which models do other armies carry in APC's?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Army research

The alotocan would be used as portable AT weapons say in Kashmir where there might be no tanks on the mountains , but once you capture an enemy peak then behind it would be enemy infrastructure and cities full of roads tanks mraps ifv. Furthermore Altocan can be used in Lahore sialkot kasur field against enemy tanks on class range with cover with a tandem war head to defeat ERA and armour of tanks front for old, sides for older tanks. 
To use Altocan in deserts is impractical strategically as they only have 600 metre range, and when your exposed in the open there's no chance of survival. In desert the force with better guns and range wins, number don't matter much. There is no Cover and fortifications can be destroyed by guided munitions. Maneuverable tanks with Anti air denial, long range guns and long range Atgms are the way to win. 
Pakistan needs dedicated new generation anti tank platforms. 
Take old M113 , Patton's type 59 , remove most armour, add new engine remove turret and add either dedicated new gen atgm multi launcher or also add extra Mortar like Israeli Namer. 
Following Israeli approach to Armoured warfare would be the best as after having studied them, I've found that they have improved their techniques significantly over they previous wars they've had and now they're equipment is unlike anyother found in the world, specially designed to take out the highly outnumbering Arab tanks , new and old. 
Essentially they're following the Wehrmacht's way but keeping in mind modern technologies and EW

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Inception-06

Gryphon said:


> If it was intended for bunkers, why not acquire the anti-bunker variant? The anti-tank version has no fragments.
> 
> Replacement for RPG-7, I would think no. These rockets cost roughly US$ 10,000 each and only 1,413 pcs were purchased in the initial batch. RPG's are much cheaper.
> 
> IMO, the intention is to use those against MBT/IFV targets - in areas allowing cover and/or having a few rockets in APC's allowing better engagement of MBT/IFV by the dismounted infantry.
> 
> Regarding 120 mm mortar in APC, the ones used by PA are very heavy. Which models do other armies carry in APC's?



Only 158 Systems and 1430 Missiles were bought !

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Gryphon said:


> Regarding 120 mm mortar in APC, the ones used by PA are very heavy. Which models do other armies carry in APC's?


Wiesel 2
M1129 Stryker
AMOS on AMV, CV-90
Rak- Rosomak 
HSW
Nona
etc

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gryphon

Ulla said:


> Only 158 Systems and 1430 Missiles were bought !









At IDEAS 2016, Instalaza reportedly offered local production if PA committed to larger orders in future.



Signalian said:


> Wiesel 2
> M1129 Stryker
> AMOS on AMV, CV-90
> Rak- Rosomak
> HSW
> Nona
> etc



You mean self propelled mortars

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Gryphon said:


> If it was intended for bunkers, why not acquire the anti-bunker variant? The anti-tank version has no fragments.
> 
> Replacement for RPG-7, I would think no. These rockets cost roughly US$ 10,000 each and only 1,413 pcs were purchased in the initial batch. RPG's are much cheaper.
> 
> IMO, the intention is to use those against MBT/IFV targets - in areas allowing cover and/or having a few rockets in APC's allowing better engagement of MBT/IFV by the dismounted infantry.


Prospect of Alcotan to be used on LOC due to conversion of IA 10th Infantry Division to RAPID with MBT's and IFV's. RPG and SPG-9 have 70mm and 73mm calibre. No limitation of firing from confined spaces like bunkers. AT version showed some fragmentation on the bar scale below specs.



Gryphon said:


> You mean self propelled mortars


Very useful in aspect of indirect fire.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Gryphon

Signalian said:


> Prospect of Alcotan to be used on LOC due to conversion of IA 10th Infantry Division to RAPID with MBT's and IFV's. RPG and SPG-9 have 70mm and 73mm calibre. No limitation of firing from confined spaces like bunkers. AT version showed some fragmentation on the bar scale below specs.
> 
> 
> Very useful in aspect of indirect fire.



Akhnoor isn't located along LoC. The division was converted into a RAPID keeping in view the vulnerability of the area.

30 Corps has two IABG's right across and some of it's infantry battalions have been apparently mechanized in last 3 years following delivery of VCC-1 Camillino. Then, there is the 1 Corps.

Alcotan is useful everywhere - in areas providing cover, i.e., buildings/houses and even in the desert: have 1 soldier with Alcotan in every section sitting inside an APC.

Regarding SP mortar, PA has a large inventory of Type 59's - a few hundred should be converted into SP mortar or ATGM carrier vehicles with fire on the move ATGM's like Ingwe (and possibly HJ-12).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Signalian

Gryphon said:


> Akhnoor isn't located along LoC. The division was converted into a RAPID keeping in view the vulnerability of the area.
> 
> 30 Corps has two IABG's right across and some of it's infantry battalions have been apparently mechanized in last 3 years following delivery of VCC-1 Camillino. Then, there is the 1 Corps.
> 
> Alcotan is useful everywhere - in areas providing cover, i.e., buildings/houses and even in the desert: have 1 soldier with Alcotan in every section sitting inside an APC.
> 
> Regarding SP mortar, PA has a large inventory of Type 59's - a few hundred should be converted into SP mortar or ATGM carrier vehicles with fire on the move ATGM's like Ingwe (and possibly HJ-12).


Akhnoor is located behind LOC. This area of LOC is tank passable, as seen in 1965 operation Grandslam. 

In case of Alcotan, there are better options out there with better specs like RPG-29, AT-4 upgraded series, Panzerfaust 3 etc. The confined space element seems to be the only difference. 

I doubt PA will convert any MBT into APC or SP.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Gryphon

Signalian said:


> Akhnoor is located behind LOC. This area of LOC is tank passable, as seen in 1965 operation Grandslam.



It is located along what is called working boundary in Pakistan. The area has seen tank battles, however the terrain isn't exactly plain - boggy land and small hills.



Signalian said:


> In case of Alcotan, there are better options out there with better specs like RPG-29, AT-4 upgraded series, Panzerfaust 3 etc. The confined space element seems to be the only difference.



Panzerfaust 3 - yes, AT4 and RPG 29 - no.

*ALCOTAN-AT (M2)*

100 mm calibre
Weight
(transport configuration) 10,5 kg
Effective range 600 m
(point target)
Penetration 700 mm
(ERA + armour steel)

http://instalaza.com/producto/alcotan/?lang=en

*AT4 HEAT*

_Dismounted soldiers are exposed to many threats, among them infantry fighting vehicles. The AT4 HEAT provides a powerful defence against such adversaries. AT4 HEAT is a shoulder-launched anti-armour weapon with a unique warhead design, offering a very high kill-probability and a launch system providing a very high hit-probability._

Range 40-400 m
Calibre
84 mm
Weight
< 7 kg
Length
< 1 m
Armour penetration
> 420 mm

http://saab.com/land/weapon-systems/support-weapons/AT4/

*PG-29V
Round*

Warhead type tandem HEAT
Caliber, mm 105
Weight, kg 6,7
Sighting range of fire, m 500
Penetration,more than, mm:
RHA (behind ERA) 600

http://roe.ru/eng/catalog/land-forces/strelkovoe-oruzhie/grenade-launchers/pg-29v/

*Pzf 3-IT600*

Caliber 60mm barrel, 110mm warhead
Weight, ready to fire 14,3 kg
Effective range 600 m
Armor penetration 900 mm RHA + reactive armor

http://modernfirearms.net/en/grenade-launchers/germany-grenade-launchers/panzerfaust-3-eng/

Clearly, better penetration comes with a bigger caliber (and added weight).



Signalian said:


> I doubt PA will convert any MBT into APC or SP.



I doubt it too, but some hope exists.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The Eagle

Thread status change to sticky. Continue participation with quality, productive and informative discussion.

Regards,

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Tps43

The Eagle said:


> Thread status change to sticky. Continue participation with quality, productive and informative discussion.
> 
> Regards,


@Signalian

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## rvats

I think it was mentioned in one of the posts that IA's 33rd Armored Division has less number of tanks. That is not the case. All Armored Divisions in Indian Army have 5 armored regiments. Structure for three armored brigades is (armored regiments + mechanized infantry regiments): 1st bde - 2+2 while 2nd bde - 2+1 and 3rd bde - 1+2


----------



## khanasifm

lets see if this quad launcher shows up on vehicles and APCs

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SipahSalar

Signalian said:


> Theoretically the 25th and 26th are mechanised divisions but in fact these 2 divisions are heavily armoured and have more strength (in infantry) than even 1st Armoured and 6th Armoured Divisions of Pakistan Army.


Can you explain this statement please? To my knowledge in terms of personnel, infantry divisions are usually twice as large as Armoured divisions. So why is it a big deal if the Mechanized Infantry Division has more personnel than the Armoured divison? Or are you saying they have even more tanks than the Armoured division?


----------



## Signalian

SipahSalar said:


> Can you explain this statement please? To my knowledge in terms of personnel, infantry divisions are usually twice as large as Armoured divisions.


Correct



> So why is it a big deal if the Mechanized Infantry Division has more personnel than the Armoured divison?


1. Armor Div should have more armor regiments instead of just 5.
2.Armor Div doesnt have any Mechanized Infantry Battalions equipped with APC.

I have given an overview in Armor Div topic.

Its not about comparison of more personnel.


> Or are you saying they have even more tanks than the Armoured division?


Number of MBT are same in both Armor and Mechanised Divs.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Basel



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Armchair

Signalian said:


> Correct
> 
> 
> 1. Armor Div should have more armor regiments instead of just 5.
> 2.Armor Div doesnt have any Mechanized Infantry Battalions equipped with APC.
> 
> I have given an overview in Armor Div topic.
> 
> Its not about comparison of more personnel.
> 
> Number of MBT are same in both Armor and Mechanised Divs.




Fantastic thread. Had a good read. Thanks. Have a question - How many motorized infantry divisions and how many standard infantry divisions?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Reichsmarschall

i cant seem to find your thread about Infantry Divs
@Signalian


----------



## Signalian

Armchair said:


> Fantastic thread. Had a good read. Thanks. Have a question - How many motorized infantry divisions and how many standard infantry divisions?


all infantry divisions are motorized in way that they have motor transport in the form of pickups and trucks for personnel and cargo, you can see that in convoys. But not a standard wheeled armored transport or IFV like MRAP/BTR series etc.




















Reichsmarschall said:


> i cant seem to find your thread about Infantry Divs
> @Signalian


https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/the-infantry-division-of-pa.547663/

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Dazzler

Reichsmarschall said:


> @Signalian @Gryphon how 1650 T-90s and 2410 T-72s(which are very good) will be confronted by our mere 1500 modern tanks?
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 441770
> 
> *Pakistani Top Tanks*
> View attachment 441771
> 
> @Areesh @DESERT FIGHTER @naveedullahkhankhattak




They dont have 1650 t-90s in service, rather close o 800 until two years ago. Most of the t-72s are still not upgraded with night sights which make them less effective during night time. Most of their guns are still faulty, and incompatible with the ammo of t-90 including BM-42 mango apfsds as well as Invar (Reflex) ATGM. 

These inflated wiki figures a a part of their propaganda. The situation on ground s still pretty dismal. They still suffer from tank ammo deficiency to this day.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SSGcommandoPAK




----------



## zulu

How is our night fighting capability ???


----------



## Dazzler

zulu said:


> How is our night fighting capability ???



More than 80% of PA's armored corps are equipped with night vision devices, most of those are locally manufactured.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## SSGcommandoPAK




----------



## zulu

Dazzler said:


> More than 80% of PA's armored corps are equipped with night vision devices, most of those are locally manufactured.


Wish we soon setup thermal imaging capability too.Last year trying to import thermal imaging cameras for car ( esp for foggy areas like punjab in winter) amazing thing.Imagine using it as in winter punjab and sindh grounds is lot cooler so performance will be at peak of these cameras

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ghazi52

Nice shot

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Signalian

ghazi52 said:


> Nice shot


Sindh Regt MIB. insignia of 35 inf div Bahawalpur.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Armchair

is PA really capable of division-level armoured maneuvers? I have serious doubts about this.


----------



## Army research

Armchair said:


> is PA really capable of division-level armoured maneuvers? I have serious doubts about this.


Why so ? We perfected this in zarb e momin, learning from the failures of first armoured div in 65 and 71 , and recently in the Azm e Nau, rad al barq, however zarb e momin was the turning point , we've come a long way from the army of 65, 
However in nowadays limited war IAB's manuvers with overwhelming concentrated fire support will be more important, with armoured and mech div pouring in the exploitation made by them

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## MastanKhan

Army research said:


> Why so ? We perfected this in zarb e momin, learning from the failures of first armoured div in 65 and 71 , and recently in the Azm e Nau, rad al barq, however zarb e momin was the turning point , we've come a long way from the army of 65,
> However in nowadays limited war IAB's manuvers with overwhelming concentrated fire support will be more important, with armoured and mech div pouring in the exploitation made by them



Hi,

Why is the poster asking that question---? Think about it---.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## truthseeker2010

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> Why is the poster asking that question---? Think about it---.





Armchair said:


> is PA really capable of division-level armoured maneuvers? I have serious doubts about this.





Army research said:


> Why so ? We perfected this in zarb e momin, learning from the failures of first armoured div in 65 and 71 , and recently in the Azm e Nau, rad al barq, however zarb e momin was the turning point , we've come a long way from the army of 65,
> However in nowadays limited war IAB's manuvers with overwhelming concentrated fire support will be more important, with armoured and mech div pouring in the exploitation made by them



In today's warfare, armored movement is venerable without air superiority/air support. Same goes for PA, which lacks area air defence for armored formations. So without PAF giving cover, PA won't be able to undertake formation sized thrust. The same applies for IA/IAF.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MastanKhan

truthseeker2010 said:


> In today's warfare, armored movement is venerable without air superiority/air support. Same goes for PA, which lacks area air defence for armored formations. So without PAF giving cover, PA won't be able to undertake formation sized thrust. The same applies for IA/IAF.



Hi,

Oh---Jee---thanks---!!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

truthseeker2010 said:


> In today's warfare, armored movement is venerable without air superiority/air support. Same goes for PA, which lacks area air defence for armored formations. So without PAF giving cover, PA won't be able to undertake formation sized thrust. The same applies for IA/IAF.


PA has the AD cover and it can make even a Corps sized thrust if needed be.


----------



## truthseeker2010

Signalian said:


> PA has the AD cover and it can make even a Corps sized thrust if needed be.



I disagree, bcoz publicly ly-80 is the best sam of Pa that wont be effective against long range stand off weapons, alcms, srbm and brahmos as well.


----------



## Signalian

truthseeker2010 said:


> I disagree, bcoz publicly ly-80 is the best sam of Pa that wont be effective against long range stand off weapons, alcms, srbm and brahmos as well.


Good luck firing these weapons on Indian Army and Indian population.
Its not about the best weapon, but the best tactic and strategy. so you can keep disagreeing all you want throughout the day, week,month and years. 
PA's armor will cross into India and ensure to make contact with IA armor/infantry, capture land and keep majorly hanging around populated/developed areas for resources and roads to discourage the use of above mentioned weapons. This is why PA's armor is deployed close to the borders.

have a look at IA armor deployments now

It will then make sense to you why Cold start and IBG's were created by IA.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## omega supremme

Signalian said:


> have a look at IA armor deployments now


 

Can you show us the article or any information which can show us the deployments close to Pakistan ?


----------



## Armchair

To date, in all previous wars, PA armored divisions have fought largely as single divisions. They have never to date managed a serious maneuver warfare strategy. 

The current strategy goes something like this:
1. A railway based backbone going north to south. 
2. A ditch like a great wall of china running north to south
3. Aim has been to fight India on Pakistani ground in the desert between Punjab and impassable Sindh. 
This has been the "strategy" since 1970s I believe. 

PA is woefully ill-prepared for any kind of meaningful maneuver warfare but the Indians are equally as bad, so neither side will majorly embarrass the other. 

Pak because of the above strategy can be ready for war within 24 hours, much faster than India. Cold Start is an attempt to improve this reaction time but I don't know how effective Cold Start will be in real life.

Maneuver warfare is an industrial scale war. Unfortunately, neither India nor Pakistan has a culture of understanding industrial scale military operations. They buy military equipment from abroad like people buy clothes for marrying their girls. 

They have yet to appreciate the importance of local large scale production capabilities. Some semi-retired fat chap will use organizations like KSEW or HIT thinking these are some kind of personal fiefdoms. But because this kind of capacity and way of thinking was never developed, such industrial capacities will remain unbuilt, unused and ineffective. 

Certain "favored" divisions will be given the job in a future war to attack the enemy while others will play a supporting role / defensive role. That is the extent of strategy one can expect from the PA, if past performance is anything to go by. 

To understand the multi-division, massive, choreographed military maneuvers, done with thousands of tanks, and many more personnel, in coordination with effective artillery, and other arms. This has never truly happened in the Indian subcontinent. 

We have had some basic, raw, tank battles, that happened. But these were barely planned effectively and didn't have much meaning in the overall scheme of things. They happened along very predictable lines and without meaningful combined arms, surprise, or even any original maneuver.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Army research

Armchair said:


> To date, in all previous wars, PA armored divisions have fought largely as single divisions. They have never to date managed a serious maneuver warfare strategy.
> 
> The current strategy goes something like this:
> 1. A railway based backbone going north to south.
> 2. A ditch like a great wall of china running north to south
> 3. Aim has been to fight India on Pakistani ground in the desert between Punjab and impassable Sindh.
> This has been the "strategy" since 1970s I believe.
> 
> PA is woefully ill-prepared for any kind of meaningful maneuver warfare but the Indians are equally as bad, so neither side will majorly embarrass the other.
> 
> Pak because of the above strategy can be ready for war within 24 hours, much faster than India. Cold Start is an attempt to improve this reaction time but I don't know how effective Cold Start will be in real life.
> 
> Maneuver warfare is an industrial scale war. Unfortunately, neither India nor Pakistan has a culture of understanding industrial scale military operations. They buy military equipment from abroad like people buy clothes for marrying their girls.
> 
> They have yet to appreciate the importance of local large scale production capabilities. Some semi-retired fat chap will use organizations like KSEW or HIT thinking these are some kind of personal fiefdoms. But because this kind of capacity and way of thinking was never developed, such industrial capacities will remain unbuilt, unused and ineffective.
> 
> Certain "favored" divisions will be given the job in a future war to attack the enemy while others will play a supporting role / defensive role. That is the extent of strategy one can expect from the PA, if past performance is anything to go by.
> 
> To understand the multi-division, massive, choreographed military maneuvers, done with thousands of tanks, and many more personnel, in coordination with effective artillery, and other arms. This has never truly happened in the Indian subcontinent.
> 
> We have had some basic, raw, tank battles, that happened. But these were barely planned effectively and didn't have much meaning in the overall scheme of things. They happened along very predictable lines and without meaningful combined arms, surprise, or even any original maneuver.


I suggest you chalk up on what zarb e momin, largest military exercise in South Asia to date, was

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TsAr

truthseeker2010 said:


> I disagree, bcoz publicly ly-80 is the best sam of Pa that wont be effective against long range stand off weapons, alcms, srbm and brahmos as well.


What makes you think that PA armor will just all of a sudden go into India without any planning? Any attack would be fully coordinated with PAF.


----------



## Signalian

omega supremme said:


> Can you show us the article or any information which can show us the deployments close to Pakistan ?


contact @Nilgiri .
He is an expert on drawing deployments. He sits and makes maps all days.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Armchair

PAF has very rarely coordinated with PA on anything real. In a real war, I very seriously doubt PAF would help PA. They would be fighting IAF and focusing all their resources on that. 

This is why I never took the Azm-e-Nau series of exercises seriously. It's all just a lot of paperwork but not real or realistic. IMHO.

The only way around this is to have CAS aircraft integral to the Pakistan Army Aviation.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Nilgiri

Signalian said:


> contact @Nilgiri .
> He is an expert on drawing deployments. He sits and makes maps all days.



The real experts are those that pester me all hours of all days for the maps after I get stuck in real world for just a bit

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Signalian

Nilgiri said:


> The real experts are those that pester me all hours of all days for the maps after I get stuck in real world for just a bit


@Gryphon look at this guy Nilgiri - he is complaining against us

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Signalian

omega supremme said:


> Can you show us the article or any information which can show us the deployments close to Pakistan ?


Nilgiri maps are better.
I just generated a rough scale few years back only about armor deployments. It shows that Indian armored divisions are deployed far from the border thus CSD making sense.
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/paki...counter-cold-start.485506/page-8#post-9329263

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## MastanKhan

Armchair said:


> PAF has very rarely coordinated with PA on anything real. In a real war, I very seriously doubt PAF would help PA. They would be fighting IAF and focusing all their resources on that.
> 
> This is why I never took the Azm-e-Nau series of exercises seriously. It's all just a lot of paperwork but not real or realistic. IMHO.
> 
> The only way around this is to have CAS aircraft integral to the Pakistan Army Aviation.



Hi,

You are correct---. The 350 # that the Paf had given was just for its air defences---fighter and strike---.

Support of ground forces & naval forces need their seperate dedicated air force---.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Armchair

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> You are correct---. The 350 # that the Paf had given was just for its air defences---fighter and strike---.
> 
> Support of ground forces & naval forces need their seperate dedicated air force---.



I once made a proposal in PTI (around 2012) that if PTI came to power, among other structural and organizational changes, we would give PAA (Pakistan Army Aviation) fixed wing assets. However, once PTI came to power there is a tacit agreement that PTI will not put its nose in the Pak military's business thus this proposal could not go forward.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aziqbal

if you look at the Mechanised divisions of Pakistan army the % is very low

we don't really have a need for fast movement of heavy armour but still it would be nice to increase our mechanised forces

we also need to be able to lift by helicopter heavy Howitzers to high altitudes but we never really managed that either

supplying 155mm shells is also a big issue, btw POF makes 155mm shells and that is a huge shell a single shell can level a large building totally devastating round


----------



## Humble Analyst

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> Why is the poster asking that question---? Think about it---.


Good point


----------



## Signalian

aziqbal said:


> *we don't really have a need for fast movement of heavy armour* but still it would be nice to increase our mechanised forces


why don't we have the need for that?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Armchair

Signalian said:


> why don't we have the need for that?


We would need it if we want to _win _a war against India. But if we want to continue past performance, then nothing much is needed but the status quo.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Gryphon

Looks like a new Mechanized Division is being raised at Pano Aqil, recent deployments & postings indicate significant progress.

FYI
@Inception-06 @Signalian @HRK

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## JPMM

Gryphon said:


> Looks like a new Mechanized Division is being raised at Pano Aqil, recent deployments & postings indicate significant progress.
> 
> FYI
> @Inception-06 @Signalian @HRK



Friend, I have been warning for some time!
"Last time they bought new M109....They formed new Mechanized Divisions"
My question was also "Were are the new Al-Khalid-I going to?"
Thanks

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Cuirassier

Gryphon said:


> Looks like a new Mechanized Division is being raised at Pano Aqil, recent deployments & postings indicate significant progress.
> 
> FYI
> @Inception-06 @Signalian @HRK


Does this mean 21 Div will never return?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gryphon

JPMM said:


> Friend, I have been warning for some time!
> "Last time they bought new M109....They formed new Mechanized Divisions"
> My question was also "Were are the new Al-Khalid-I going to?"
> Thanks



First AK-1 Regiment is with an IABG under HQ 31 Corps.



TF141 said:


> Does this mean 21 Div will never return?



Division HQ is still at Pano Aqil - one of the bdes has been moved.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Cuirassier

Gryphon said:


> First AK-1 Regiment is with an IABG under HQ 31 Corps.
> 
> 
> 
> Division HQ is still at Pano Aqil - one of the bdes has been moved.


Strange that the GOC sits in Malakand Division. Perhaps Div less 2 bde

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JPMM

Gryphon said:


> First AK-1 Regiment is with an IABG under HQ 31 Corps.
> 
> 
> 
> Division HQ is still at Pano Aqil - one of the bdes has been moved.



So they are Keeping their Al-Khalids (not AK-I) in the two Mech Divs 158 each!
Thanks

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Gryphon said:


> Looks like a new Mechanized Division is being raised at Pano Aqil, recent deployments & postings indicate significant progress.
> 
> FYI
> @Inception-06 @Signalian @HRK


Through IAB and IMB HQs ?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Gryphon

Signalian said:


> Through IAB and IMB HQs ?



Yes, Independent Bdes + Div Logistics + Div Tps + Div Arty.
I have noted progress in last two areas.

Number of Armoured Corps regiments has hit 50 (confirmed).

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Phantom.

which mbts are present in 1st armoured division and 6th armoured division??


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

Gryphon said:


> Number of Armoured Corps regiments has hit 50 (confirmed).


How many do India have?


----------



## Signalian

CHAOS BRINGER said:


> which mbts are present in 1st armoured division and 6th armoured division??


T-80 and AZ

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Inception-06

@Signalian @Dazzler @HRK @DESERT FIGHTER] if we have stored these Tanks, then they should be upgraded to a payable limit, and deployed on western and eastern border posts and in wartime integrated as close fire support vehicles in mechanised infantry formations! The Turkish Army has deployed older Tanks as mobile posts along their troubled border!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Inception-06

Gryphon said:


> Yes, Independent Bdes + Div Logistics + Div Tps + Div Arty.
> I have noted progress in last two areas.
> 
> Number of Armoured Corps regiments has hit 50 (confirmed).




@Signalian @Dazzler @HRK @DESERT FIGHTER

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## HRK

Inception-06 said:


> @Signalian @Dazzler @HRK @DESERT FIGHTER
> 
> View attachment 592774
> View attachment 592775
> View attachment 592776
> View attachment 592777
















So at least 18 tanks are visible in pic which mean 25+ tanks are either completed or near completion



Inception-06 said:


> if we have stored these Tanks, then they should be upgraded to a payable limit


One word "Maintenance"
why go for costly import route to maintain this fleet .... ??? we do not make anything related to this, OTOH if I am not wrong we have licence to produce T-59/69 so all the spares needed for these tanks can be produced in house so T-69 with F.C deployed at western border is a right solution to our problems at western borders

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Gryphon

Inception-06 said:


> @Signalian @Dazzler @HRK @DESERT FIGHTER] if we have stored these Tanks, then they should be upgraded to a payable limit, and deployed on western and eastern border posts and in wartime integrated as close fire support vehicles in mechanised infantry formations! The Turkish Army has deployed older Tanks as mobile posts along their troubled border!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 592675



US sanctions lead to the planned upgrades being cancelled and de-induction accelerated. These were even withdrawn from reserves thus beyond discussion.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Inception-06

HRK said:


> View attachment 592781
> 
> View attachment 592780
> 
> View attachment 592782
> 
> 
> .
> So at least 18 tanks are visible in pic which mean 25+ tanks are either completed or near completion
> 
> 
> One word "Maintenance"
> why go for costly import route to maintain this fleet .... ??? we do not make anything related to this, OTH if I am not wrong we have licence to produce T-59/69 so all the spares needed for these tanks can be produced in house so T-69 with F.C deployed at western border is a right solution to our problems at western borders



I guess these Alkhalid-1 Tanks ?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## HRK

Inception-06 said:


> I guess these Alkhalid-1 Tanks ?
> 
> 
> View attachment 592897
> View attachment 592898


yaap fresh AK-I

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Inception-06

HRK said:


> View attachment 592781
> 
> One word "Maintenance"
> why go for costly import route to maintain this fleet .... ??? we do not make anything related to this, OTOH if I am not wrong we have licence to produce T-59/69 so all the spares needed for these tanks can be produced in house so T-69 with F.C deployed at western border is a right solution to our problems at western borders

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## striver44

Dont know where to post but is this true that pakistan had just received 282 T55 from ex serb army stocks?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Tipu7

striver44 said:


> Dont know where to post but is this true that pakistan had just received 282 T55 from ex serb army stocks?


There was a rumor two years back.


----------



## Inception-06

striver44 said:


> Dont know where to post but is this true that pakistan had just received 282 T55 from ex serb army stocks?




What does this picture say ? It's definitely not shot in Pakistan, where this picture was taken ?


----------



## truthseeker2010

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> How many do India have?



67


----------



## bananarepublic

Inception-06 said:


> What does this picture say ? It's definitely not shot in Pakistan, where this picture was taken ?


Source is these I think ?
https://topwar.ru/164587-kak-bystro-popolnit-tankovyj-park-pakistan-zakupaet-t-55.html

Pakistan buys second-hand goods While India begins production of five hundred T-90MS for $ 4 million each, things are not going so well in Pakistan. Al-Khalid production is proceeding at a slow pace (about a dozen a year), the modernization of the T-80UD is stalled. Therefore, we decided to purchase very modestly so far - the modernized T-55s with NKDZ from Serbia

And this
https://topwar.ru/164587-kak-bystro-popolnit-tankovyj-park-pakistan-zakupaet-t-55.html

Against the background of the deployment in India of the release of a new large-scale batch of the main battle tanks T-90MS, Pakistan is forced to take asymmetric actions, trying to quickly replenish the ranks of its military equipment. The high cost of modern tanks does not allow Islamabad to acquire an impressive MBT fleet of advanced technology. Apparently, precisely because of material difficulties, the production of Al-Khalid's own-designed machine is in miserable quantities. About a dozen units are produced throughout the year. The T-80UD improvement program is slipping.
Under these conditions, Pakistan made a fairly budgetary decision, acquiring an improved T-55. The machines intended for Islamabad received a complex of dynamic protection. As stated in the press, the T-55 data were purchased from Serbia, although it is believed that they are “originally” from Slovenia. In Russia, the last T-55s were withdrawn from service at the turn of the 2010s, although various modifications of this medium tank are offered for export. This machine is very popular among countries with a modest military budget. The financial difficulties in Pakistan most likely led to the decision to purchase the T-55




Tipu7 said:


> There was a rumor two years back.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## striver44

bananarepublic said:


> Source is these I think ?
> https://topwar.ru/164587-kak-bystro-popolnit-tankovyj-park-pakistan-zakupaet-t-55.html
> 
> Pakistan buys second-hand goods While India begins production of five hundred T-90MS for $ 4 million each, things are not going so well in Pakistan. Al-Khalid production is proceeding at a slow pace (about a dozen a year), the modernization of the T-80UD is stalled. Therefore, we decided to purchase very modestly so far - the modernized T-55s with NKDZ from Serbia
> 
> And this
> https://topwar.ru/164587-kak-bystro-popolnit-tankovyj-park-pakistan-zakupaet-t-55.html
> 
> Against the background of the deployment in India of the release of a new large-scale batch of the main battle tanks T-90MS, Pakistan is forced to take asymmetric actions, trying to quickly replenish the ranks of its military equipment. The high cost of modern tanks does not allow Islamabad to acquire an impressive MBT fleet of advanced technology. Apparently, precisely because of material difficulties, the production of Al-Khalid's own-designed machine is in miserable quantities. About a dozen units are produced throughout the year. The T-80UD improvement program is slipping.
> Under these conditions, Pakistan made a fairly budgetary decision, acquiring an improved T-55. The machines intended for Islamabad received a complex of dynamic protection. As stated in the press, the T-55 data were purchased from Serbia, although it is believed that they are “originally” from Slovenia. In Russia, the last T-55s were withdrawn from service at the turn of the 2010s, although various modifications of this medium tank are offered for export. This machine is very popular among countries with a modest military budget. The financial difficulties in Pakistan most likely led to the decision to purchase the T-55


Consider a T55 is obsolete at what role does Pak Army intend for these t55,obviously its not tank vs tank warfare

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

striver44 said:


> Consider a T55 is obsolete at what role does Pak Army intend for these t55,obviously its not tank vs tank warfare


None, considering we ourself have hundreds of old Type-59/69s etc to replace.

Thus it makes no sense to buy more obsolete t-55s.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## JPMM

Inception-06 said:


> View attachment 592904


At presente I believe there are at least 4 Armoured Regiments with T69IIMP with the 4 Inf Divs of the IV/XXX Corps, equipped with 105mm guns. The rest prabably have been sent to the FC equipped with 100mm guns as above.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Zulfiqar

Considering all the mechanization in the south, if a war happens I think PA would also be aiming for encirclement of some areas of Indian Gujarat for trade off on Kashmir/any future area to be captured in this round.

I don't know if the terrain will be supportive for that.

@Signalian @Gryphon

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Gryphon

Zulfiqar said:


> Considering all the mechanization in the south, if a war happens I think PA would also be aiming for encirclement of some areas of Indian Gujarat for trade off on Kashmir/any future area to be captured in this round.
> 
> I don't know if the terrain will be supportive for that.
> 
> @Signalian @Gryphon
> 
> 
> View attachment 594552
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 594553



The terrain (creeks + marshes) doesn't allow large-scale armour movement towards/from Gujarat.

Mechanized Div's were raised with holding corps (5 and 31) purely as defensive formations to fend off IA's numerically superior armoured/mechanized forces. During wartime,

Malir-based 25 Mech Div is expected to join 18 Inf Div defenses north/south of Chor.

Pano Aqil-based Mech Div (being raised) is expected to join 16 Inf Div defenses north/south of Pano Aqil & Rahim Yar Khan.

Bahawalpur-based 26 Mech Div is expected to join 35 Inf Div defenses north of Rahim Yar Khan upto Bahawalnagar.
That said, PA does have other things under consideration incl. conversion of these Inf Div's into RAPID-like formations having a mechanized bde each and raising more HAT forces.

@JPMM

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

truthseeker2010 said:


> 67


Wow close to India


----------



## Bossman

T55s were bought for the Taliban but never delivered.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HRK

Bossman said:


> T55s were bought for the Taliban but never delivered.


are talking about 1995 or about the rumore of purchased in last 2-3 years .... ???

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## striver44

DESERT FIGHTER said:


> None, considering we ourself have hundreds of old Type-59/69s etc to replace.
> 
> Thus it makes no sense to buy more obsolete t-55s.


But you did buy 282 t55's

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

striver44 said:


> But you did buy 282 t55's


No, else Ministry of Defence would have mentioned it in the annual yearbook, aswell as our media would have picked up.



striver44 said:


> But you did buy 282 t55's


As I said we hundreds of better variants tanks we are phasing out or upgrading into AZ status. Such a sale would literally make zero sense at all.



striver44 said:


> But you did buy 282 t55's


The report originated from a Serbian outlet, “Blic”, that claimed Serbia & Pak will sign a contract for modernised T-55s. Which never was....

What they seemed to forget was that Pakistan itself produces and upgrades its old Type series into Al Zarrar status. With over 550 in service while older are being phased out slowly by AKI & expected AKII. Some making their eay to Paramilitary forces like Frontier Corps who operate them along the Afghan border.

Zarrar MBT:

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## JPMM

Gryphon said:


> The terrain (creeks + marshes) doesn't allow large-scale armour movement towards/from Gujarat.
> 
> Mechanized Div's were raised with holding corps (5 and 31) purely as defensive formations to fend off IA's numerically superior armoured/mechanized forces. During wartime,
> 
> Malir-based 25 Mech Div is expected to join 18 Inf Div defenses north/south of Chor.
> 
> Pano Aqil-based Mech Div (being raised) is expected to join 16 Inf Div defenses north/south of Pano Aqil & Rahim Yar Khan.
> 
> Bahawalpur-based 26 Mech Div is expected to join 35 Inf Div defenses north of Rahim Yar Khan upto Bahawalnagar.
> That said, PA does have other things under consideration incl. conversion of these Inf Div's into RAPID-like formations having a mechanized bde each and raising more HAT forces.
> 
> @JPMM


It would be the logical move, each InfDiv having allready an Armoured Regiment and a Light AT Battalion, its only missing the extra MechInf Bn?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bossman

striver44 said:


> But you did buy 282 t55's


You will see them at the upcoming Taliban victory parade in Kabul.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gryphon

JPMM said:


> It would be the logical move, each InfDiv having allready an Armoured Regiment and a Light AT Battalion, its only missing the extra MechInf Bn?



One Inf Bde converted to Mech Bde with 1× Armd Regt + 2× MIB. Detached Inf Bn converted to HAT.

Done with Bahawalpur-based 35 Inf Div.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## JPMM

Gryphon said:


> One Inf Bde converted to Mech Bde with 1× Armd Regt + 2× MIB. Detached Inf Bn converted to HAT.
> 
> Done with Bahawalpur-based 35 Inf Div.


There were many reports that several InfDivs were becomming Mech, but when we see a M113 with an InfDiv like that photo of 35 InfDiv, its the Mech Bde refered above.
The true Mech Divs are not "Infantry" and from what a see they have:
1x ArmBrig (1x ArmReg + 1x ArmRecReg + 1x MIB)
2x MechBrigs (1 x ArmReg + 1x MIBn + 1x HAT Bn)
1x SP ArtBrig (3x SP Medium Regs)

Are the new Kornet ATGMs used to equip the HAT Bns in the new MechDiv? , becouse there are no new TOW being supplied!​Their two HAT Bns should have 24 Kornet each.

The 3x ArmRegs with 44 Al-Khalid each and the ArmRecReg with 26
Al-Khalid.

The new MechDiv should have Al-Khalid-I instead of Al-Khalid, M109L instead of M109A5 and Kornet instead of TOWs.​
That way the US were not allowing Pak Army expansion to form more MechDivs and they just went to alternative markets (Italy/M109L and Russia/Kornet)

The ArmRecReg must have BS ATGMs mounted in Maaz, becouse you bought 52 Kornet, 24 in each HAT and 4 in training.

The orders are for 220 Al-Khalid-I, so 158 will be with new MechDiv and there are 62 left.​ 
Were will they go?
​ 
Thanks​

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Gryphon

JPMM said:


> There were many reports that several InfDivs were becomming Mech, but when we see a M113 with an InfDiv like that photo of 35 InfDiv, its the Mech Bde refered above.



Bdes with Divisional armd regt + 2×MIBs have a different nomenclature in PA. Not called Mech Bde.​


> The true Mech Divs are not "Infantry" and from what a see they have:
> 1x ArmBrig (1x ArmReg + 1x ArmRecReg + 1x MIB)
> 2x MechBrigs (1 x ArmReg + 1x MIBn + 1x HAT Bn)
> 1x SP ArtBrig (3x SP Medium Regs)



2× IABG + 1× IMBG.

One Mech Div has 2× SP Med Regt's + 1× Med Regt in Div Arty. I believe same is the case with the other one.



> Are the new Kornet ATGMs used to equip the HAT Bns in the new MechDiv? , becouse there are no new TOW being supplied!





> Their two HAT Bns should have 24 Kornet each.
> 
> The 3x ArmRegs with 44 Al-Khalid each and the ArmRecReg with 26
> Al-Khalid.
> 
> The new MechDiv should have Al-Khalid-I instead of Al-Khalid, M109L instead of M109A5 and Kornet instead of TOWs.​
> That way the US were not allowing Pak Army expansion to form more MechDivs and they just went to alternative markets (Italy/M109L and Russia/Kornet)
> 
> The ArmRecReg must have BS ATGMs mounted in Maaz, becouse you bought 52 Kornet, 24 in each HAT and 4 in training.
> 
> The orders are for 220 Al-Khalid-I, so 158 will be with new MechDiv and there are 62 left.​
> Were will they go?
> ​
> Thanks​



Can't say if Kornet-equipped HAT's will be with new Mech Div as units are rotated between formations.

M109L's are still US origin, third-party transfer was approved by USG.

220 Al-Khalid 1's will be divided into 5 regt's - 44 MBTs each.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## striver44

Bossman said:


> You will see them at the upcoming Taliban victory parade in Kabul.


There is a highr chance that taliban will capture US supplied tanks and Armored vehicles than having pakistan supplied them. Just because the afghan army is SHIT.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bossman

striver44 said:


> There is a highr chance that taliban will capture US supplied tanks and Armored vehicles than having pakistan supplied them. Just because the afghan army is SHIT.


Taliban’s cannot operate M1s, T55s they can and have a history of doing it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

JPMM said:


> There were many reports that several InfDivs were becomming Mech, but when we see a M113 with an InfDiv like that photo of 35 InfDiv, its the Mech Bde refered above.
> The true Mech Divs are not "Infantry" and from what a see they have:
> 1x ArmBrig (1x ArmReg + 1x ArmRecReg + 1x MIB)
> 2x MechBrigs (1 x ArmReg + 1x MIBn + 1x HAT Bn)
> 1x SP ArtBrig (3x SP Medium Regs)
> 
> Are the new Kornet ATGMs used to equip the HAT Bns in the new MechDiv? , becouse there are no new TOW being supplied!​Their two HAT Bns should have 24 Kornet each.
> 
> The 3x ArmRegs with 44 Al-Khalid each and the ArmRecReg with 26
> Al-Khalid.
> 
> The new MechDiv should have Al-Khalid-I instead of Al-Khalid, M109L instead of M109A5 and Kornet instead of TOWs.​
> That way the US were not allowing Pak Army expansion to form more MechDivs and they just went to alternative markets (Italy/M109L and Russia/Kornet)
> 
> The ArmRecReg must have BS ATGMs mounted in Maaz, becouse you bought 52 Kornet, 24 in each HAT and 4 in training.
> 
> The orders are for 220 Al-Khalid-I, so 158 will be with new MechDiv and there are 62 left.​
> Were will they go?
> ​
> Thanks​


Armored Recon had light tanks in past. Don't think PA will put AK in Armored Recon role. Recon is usually wheeled and 4 x 4.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Dazzler



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## M.AsfandYar

Dazzler said:


>


Is that from the parade?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

JPMM said:


> It would be the logical move, each InfDiv having allready an Armoured Regiment and a Light AT Battalion, its only missing the extra MechInf Bn?


each inf div should have an armored bde instead of just armd regt and LAT

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Armchair

I think rotating tanks and infantry and matching them up randomly is a poor choice. Better would be if the infantry supporting the armour is well known and organic to the armoured brigade.
This would allow better coordination and esprit de corps. And would allow these infantry to specialise in how to protect armour and work alongside them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JPMM

Signalian said:


> each inf div should have an armored bde instead of just armd regt and LAT


Yes in respect of those 13 InfDivs at the East (8 deployed at IB + 2 deployed in LOC +3 with Strike Corps), waste of Money for those 4 deployed in the West and not necessary in 12th InfDiv.
There should allways be Corps reserve formations (IABGs and IIBGs) avaiable to the Corps Commander, making im possible influence on the developing battle situation.
This whould mean 13 extra ArmRegs (572 Tanks) with all its cost, Logistic support necessary and it could result in those extra Tanks being of a low grade type (knot first line).
We did sow this type of formations in Sadam Army in 1990, their combat performance was very bad, they had T55/T62/Type59/Type69.
They simply dont have fighting power to make the diffrence against a 1st line Armoured/Mechanised Division. They make numbers on paper during peace time, but the cost/logistic off that extra Armoured Regiment and Mechanised Battalion will not be proportionate to their fighting value.
It has much to do with the terrain were the InfDiv will deploy. Maybe 4 extra ArmRegs for those 4 InfDivs at the IB of those two Southern Corps.
Thanks


----------



## Signalian

JPMM said:


> Yes in respect of those 13 InfDivs at the East (8 deployed at IB + 2 deployed in LOC +3 with Strike Corps), waste of Money for those 4 deployed in the West and not necessary in 12th InfDiv.
> There should allways be Corps reserve formations (IABGs and IIBGs) avaiable to the Corps Commander, making im possible influence on the developing battle situation.
> This whould mean 13 extra ArmRegs (572 Tanks) with all its cost, Logistic support necessary and it could result in those extra Tanks being of a low grade type (knot first line).
> We did sow this type of formations in Sadam Army in 1990, their combat performance was very bad, they had T55/T62/Type59/Type69.
> They simply dont have fighting power to make the diffrence against a 1st line Armoured/Mechanised Division. They make numbers on paper during peace time, but the cost/logistic off that extra Armoured Regiment and Mechanised Battalion will not be proportionate to their fighting value.
> It has much to do with the terrain were the InfDiv will deploy. Maybe 4 extra ArmRegs for those 4 InfDivs at the IB of those two Southern Corps.
> Thanks


Since I was talking about Armd Bde so I obviously meant Inf Divs devoid of the ones deployed on Mountains.

The Infantry Divs own offensive power is 9 (infantry):1 (Armor) ratio. That is 12-15 tanks to support a Brigade or 4-5 tanks to support an infantry battalion, whether in offense or defense. AT units whether LAT or HAT are mainly defensive, again can be distributed and attached to Infantry battalions. Loss of tanks, loss of ATGM luanchers will affect performance of Infantry Div which is supposed to operate independently too since it has all the support units along with fighting units under its command. If an Inf Div has an Armored Bde with 2 Armor Regts, there will be 24-30 tanks supporting a Brigade or 8-10 tanks supporting an infantry Battalion. The chances of success of an Ops increase.

Inf Divs are supported by units from other formations to mount a successful Ops since Inf Divs in PA have just strength enough to stand own ground in case of an attack. Even in WOT, few Inf Divs were diluted to send units to western theater since full relocation of Inf Divs wasn't considered enough and viable in some cases. 

Take 4 Corps HQ, Lahore as an example, which has:
10th Infantry Division 
11th Infantry Division 
212th Independent Infantry Brigade Group 
4th AD Brigade 
Corps Artillery Brigade
3rd IABG 
and probably another Independent Infantry Brigade Group from 30 Corps (Sialkot) deployed under its AOR.

To mount an offensive, either one of the two Inf Divs (10th ID or 11th ID), lets say 10th ID with IABG or IIBG will be thrown in the mix. The only tanks left with the Corps after this will be Armor Regiment of 11th ID. Else than this Corps HQ will ask for GHQ Armor Reserves (GHQ will either send reserves or dilute an armor regiment from any other Inf Div/Mech Div/Armor Bde and send it) otherwise 11th ID will stay on defensive through out the war. 

Almost same case with 30 Corps HQ Gujranwala/Sialkot. 
31 Corps HQ (Bahwalpur) and 5 Corps HQ (Karachi) could have all their IABG and IMBG under Mech Div HQs. So there might not be any armor to be attached to their Infantry Divisions. 11 Corps HQ (Peshawar) and 12 Corps HQ (Quetta) will be sending at least one of their Infantry Divisions towards Eastern border (India) in case of war, which again have only 1 Armor Regiment each. 

In 1971, 23rd Inf Div which made gains into IOK was bolstered with units from other formations so it could successfully conduct an Ops. With its own units, 23rd ID would never have gained ground into IOK. 

IABG is a Corps Asset. The Corps HQ may or may not use IABG to support Inf Div Ops. The Corps HQ can use it in different other methods independently, even holding it as reserve. 

Indian Army is an infantry dominated Field Army, however it has RAPIDs and then IBGs, which can be very effective in attack or defense. PA can successfully defend attacks from RAPID or IBG through an Infantry Division, but mounting an attack on RAPID or IBG will require more armor for PA's Infantry Division.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Mumm-Ra

Signalian said:


> Since I was talking about Armd Bde so I obviously meant Inf Divs devoid of the ones deployed on Mountains.
> 
> The Infantry Divs own offensive power is 9 (infantry):1 (Armor) ratio. That is 12-15 tanks to support a Brigade or 4-5 tanks to support an infantry battalion, whether in offense or defense. AT units whether LAT or HAT are mainly defensive, again can be distributed and attached to Infantry battalions. Loss of tanks, loss of ATGM luanchers will affect performance of Infantry Div which is supposed to operate independently too since it has all the support units along with fighting units under its command. If an Inf Div has an Armored Bde with 2 Armor Regts, there will be 24-30 tanks supporting a Brigade or 8-10 tanks supporting an infantry Battalion. The chances of success of an Ops increase.
> 
> Inf Divs are supported by units from other formations to mount a successful Ops since Inf Divs in PA have just strength enough to stand own ground in case of an attack. Even in WOT, few Inf Divs were diluted to send units to western theater since full relocation of Inf Divs wasn't considered enough and viable in some cases.
> 
> Take 4 Corps HQ, Lahore as an example, which has:
> 10th Infantry Division
> 11th Infantry Division
> 212th Independent Infantry Brigade Group
> 4th AD Brigade
> Corps Artillery Brigade
> 3rd IABG
> and probably another Independent Infantry Brigade Group from 30 Corps (Sialkot) deployed under its AOR.
> 
> To mount an offensive, either one of the two Inf Divs (10th ID or 11th ID), lets say 10th ID with IABG or IIBG will be thrown in the mix. The only tanks left with the Corps after this will be Armor Regiment of 11th ID. Else than this Corps HQ will ask for GHQ Armor Reserves (GHQ will either send reserves or dilute an armor regiment from any other Inf Div/Mech Div/Armor Bde and send it) otherwise 11th ID will stay on defensive through out the war.
> 
> Almost same case with 30 Corps HQ Gujranwala/Sialkot.
> 31 Corps HQ (Bahwalpur) and 5 Corps HQ (Karachi) could have all their IABG and IMBG under Mech Div HQs. So there might not be any armor to be attached to their Infantry Divisions. 11 Corps HQ (Peshawar) and 12 Corps HQ (Quetta) will be sending at least one of their Infantry Divisions towards Eastern border (India) in case of war, which again have only 1 Armor Regiment each.
> 
> In 1971, 23rd Inf Div which made gains into IOK was bolstered with units from other formations so it could successfully conduct an Ops. With its own units, 23rd ID would never have gained ground into IOK.
> 
> IABG is a Corps Asset. The Corps HQ may or may not use IABG to support Inf Div Ops. The Corps HQ can use it in different other methods independently, even holding it as reserve.
> 
> Indian Army is an infantry dominated Field Army, however it has RAPIDs and then IBGs, which can be very effective in attack or defense. PA can successfully defend attacks from RAPID or IBG through an Infantry Division, but mounting an attack on RAPID or IBG will require more armor for PA's Infantry Division.



As usual, an extremely informative and commendable post. hats off!!!

One question though, why doesn't PA combine both Armoured Divs into a single armoured Corps. Two armoured divs supported by two mech/motorized infantry div? It can be reminiscent of the Germans armoured Corps during WWW2. Not only will they have a lot more fire power and be able to have a numerical superiority in terms of tanks in their given operational area. Further, they may be able to tie down a much greater strength of IA as it may be compelled to put a lot more resources, which would have otherwise been used in an offensive operations, to counter this threat.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Signalian

Xlvee01 said:


> As usual, an extremely informative and commendable post. hats off!!!
> 
> One question though, why doesn't PA combine both Armoured Divs into a single armoured Corps. Two armoured divs supported by two mech/motorized infantry div? It can be reminiscent of the Germans armoured Corps during WWW2. Not only will they have a lot more fire power and be able to have a numerical superiority in terms of tanks in their given operational area. Further, they may be able to tie down a much greater strength of IA as it may be compelled to put a lot more resources, which would have otherwise been used in an offensive operations, to counter this threat.


It becomes a gamble by putting all assets in one area. The eastern border in the centre and south is all open and its massive to cover. IA IBG threat needs to be addressed so armor has to be spread all along the border. IA Armored Divs are north, centre and south. Then the issue of logistics, fuel, spares, ammunition - all needs to be concentrated in one sector. The psychology and mindset of Desi Armor Commanders is different than Germans. Lesser number of armor compared to infantry is an issue on both sides (IA and PA). So tanks are a precious asset for both armies. PA has no reserve MBTs. Those M-48s are outdated and not worth investing. All the Armored and Mech Divs use different types of Tanks in PA, which will be analogous to Wehrmacht using Pz I,II and III very early, then using Pz II,III and IV and finally Pz IV and V as standard in Pz Divs supported by Pz VI heavy battalions, but Wehrmacht's Panzer Divs had smaller component of Armor than other countries. 

*PA Inf Div can have up to 15,000 troops with around 8000-9000 fighting troops who are supported by just 45 Tanks ! *

Your idea is good though. You must have seen what happened in 1965. PA 1st Armd Div joined 6th Armd Div in Sialkot in the middle of the war after it withdrew from Khem Karan. However, now IA has 3 Armored Divs and few RAPIDs. IA will send its Armor (T-90 + BMP-2) through IBGs in all sectors and in good numbers to offset PA defences. 

To go ahead with your idea, PA can raise an Armored Brigade Group and a Mechanized Brigade Group, then attach several other armor and mechanized battalions in case of war to bring both "Groups" to Divisional strength. If you look on the map, Rahim Yar Khan is a strategic location where PA can place these two formations and then launch them north, centre or south towards India.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Mumm-Ra

Signalian said:


> It becomes a gamble by putting all assets in one area. The eastern border in the centre and south is all open and its massive to cover. IA IBG threat needs to be addressed so armor has to be spread all along the border. IA Armored Divs are north, centre and south. Then the issue of logistics, fuel, spares, ammunition - all needs to be concentrated in one sector. The psychology and mindset of Desi Armor Commanders is different than Germans. Lesser number of armor compared to infantry is an issue on both sides (IA and PA). So tanks are a precious asset for both armies. PA has no reserve MBTs. Those M-48s are outdated and not worth investing. All the Armored and Mech Divs use different types of Tanks in PA, which will be analogous to Wehrmacht using Pz I,II and III very early, then using Pz II,III and IV and finally Pz IV and V as standard in Pz Divs supported by Pz VI heavy battalions, but Wehrmacht's Panzer Divs had smaller component of Armor than other countries.
> 
> *PA Inf Div can have up to 15,000 troops with around 8000-9000 fighting troops who are supported by just 45 Tanks ! *
> 
> Your idea is good though. You must have seen what happened in 1965. PA 1st Armd Div joined 6th Armd Div in Sialkot in the middle of the war after it withdrew from Khem Karan. However, now IA has 3 Armored Divs and few RAPIDs. IA will send its Armor (T-90 + BMP-2) through IBGs in all sectors and in good numbers to offset PA defences.
> 
> To go ahead with your idea, PA can raise an Armored Brigade Group and a Mechanized Brigade Group, then attach several other armor and mechanized battalions in case of war to bring both "Groups" to Divisional strength. If you look on the map, Rahim Yar Khan is a strategic location where PA can place these two formations and then launch them north, centre or south towards India.



But with heightened risk comes greater reward. The point of all the training, investment and planning should be to have a decisive victory in the shortest amount of time as we should not be embroiled in a long full fledged war given the resource and manpower difference between us and India. And neither should the war planning be to fight to a stalemate with insignificant gains or no gains an all. 

The threat of IA armour on all sectors can also be handled if we have a very high ratio of Anti-tank equipment. From what I gather on this forum is that there is a dearth of that so why not increase this resource. We already produce Bakhtar Shikan and upgrading it, if required, or locally producing a new advanced version should not be a big issue, at least theoretically. A large amount of anti-armour also provides at least some buffer in case the armoured element of a formation are rendered unusable. That formation may still hold its ground against any IA armour threat.

If I have read right, your approach reminds me of the treatment of PA 1st armour div and 11th Inf div during the 1965 war. Both were joined together for the first time as a formation during the war as a task force or battle group during the war. This ad-hocist approach, among many other factors, was responsible for its unsatisfactory performance in its sector and hence it had to be withdrawn.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## khanasifm

I think in case war/ skirmish in east Peshawar based Corp and Quetta based Corp minus perhaps a brigade move east as well Peshawar covering /adding north and Quetta adding to south


----------



## JPMM

khanasifm said:


> I think in case war/ skirmish in east Peshawar based Corp and Quetta based Corp minus perhaps a brigade move east as well Peshawar covering /adding north and Quetta adding to south


I believe yes regarding XIIth Quetta Corps, but not anymore with XIth Peshawar Corps. Since the COIN operations Pak Army is permenantly in FATA, they cant leave the area. There are reports of 19th InfDiv moving from Xth Corps to Ist Corps as reserve, replaced by 34th LID. These 19th InfDiv may join 37th InfDiv forming a new Corps as a reserve Infantry Formation.
It could be a new rapid reaction Corps, with abilities to go East or West as needed.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ich

Xlvee01 said:


> Bakhtar Shikan



What kind of missiles does the Bakhtar Shikan have? I only found Tandem. Are there missiles against Infanterie too?

Edit:

Ok, i found *HJ-8H
*
Edit 2:

And i found this but i think it is out dated

http://vatsrohit.blogspot.com/2018/02/pakistan-army-and-anti-tank-guided.html


----------



## Gryphon

Corps Reserves with 3× (I) brigades each were active at Bahawalpur and Malir two decades back. These brigades were later grouped under Mech Div HQs to enable coordination in operations. Adhocism sucks.




JPMM said:


> There are reports of 19th InfDiv moving from Xth Corps to Ist Corps as reserve, replaced by 34th LID. These 19th InfDiv may join 37th InfDiv forming a new Corps as a reserve Infantry Formation.
> It could be a new rapid reaction Corps, with abilities to go East or West as needed.



I don't see 1 Strike Corps being stripped of 37 Inf Div. The Corps is placed to operate on both banks of the Chenab river - and that would be 8 IABG + 37 Inf Div (north of Chenab) and 6 Armd Div + 17 Inf Div (south of Chenab).
* 19 Inf Div as reserve.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## khanasifm

JPMM said:


> I believe yes regarding XIIth Quetta Corps, but not anymore with XIth Peshawar Corps. Since the COIN operations Pak Army is permenantly in FATA, they cant leave the area. There are reports of 19th InfDiv moving from Xth Corps to Ist Corps as reserve, replaced by 34th LID. These 19th InfDiv may join 37th InfDiv forming a new Corps as a reserve Infantry Formation.
> It could be a new rapid reaction Corps, with abilities to go East or West as needed.



There is a reason for raising 76/79 new wings or regiments of Fc in case of need army corp will move east and security division and fc will take over west secondly west major threats are neutralised

Not sure what the time line for completion may be 5/10 years time though

But it does not means Peshawar Corp is moving just will go to its role of being reserve for east and will still remain on western side 

With merger of data into kpk move out does not mean anything but army will be restricted to cannts 

https://www.dawn.com/news/1297452

https://www.thenews.com.pk/tns/detail/568232-army-leave-tribal-areas-2022

https://www.app.com.pk/72-wings-of-...-effective-management-senate-bodies-informed/


----------



## Ich

For me a MechInf has to be fast, quick and dirty. Its not good for the function of a MechInf to mix it up with other troops

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JPMM

Gryphon said:


> Corps Reserves with 3× (I) brigades each were active at Bahawalpur and Malir two decades back. These brigades were later grouped under Mech Div HQs to enable coordination in operations. Adhocism sucks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see 1 Strike Corps being stripped of 37 Inf Div. The Corps is placed to operate on both banks of the Chenab river - and that would be 8 IABG + 37 Inf Div (north of Chenab) and 6 Armd Div + 17 Inf Div (south of Chenab).
> * 19 Inf Div as reserve.


Exactly my friend, Ist Corps south of Chenab, New Corps north of Chenab, all the Divisions are allready in place that way. Just need na extra IABG for Ist Corps etc.



khanasifm said:


> There is a reason for raising 76/79 new wings or regiments of Fc in case of need army corp will move east and security division and fc will take over west secondly west major threats are neutralised
> 
> Not sure what the time line for completion may be 5/10 years time though
> 
> But it does not means Peshawar Corp is moving just will go to its role of being reserve for east and will still remain on western side
> 
> With merger of data into kpk move out does not mean anything but army will be restricted to cannts
> 
> https://www.dawn.com/news/1297452
> 
> https://www.thenews.com.pk/tns/detail/568232-army-leave-tribal-areas-2022
> 
> https://www.app.com.pk/72-wings-of-...-effective-management-senate-bodies-informed/


Just a small incitation to violance on FATA (provocked by the Indian RAW), and your GHQ wont let go XIth Corps East. Were is Plan-B?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## khanasifm

JPMM said:


> Exactly my friend, Ist Corps south of Chenab, New Corps north of Chenab, all the Divisions are allready in place that way. Just need na extra IABG for Ist Corps etc.
> 
> 
> Just a small incitation to violance on FATA (provocked by the Indian RAW), and your GHQ wont let go XIth Corps East. Were is Plan-B?



Your ghq ?? Haha 

Got it go home and do not worry not your headache [emoji856]

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Xlvee01 said:


> But with heightened risk comes greater reward. The point of all the training, investment and planning should be to have a decisive victory in the shortest amount of time as we should not be embroiled in a long full fledged war given the resource and manpower difference between us and India. And neither should the war planning be to fight to a stalemate with insignificant gains or no gains an all.
> 
> The threat of IA armour on all sectors can also be handled if we have a very high ratio of Anti-tank equipment. From what I gather on this forum is that there is a dearth of that so why not increase this resource. We already produce Bakhtar Shikan and upgrading it, if required, or locally producing a new advanced version should not be a big issue, at least theoretically. A large amount of anti-armour also provides at least some buffer in case the armoured element of a formation are rendered unusable. That formation may still hold its ground against any IA armour threat.
> 
> If I have read right, your approach reminds me of the treatment of PA 1st armour div and 11th Inf div during the 1965 war. Both were joined together for the first time as a formation during the war as a task force or battle group during the war. This ad-hocist approach, among many other factors, was responsible for its unsatisfactory performance in its sector and hence it had to be withdrawn.


In 1965, 1st Armored Div had minimal infantry support which is why tanks were shot up easily by Indian RRs. If Infantry had been deployed effectively, they would have flushed out the ambushing Indian forces. Tanks cannot advance without infantry, tanks cannot operate on their own. 

ATGM is a defensive weapon. It can be used offensively, yes, but the main offensive weapon of an Army is Tank. There has to be sizeable offensive force in every region of operation. "Counter-attack" is a term used in military which is used to offset advantage gained by the enemy. Did you read about Rommel's campaign in Africa ? He never consolidated his position by building defenses, he kept advances with whatever force he had. It's a gamble as he retreated twice along the route that he won, but a middle approach can be sought. He kept pressurizing his enemy but neither he nor his enemy could get a foot hold of territory for long till Montgomery came along. Rommel's example is extreme, however counter attack is important. Infantry has to be supported with tanks against enemy infantry and if possible by strike aircrafts. So if Indian Army attacks and captures a Pakistani village or town, Pakistan should have sufficient armor along with majority infantry to counter-attack not just captured area, but also attack Indian reinforcements pouring in to consolidate that area, attack Indian supply lines to cut off enemy's link from its rear and also to defend against another attack when the reserve battalions are thrown in by Indian Commander which had been held back initially. For all this, Pakistan needs Tanks. Infantry cannot handle all these Military build ups by Indian Army. Most importantly, after Indian Army is dislodged from pakistani soil, then tanks are needed to attack Indian forces in Indian territory. All this cannot be done with ATGMs alone. 

Pakistan uses its Brigade sized forces or Ad-hoc brigade sized forces effectively. This was seen in deployment of Changez Force in 1971. If you read 1971 war threads, you will see that atleast one brigade of every Division had performed much better than the whole division on its own. US Military has moved to Brigade Combat Teams (Stryker Bdes). India has moves to IBGs which are larger than Bde but smaller than Div. Pakistan itself is expected to use mixed Brigade sized forces comprising of armor, infantry, artillery, AD, Gunships to stop or delay a much larger Indian force. 

Through Pakistan Military's deployment, now there are 4 armor/mechanized divisions capable of penetrating into India at four various places instead of a single area like you want. Concentrating all the armored force towards a single target will attract IAF, missiles, ATGMs and lots of Indian infantry in that area. Pakistan will lose initiative elsewhere. India will use minimal armor forces to counter this Pakistan Armored Corps size thrust and then India will create its own Corps sized Armored forces using that force to enter Pakistan hundreds of miles away. Pakistan won't have sufficient tanks to stop that Indian armored attack and then counter attack.



JPMM said:


> Just a small incitation to violance on FATA (provocked by the Indian RAW), and your GHQ wont let go XIth Corps East. Were is Plan-B?


Plan-B is Second Div strength force of FC which is now operational.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

Signalian said:


> For all this, Pakistan needs Tanks.


How would u compare Pakistani Tanks with Indian Tanks in terms of their capabilities?


----------



## Signalian

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> How would u compare Pakistani Tanks with Indian Tanks in terms of their capabilities?


T-90 is a very capable MBT.
BMP-2 is an effective IFV


----------



## Ich

Signalian said:


> In 1965, 1st Armored Div had minimal infantry support which is why tanks were shot up easily by Indian RRs. If Infantry had been deployed effectively, they would have flushed out the ambushing Indian forces. Tanks cannot advance without infantry, tanks cannot operate on their own.
> 
> ATGM is a defensive weapon. It can be used offensively, yes, but the main offensive weapon of an Army is Tank. There has to be sizeable offensive force in every region of operation. "Counter-attack" is a term used in military which is used to offset advantage gained by the enemy. Did you read about Rommel's campaign in Africa ? He never consolidated his position by building defenses, he kept advances with whatever force he had. It's a gamble as he retreated twice along the route that he won, but a middle approach can be sought. He kept pressurizing his enemy but neither he nor his enemy could get a foot hold of territory for long till Montgomery came along. Rommel's example is extreme, however counter attack is important. Infantry has to be supported with tanks against enemy infantry and if possible by strike aircrafts. So if Indian Army attacks and captures a Pakistani village or town, Pakistan should have sufficient armor along with majority infantry to counter-attack not just captured area, but also attack Indian reinforcements pouring in to consolidate that area, attack Indian supply lines to cut off enemy's link from its rear and also to defend against another attack when the reserve battalions are thrown in by Indian Commander which had been held back initially. For all this, Pakistan needs Tanks. Infantry cannot handle all these Military build ups by Indian Army. Most importantly, after Indian Army is dislodged from pakistani soil, then tanks are needed to attack Indian forces in Indian territory. All this cannot be done with ATGMs alone.
> 
> Pakistan uses its Brigade sized forces or Ad-hoc brigade sized forces effectively. This was seen in deployment of Changez Force in 1971. If you read 1971 war threads, you will see that atleast one brigade of every Division had performed much better than the whole division on its own. US Military has moved to Brigade Combat Teams (Stryker Bdes). India has moves to IBGs which are larger than Bde but smaller than Div. Pakistan itself is expected to use mixed Brigade sized forces comprising of armor, infantry, artillery, AD, Gunships to stop or delay a much larger Indian force.
> 
> Through Pakistan Military's deployment, now there are 4 armor/mechanized divisions capable of penetrating into India at four various places instead of a single area like you want. Concentrating all the armored force towards a single target will attract IAF, missiles, ATGMs and lots of Indian infantry in that area. Pakistan will lose initiative elsewhere. India will use minimal armor forces to counter this Pakistan Armored Corps size thrust and then India will create its own Corps sized Armored forces using that force to enter Pakistan hundreds of miles away. Pakistan won't have sufficient tanks to stop that Indian armored attack and then counter attack.
> 
> 
> Plan-B is Second Div strength force of FC which is now operational.



Well, Rommel is a bad example. Not in his offensive actions, but in his badness to see the whole mediteranian theater including how is it going with the supplies for his troops and how can the enemy supply and how the enemy can cut his supplielines. Also air cover/air superiority. All these things were underrated if not ignored by him. Bullet point Malta.

https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/cia-document-describes-nazi-plan-to-invade-malta.531355

And yes, tanks are offensive weapons and can take on various targets cause auf their various ammunition and their ability to come into combat range cause of their armour. Me think this is shifting towards modern ATGMs and their meanwhile also various missiles and their meanwhile also larger range. But this will not be the end in this development. The future will be MechInfs (fast,quick,dirty) in combination with modern ATGMs and (!) small cruise missiles with range of up to 100 km, tube mounted on APCs, used against e.g. artillery what is builded up behind the enemy lines or air defence also builded up behind enemy lines or against hard points and so on. Small CMs already exists like Spear-3 from MDBA.


----------



## Gryphon

JPMM said:


> Exactly my friend, Ist Corps south of Chenab, New Corps north of Chenab, all the Divisions are allready in place that way. Just need na extra IABG for Ist Corps etc.



North of Chenab, we have 4× Inf Bdes of 23 Div < 10 (holding) Corps < HQ Northern Command (under raising) deployed:

3 AK Bde - Kotli
4 AK Bde - Bhimber
66 Inf Bde - Chamb
333 Inf Bde - Jalalpur Jattan
And there is HQ Central Command at Kharian and its subordinate 1 (strike) Corps > 17, 19, 37 Inf Div's + 8 IABG. How do you carve out a new corps and what will be its AOR?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mumm-Ra

Signalian said:


> In 1965, 1st Armored Div had minimal infantry support which is why tanks were shot up easily by Indian RRs. If Infantry had been deployed effectively, they would have flushed out the ambushing Indian forces. Tanks cannot advance without infantry, tanks cannot operate on their own.
> 
> ATGM is a defensive weapon. It can be used offensively, yes, but the main offensive weapon of an Army is Tank. There has to be sizeable offensive force in every region of operation. "Counter-attack" is a term used in military which is used to offset advantage gained by the enemy. Did you read about Rommel's campaign in Africa ? He never consolidated his position by building defenses, he kept advances with whatever force he had. It's a gamble as he retreated twice along the route that he won, but a middle approach can be sought. He kept pressurizing his enemy but neither he nor his enemy could get a foot hold of territory for long till Montgomery came along. Rommel's example is extreme, however counter attack is important. Infantry has to be supported with tanks against enemy infantry and if possible by strike aircrafts. So if Indian Army attacks and captures a Pakistani village or town, Pakistan should have sufficient armor along with majority infantry to counter-attack not just captured area, but also attack Indian reinforcements pouring in to consolidate that area, attack Indian supply lines to cut off enemy's link from its rear and also to defend against another attack when the reserve battalions are thrown in by Indian Commander which had been held back initially. For all this, Pakistan needs Tanks. Infantry cannot handle all these Military build ups by Indian Army. Most importantly, after Indian Army is dislodged from pakistani soil, then tanks are needed to attack Indian forces in Indian territory. All this cannot be done with ATGMs alone.
> 
> Pakistan uses its Brigade sized forces or Ad-hoc brigade sized forces effectively. This was seen in deployment of Changez Force in 1971. If you read 1971 war threads, you will see that atleast one brigade of every Division had performed much better than the whole division on its own. US Military has moved to Brigade Combat Teams (Stryker Bdes). India has moves to IBGs which are larger than Bde but smaller than Div. Pakistan itself is expected to use mixed Brigade sized forces comprising of armor, infantry, artillery, AD, Gunships to stop or delay a much larger Indian force.
> 
> Through Pakistan Military's deployment, now there are 4 armor/mechanized divisions capable of penetrating into India at four various places instead of a single area like you want. Concentrating all the armored force towards a single target will attract IAF, missiles, ATGMs and lots of Indian infantry in that area. Pakistan will lose initiative elsewhere. India will use minimal armor forces to counter this Pakistan Armored Corps size thrust and then India will create its own Corps sized Armored forces using that force to enter Pakistan hundreds of miles away. Pakistan won't have sufficient tanks to stop that Indian armored attack and then counter attack.
> 
> 
> Plan-B is Second Div strength force of FC which is now operational.



And I believe ad-hocism might one of the reasons for such a foresight. You can not just jumble people together in a high pressure situation and expect them to work just fine. This may work at the lower level where there is less coordination required and the ground staff may be adept at pulling it off. But they won't give the same returns when practiced at a higher level. 

The shortage of equipment of nearly all types is well known. We do not have long range air cover, we do not have IFVs, our tanks production rate is disastrously low and so on. We all would like to have more of it but I can't see that happening in the near future. Not till we pull off some impressive economic growth figures. In the end, it was more men and material that enabled the British to beat the Germans in Africa. Rommel may have been a brilliant tactician and field commander but he was not a very goof theatre commander. Increased effectiveness of ATGMs was probably one major reason, out of many, for buying the Cobras and then Zulus in the first place. Its an excellent platform for both offensive and defensive options and, as its airborne, it gives us much more flexibility. I hope we might look to replace the Zulus with Chinese or Russian options. 

If India can counter our armoured thrust with minimal armour, why shouldn't we be able to do the same to theirs. Right now we have four armoured/mech div who will be used for counteracting the Indians and then take the fight to their land. Shouldn't we two of them together in a theatre to really hurt them where it counts. Provided, this formation has good air cover and auxiliary support. Whereas, we can utlize the other two for countering Indian armour threat and capturing any lost territory and even take the fight to their own land while the armoured corps wreaks havoc in our preferred choice of attack. Throw in the FC into the mix and we have reserves that are tough and seriously under appreciated. These guys might prove as the NLI did in kargil.

Another question though, what are our chances of withstanding an intitial IA fullscale attack? We have a riposte doctrine but are we big enough to absorb an initial full scale attack.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Cuirassier

I believe the current ORBAT gives us a hint on GHQ's planned use of the I Corps. 23 Div is under X Corps and since Central Command does not have nominal authority over it, coordinating an offensive with I Corps across Tawi from the west would be difficult. But an approach from the flanks of the Phuklian Salient would be easier, if initiative is taken, as a direct threat to the Marala Headworks is not affordable again.

ARN's most valuable use would definitely be by exploiting the Shakargarh-Narowal Bulge, but that would depend on who takes the initiative first, and it should be kept in mind that the Indians would surely be ready for a '71 style massed offensive to lure our ARN into a slugfest. 

23 Div would be most balanced by holding it's ground in a defensive attritional battle and conduct only limited tactical assaults to disrupt enemy balance, a replay of the '71 Chamb feat would be too risky. Hence there is no need to raise a new Corps, IMO.


Gryphon said:


> North of Chenab, we have 4× Inf Bdes of 23 Div < 10 (holding) Corps < HQ Northern Command (under raising) deployed:
> 
> 3 AK Bde - Kotli
> 4 AK Bde - Bhimber
> 66 Inf Bde - Chamb
> 333 Inf Bde - Jalalpur Jattan
> And there is HQ Central Command at Kharian and its subordinate 1 (strike) Corps > 17, 19, 37 Inf Div's + 8 IABG. How do you carve out a new corps and what will be its AOR?


----------



## Gryphon

TF141 said:


> I believe the current ORBAT gives us a hint on GHQ's planned use of the I Corps. 23 Div is under X Corps and since Central Command does not have nominal authority over it, coordinating an offensive with I Corps across Tawi from the west would be difficult. But an approach from the flanks of the Phuklian Salient would be easier, if initiative is taken, as a direct threat to the Marala Headworks is not affordable again.
> 
> ARN's most valuable use would definitely be by exploiting the Shakargarh-Narowal Bulge, but that would depend on who takes the initiative first, and it should be kept in mind that the Indians would surely be ready for a '71 style massed offensive to lure our ARN into a slugfest.
> 
> 23 Div would be most balanced by holding it's ground in a defensive attritional battle and conduct only limited tactical assaults to disrupt enemy balance, a replay of the '71 Chamb feat would be too risky. Hence there is no need to raise a new Corps, IMO.



If 19 Inf Div can be placed under HQ 1 Corps, who knows 23 Inf Div may turn subordinate HQ 30 Corps.


----------



## Cuirassier

Gryphon said:


> If 19 Inf Div can be placed under HQ 1 Corps, who knows 23 Inf Div may turn subordinate HQ 30 Corps.


Possible but 30 Corps AOR is Chenab-Ravi Corridor I reckon.


----------



## aliaselin

Hellfire said:


> Officially 62 Armoured Units in Indian Army. That is 62 x 59 1st line held. So, 3658 tanks in 1st line.


How 62?
2 armored div = 14 reg
1 mechanized div = 3 reg
5 RAPID = 10 reg
Independent reg under 16 inf div = 16 reg
5 Independent armored brigade = 10 reg
2 Independent mechanized brigade = 2 reg
total = 55 reg?


----------



## Signalian

Xlvee01 said:


> And I believe ad-hocism might one of the reasons for such a foresight. You can not just jumble people together in a high pressure situation and expect them to work just fine. This may work at the lower level where there is less coordination required and the ground staff may be adept at pulling it off. But they won't give the same returns when practiced at a higher level.
> 
> The shortage of equipment of nearly all types is well known. We do not have long range air cover, we do not have IFVs, our tanks production rate is disastrously low and so on. We all would like to have more of it but I can't see that happening in the near future. Not till we pull off some impressive economic growth figures. In the end, it was more men and material that enabled the British to beat the Germans in Africa. Rommel may have been a brilliant tactician and field commander but he was not a very goof theatre commander. Increased effectiveness of ATGMs was probably one major reason, out of many, for buying the Cobras and then Zulus in the first place. Its an excellent platform for both offensive and defensive options and, as its airborne, it gives us much more flexibility. I hope we might look to replace the Zulus with Chinese or Russian options.
> 
> If India can counter our armoured thrust with minimal armour, why shouldn't we be able to do the same to theirs. Right now we have four armoured/mech div who will be used for counteracting the Indians and then take the fight to their land. Shouldn't we two of them together in a theatre to really hurt them where it counts. Provided, this formation has good air cover and auxiliary support. Whereas, we can utlize the other two for countering Indian armour threat and capturing any lost territory and even take the fight to their own land while the armoured corps wreaks havoc in our preferred choice of attack. Throw in the FC into the mix and we have reserves that are tough and seriously under appreciated. These guys might prove as the NLI did in kargil.
> 
> Another question though, what are our chances of withstanding an intitial IA fullscale attack? We have a riposte doctrine but are we big enough to absorb an initial full scale attack.



The training doctrine allows formations of any level (platoons up to Divs) to work together. Ad Hoc forces is not the issue, Zulfiqar force in 1965 Chawinda and Changez force in 1971, held back attacks of much superior forces. The issue you would want to address is "Change of Command" in midst of war. Second issue, which now seems much addressed is, training of General staff in command position. I say its now addressed due to recent Ops seen in WOT, results of Divisional command are much better. 

Rommel had the drive which made British insane. Pakistani and Indian military commanders are mainly trained on British traditions. So who can put a crack into that ? Someone like Rommel. Yes I know that Rommel eventually got defeated by British General Montgomery, but what was Montgomery's style? gather forces, put them in defense, be very cautious in movement. So in 1971, both armies did that. Where were armored divisions of PA and IA in 1971? Waiting for the other to attack, just like Montgomery, who let Rommel attack.

ATGM can be countered easily in subcontinent since both armies (PA and IA) are infantry dominant and it wull be expected from infantry to finish off ATGM teams as Armor advances. Syria war showed it too. MBT's own APS is an additional advantage but subject to technology, accessibility and if it performs in the war, most importantly, after a couple of days of war, both sides will know how to effectively destroy MBTs protected by APS. No weapon is invincible in a conventional war. It will always be a combo of Infantry-Armor-Artillery-SAM-Aviation that will help win a skirmish or war, not one weapon alone - Combined Arms. Gunships for PA are constantly required in COIN war on west, not just against Indian armor.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Mumm-Ra

Signalian said:


> The training doctrine allows formations of any level (platoons up to Divs) to work together. Ad Hoc forces is not the issue, Zulfiqar force in 1965 Chawinda and Changez force in 1971, held back attacks of much superior forces. The issue you would want to address is "Change of Command" in midst of war. Second issue, which now seems much addressed is, training of General staff in command position. I say its now addressed due to recent Ops seen in WOT, results of Divisional command are much better.
> 
> Rommel had the drive which made British insane. Pakistani and Indian military commanders are mainly trained on British traditions. So who can put a crack into that ? Someone like Rommel. Yes I know that Rommel eventually got defeated by British General Montgomery, but what was Montgomery's style? gather forces, put them in defense, be very cautious in movement. So in 1971, both armies did that. Where were armored divisions of PA and IA in 1971? Waiting for the other to attack, just like Montgomery, who let Rommel attack.
> 
> ATGM can be countered easily in subcontinent since both armies (PA and IA) are infantry dominant and it wull be expected from infantry to finish off ATGM teams as Armor advances. Syria war showed it too. MBT's own APS is an additional advantage but subject to technology, accessibility and if it performs in the war, most importantly, after a couple of days of war, both sides will know how to effectively destroy MBTs protected by APS. No weapon is invincible in a conventional war. It will always be a combo of Infantry-Armor-Artillery-SAM-Aviation that will help win a skirmish or war, not one weapon alone - Combined Arms. Gunships for PA are constantly required in COIN war on west, not just against Indian armor.



Got your point. Though I think it will create one hell of a nightmare for logistics. Not sure they would like it

So they need a Rommel to kick them around a bit before they learn something. As you mentioned, the recent WOT might actually be that kick. However, they were fighting a relatively lightly armed adversary without the tools for a full fledged war. And it took us more than a decade to get rid them. It is too early to say how our current crop of commanders will fare against a fully armed army. 

Agreed again with your second point.
​

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tipu7

Signalian said:


> PA's Mechanised Division:
> 
> A Brigade: Armoured Regiment + Armoured Regiment + Mechanised Infantry Battalion.
> 
> B Brigade: Armoured Regiment + Armoured Regiment + Mechanised Infantry Battalion.
> 
> C Brigade: Armoured Regiment + Mechanised Infantry Battalion + Mechanised Infantry Battalion.


Pakistan Army Armored Brigades have total Two Armored Brigades (total four armored regiments).
Your configuration suggests that Pakistan Army Mechanized Divisions have more Armored Regiments (5) than that of Armored Division (4).

If question is to be asked then,
What is the configuration difference between Armored Division and Mechanized Division?
@Gryphon @Signalian

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Tipu7 said:


> Pakistan Army Armored Brigades have total Two Armored Brigades (total four armored regiments).
> Your configuration suggests that Pakistan Army Mechanized Divisions have more Armored Regiments (5) than that of Armored Division (4).
> 
> If question is to be asked then,
> What is the configuration difference between Armored Division and Mechanized Division?
> @Gryphon @Signalian



I mixed up information as i try to give info close to reality but not 100% as PDF is an online forum and i have consistently noticed a surge of Guest numbers rising when i post in some Army/AF threads (like 2 members and suddenly 15-25 guests viewing post), who are these 15-25 guests viewing my post ? i dont know, so i have become cautious. 

Formation structure at Div and Bde keeps changing too.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## MastanKhan

Xlvee01 said:


> Got your point. Though I think it will create one hell of a nightmare for logistics. Not sure they would like it
> 
> So they need a Rommel to kick them around a bit before they learn something. As you mentioned, the recent WOT might actually be that kick. However, they were fighting a relatively lightly armed adversary without the tools for a full fledged war. And it took us more than a decade to get rid them. It is too early to say how our current crop of commanders will fare against a fully armed army.
> 
> Agreed again with your second point.
> ​



Hi,

An armored division was sitting in the jungle near Khanewal @ Pirowal---.

Tanks were visible to those who drove by as did my older cousins---.

Change of command may be inevitable---not for waiting for two days during a whiskey drinking binge and sexual orgies---.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Cuirassier

Tipu7 said:


> Pakistan Army Armored Brigades have total Two Armored Brigades (total four armored regiments).
> Your configuration suggests that Pakistan Army Mechanized Divisions have more Armored Regiments (5) than that of Armored Division (4).
> 
> If question is to be asked then,
> What is the configuration difference between Armored Division and Mechanized Division?
> @Gryphon @Signalian


Don't forget the Armoured Div Recce Regiment, makes it 5. I reckon there is another brigade but usually independent in peacetime, has 1 armoured regiment.


----------



## Tipu7

TF141 said:


> Don't forget the Armoured Div Recce Regiment, makes it 5. I reckon there is another brigade but usually independent in peacetime, has 1 armoured regiment.


Yeah that's make it 5 regiments. But again, 5 regiments each for armored division and mechanized division then what's the difference?


----------



## Signalian

Tipu7 said:


> Yeah that's make it 5 regiments. But again, 5 regiments each for armored division and mechanized division then what's


Keep it ad hoc 



TF141 said:


> I believe the current ORBAT gives us a hint on GHQ's planned use of the I Corps. 23 Div is under X Corps and since Central Command does not have nominal authority over it, coordinating an offensive with I Corps across Tawi from the west would be difficult. But an approach from the flanks of the Phuklian Salient would be easier, if initiative is taken, as a direct threat to the Marala Headworks is not affordable again.
> 
> ARN's most valuable use would definitely be by exploiting the Shakargarh-Narowal Bulge, but that would depend on who takes the initiative first, and it should be kept in mind that the Indians would surely be ready for a '71 style massed offensive to lure our ARN into a slugfest.
> 
> 23 Div would be most balanced by holding it's ground in a defensive attritional battle and conduct only limited tactical assaults to disrupt enemy balance, a replay of the '71 Chamb feat would be too risky. Hence there is no need to raise a new Corps, IMO.



A new division to should be added to either XXX Corps or IV Corps to look after Narowal area (North of Lahore). One of the two: 8th or 15th Infantry Division should be upgraded to mechanized.

This will free 1st Corps for a major offensive from Jammu till Amritsar.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gryphon

Tipu7 said:


> Yeah that's make it 5 regiments. But again, 5 regiments each for armored division and mechanized division then what's the difference?



26 Mech Div = 3× Armd/Mech Bdes. GOC from Armd Corps.
25 Mech Div = 2× Armd/Mech Bdes + 1× Inf Bde. GOC from Infantry.


----------



## TsAr

Signalian said:


> Pakistani and Indian military commanders are mainly trained on British traditions. So who can put a crack into that ? Someone like Rommel. Yes I know that Rommel eventually got defeated by British General Montgomery, but what was Montgomery's style? gather forces, put them in defense, be very cautious in movement. So in 1971, both armies did that. Where were armored divisions of PA and IA in 1971? Waiting for the other to attack, just like Montgomery, who let Rommel attack.


Commanders in 65 and 71 were trained by British, has the training style now evolved or are we still following the same doctrine.


----------



## Signalian

TsAr said:


> Commanders in 65 and 71 were trained by British, has the training style now evolved or are we still following the same doctrine.


Evolved.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TsAr

Signalian said:


> Evolved.


So it a mix of American and British now, plus our own experiences.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tipu7

TsAr said:


> So it a mix of American and British now, plus our own experiences.


The greatest factor to evolve the thinking process of Indo-Pak military planners is overt nuclearization of South Asia - leading to the employment of nuclear deterrent at strategic and tactical levels. Armored warfare is now far less relevant as it was in 65 or 71.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Dazzler

100 of these landed a while ago, modernized by Serbia..likely for reserve or FC units.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Sine Nomine

Dazzler said:


> 100 of these landed a while ago, modernized by Serbia..likely for reserve or FC units.


News about them first appeared in 2015 on PDF,were labeled false and thread closed.
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/serbia-sold-282-modernized-t-55-tanks-to-pakistan-report.384573/

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Dazzler

Sine Nomine said:


> News about them first appeared in 2015 on PDF,were labeled false and thread closed.
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/serbia-sold-282-modernized-t-55-tanks-to-pakistan-report.384573/



Some came, as per sources.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Gorgin Khan

Dazzler said:


> 100 of these landed a while ago, modernized by Serbia..likely for reserve or FC units.


----------



## Armchair

Very interesting. Are T-55s from Eastern Europe of better build quality than Chinese T-59s? Or is this for the Taliban?


----------



## Dazzler

Armchair said:


> Very interesting. Are T-55s from Eastern Europe of better build quality than Chinese T-59s? Or is this for the Taliban?



Serbia, upgraded by NKVD but they were meant for reserves. The ERA (ERO-1) package is better than Kontakt-5 - developed by VTI of Serbia.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Fieldmarshal

Doesn't get any better when u get them for almost next to not thing.


----------



## Armchair

Armchair said:


> Very interesting. Are T-55s from Eastern Europe of better build quality than Chinese T-59s? Or is this for the Taliban?



Very strange to go for this. I don't think it is explained by a marginally superior ERA. There are 101 other more likely options than this. Even Chinese T-59s can be had for next to nothing... which begs again and again, quite glaringly, the question - why?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dazzler

Armchair said:


> Very strange to go for this. I don't think it is explained by a marginally superior ERA. There are 101 other more likely options than this. Even Chinese T-59s can be had for next to nothing... which begs again and again, quite glaringly, the question - why?



The idea was to save 59s and 69s for Alzarrar upgrade later and put dirt cheap but effective 55s for FC on the Western border.


----------



## Armchair

Dazzler said:


> The idea was to save 59s and 69s for Alzarrar upgrade later and put dirt cheap but effective 55s for FC on the Western border.



Can you share where you got this idea / reference what you are saying? Because it is not a logical idea as Type 59s are among the cheapest tanks one can buy, specially used ones. 

Perhaps its an idea in your mind, and I am misunderstanding that it is an idea from PA.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

Dazzler said:


> 100 of these landed a while ago, modernized by Serbia..likely for reserve or FC units.


Plz compare them with Al Zarrar


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Dazzler said:


> The idea was to save 59s and 69s for Alzarrar upgrade later and put dirt cheap but effective 55s for FC on the Western border.


Makes no sense when you have such a large number of type-59/69 etc. We probably have over 1200 type-59 alone.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Dazzler

Armchair said:


> Can you share where you got this idea / reference what you are saying? Because it is not a logical idea as Type 59s are among the cheapest tanks one can buy, specially used ones.
> 
> Perhaps its an idea in your mind, and I am misunderstanding that it is an idea from PA.



I dont make purchases for the PA. Just shared what i heard from reliable sources.



DESERT FIGHTER said:


> Makes no sense when you have such a large number of type-59/69 etc. We probably have over 1200 type-59 alone.



600 of them are upgraded to Alzarrar.



Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> Plz compare them with Al Zarrar



AZ has better gun, armor, FCS, ammo and engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Armchair

Dazzler said:


> I dont make purchases for the PA. Just shared what i heard from reliable sources.
> 
> 
> 
> 600 of them are upgraded to Alzarrar.
> 
> 
> 
> AZ has better gun, armor, FCS, ammo and engine.





I think we need to get beyond this "my chacha told me" otherwise we won't have a productive quality forum, just a bunch of frustrated teens overloaded with hormones.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rvats

To the guys discussing Indian RAPIDs (Re-organized Army Plains Infantry Division), we've 7 x RAPIDs (confirmed) and possibly one more. Also, when doing armor comparison, remember that an Independent Armored Brigade Group (IABG) in case of Indian Army is bigger than its Pakistan counter-part.

- IA (I) Armd Bde - 3 x Armored Regiments + 1 x Mechanized Infantry (BMP-2) + 1 x Medium Regiment + Support troops.
- If I understand correctly, PA (I) Armd Bde has 2 x Armored Regiments + 1 x Mech Regiment.

A quick question - 

(1) Do PA Infantry Units also have ATGM sections?
(2) Or, do they rely on LAT/HAT battalion assets to be distributed to them as per requirement?

Just for reference, each IA infantry unit has ATGM section which is a mix of Milan-2T and Konkur-M missiles.

Thanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PanzerKiel

rvats said:


> To the guys discussing Indian RAPIDs (Re-organized Army Plains Infantry Division), we've 7 x RAPIDs (confirmed) and possibly one more. Also, when doing armor comparison, remember that an Independent Armored Brigade Group (IABG) in case of Indian Army is bigger than its Pakistan counter-part.
> 
> - IA (I) Armd Bde - 3 x Armored Regiments + 1 x Mechanized Infantry (BMP-2) + 1 x Medium Regiment + Support troops.
> - If I understand correctly, PA (I) Armd Bde has 2 x Armored Regiments + 1 x Mech Regiment.
> 
> A quick question -
> 
> (1) Do PA Infantry Units also have ATGM sections?
> (2) Or, do they rely on LAT/HAT battalion assets to be distributed to them as per requirement?
> 
> Just for reference, each IA infantry unit has ATGM section which is a mix of Milan-2T and Konkur-M missiles.
> 
> Thanks.



Our armored brigades are tailored for their task, with all sorts of combinations in orbat available. 

PA Infantry units do have potent ATGM assets.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Gryphon

rvats said:


> To the guys discussing Indian RAPIDs (Re-organized Army Plains Infantry Division), we've 7 x RAPIDs (confirmed) and possibly one more. Also, when doing armor comparison, remember that an Independent Armored Brigade Group (IABG) in case of Indian Army is bigger than its Pakistan counter-part.
> 
> - IA (I) Armd Bde - 3 x Armored Regiments + 1 x Mechanized Infantry (BMP-2) + 1 x Medium Regiment + Support troops.
> - If I understand correctly, PA (I) Armd Bde has 2 x Armored Regiments + 1 x Mech Regiment.
> 
> A quick question -
> 
> (1) Do PA Infantry Units also have ATGM sections?
> (2) Or, do they rely on LAT/HAT battalion assets to be distributed to them as per requirement?
> 
> Just for reference, each IA infantry unit has ATGM section which is a mix of Milan-2T and Konkur-M missiles.
> 
> Thanks.



Ok sanghi.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Armchair

@PanzerKiel @Signalian @Gryphon the T-55 story was apparently false. Do you guys have any input on it?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Cuirassier

Chill out man


Gryphon said:


> Ok sanghi.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PanzerKiel

Armchair said:


> @PanzerKiel @Signalian @Gryphon the T-55 story was apparently false. Do you guys have any input on it?



Which is that story?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pakistani Fighter

PanzerKiel said:


> Which is that story?


Upgraded T55s from Serbia for FC

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Syed Hammad Ahmed said:


> Upgraded T55s from Serbia for FC



Haven't heard that in my circle.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Gryphon

Armchair said:


> @PanzerKiel @Signalian @Gryphon the T-55 story was apparently false. Do you guys have any input on it?



It was fake news propagated by some websites. There are plenty of T-59s/69s available for handover to FC; will probably happen when pullout of army's armoured regiments from sensitive KPK areas accelerates.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## MastanKhan

Armchair said:


> Very strange to go for this. I don't think it is explained by a marginally superior ERA. There are 101 other more likely options than this. Even Chinese T-59s can be had for next to nothing... which begs again and again, quite glaringly, the question - why?



Hi, 

Sometimes it is all about what is available with what upgrades---condition and price---.

It is just like you are shopping for a car---you look around for 2 months---you buy one and after two weeks you want to see if you made the right deal---you find one $500 cheaper---

So---what are you gonna do---?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Joe Shearer

Gryphon said:


> Ok sanghi.



Please try to be polite. Nothing in his post shows any Sanghi affiliation.


----------



## Ahmet Pasha

Cheers Doc?


Joe Shearer said:


> Please try to be polite. Nothing in his post shows any Sanghi affiliation.


----------



## Joe Shearer

Ahmet Pasha said:


> Cheers Doc?



He is @rvats, and I don't know him from Adam. I am not Doc; you have the wrong address.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ahmet Pasha

Tum logo ka Cheers Doc bara interesting character hai. Chutti p hoga aj kal??


Joe Shearer said:


> He is @rvats, and I don't know him from Adam. I am not Doc; you have the wrong address.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

Ahmet Pasha said:


> Tum logo ka Cheers Doc bara interesting character hai. Chutti p hoga aj kal??



Sorry, he is on my ignore list. You must ask him personally. I cannot help you, nor, in this regard, wish to help you.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## araz

Joe Shearer said:


> Sorry, he is on my ignore list. You must ask him personally. I cannot help you, nor, in this regard, wish to help you.


Hey Jo.
Long time no hear. Hope you are keeping well. Live long and prosper.
Kind regards
A

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

araz said:


> Hey Jo.
> Long time no hear. Hope you are keeping well. Live long and prosper.
> Kind regards
> A



Thank you for those kind words. It's been a long time. I've been lucky and have been given a new lease of life, and am making the most of it.

Hope this finds you well, and hope that you and your dear ones are coping well with the Covid-19 thingy.

Warm regards

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## araz

Joe Shearer said:


> Thank you for those kind words. It's been a long time. I've been lucky and have been given a new lease of life, and am making the most of it.
> 
> Hope this finds you well, and hope that you and your dear ones are coping well with the Covid-19 thingy.
> 
> Warm regards


Happy to know you are recovering well. Hope you have a long happy and productive life( you can choose which form of production you care to think of). You are one of the few Indian posters I like to read as you keep a very balanced view point.
Keep smiling and keep well.
Kind regards

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Aamir Hussain

A tabulation of Tanks received by Pakistan since 1952

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
4


----------



## Tipu7

Aamir Hussain said:


> A tabulation of Tanks received by Pakistan since 1952
> View attachment 644214


You yourself are compilining this information or is sourcing it from somewhere else?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Aamir Hussain

Tipu7 said:


> You yourself are compilining this information or is sourcing it from somewhere else?


 I am compiling this off of SIPRI data

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tipu7

Aamir Hussain said:


> I am compiling this off of SIPRI data


As per book of Maj Gen Syed Ali, Pakistan acquired one regiment of T54/55 from Soviet Union after 1965 War. The numbers mentioned above are exaggerated.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PanzerKiel

Tipu7 said:


> As per book of Maj Gen Syed Ali, Pakistan acquired one regiment of T54/55 from Soviet Union after 1965 War. The numbers mentioned above are exaggerated.
> View attachment 644227


T34s stayed with us till almost 1975.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Tipu7

PanzerKiel said:


> T34s stayed with us till almost 1975.


Yes, and AFAIK they are still used for training purposes...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cuirassier

Some T34s with Armour School Nowshera?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JPMM

PanzerKiel said:


> T34s stayed with us till almost 1975.


Yes, 15th Lancers (Corps Armoured Recce Regiment)



Tipu7 said:


> Yes, and AFAIK they are still used for training purposes...


Its T55, not T34



Aamir Hussain said:


> A tabulation of Tanks received by Pakistan since 1952
> View attachment 644214



No M41, and the PT76 numbers were very much low, probably captured from India

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PanzerKiel

JPMM said:


> Yes, 15th Lancers (Corps Armoured Recce Regiment)
> 
> 
> Its T55, not T34
> 
> 
> 
> No M41, and the PT76 numbers were very much low, probably captured from India



Instead of M 41, it should be M36B2 tank busters.

... Which were part of our TDUs.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Reichmarshal

Theirs a t 34 parked at the gate of Attock fort.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Reichmarshal said:


> Theirs a t 34 parked at the gate of Attock fort.



Nopes, that is a M24 Chaffee.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Aamir Hussain

These are not my numbers but taken from SIPRI data base and compiled in one place so as to give the reader ease of readability. SIPRI is the foremost source of transfer of military equipment the world over.

I have over the years, discussed military matters, with a number of my relatives who served in armed forces upto to flag rank and some of my subordinates too who retired at flag rank. One thing that came out very clearly over the years, they were very familiar with what they were using and what the enemy had, but all other things they were almost unaware of. Furthermore, with my little experience of military service, the armed forces tends to compartmentalize your learning and information for obvious reasons and one tends to specialize in ones area of expertise. 

Revised supply position based upon input from all. Included M-39 Jacksons that i had missed out and T series light tanks. I have also added Wiki list and Global Security List based upon IISS research.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
5


----------



## PanzerKiel

Aamir Hussain said:


> These are not my numbers but taken from SIPRI data base and compiled in one place so as to give the reader ease of readability. SIPRI is the foremost source of transfer of military equipment the world over.
> 
> I have over the years, discussed military matters, with a number of my relatives who served in armed forces upto to flag rank and some of my subordinates too who retired at flag rank. One thing that came out very clearly over the years, they were very familiar with what they were using and what the enemy had, but all other things they were almost unaware of. Furthermore, with my little experience of military service, the armed forces tends to compartmentalize your learning and information for obvious reasons and one tends to specialize in ones area of expertise.
> 
> Revised supply position based upon input from all. Included M-39 Jacksons that i had missed out and T series light tanks. I have also added Wiki list and Global Security List based upon IISS research.
> 
> View attachment 644344



Bhai, i believe there are still some figures that need revision. Let me find the right documents... They will surely facilitate you....

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Aamir Hussain

PanzerKiel said:


> Bhai, i believe there are still some figures that need revision. Let me find the right documents... They will surely facilitate you....


Eagerly waiting for correction and update.

Btw some of the M 48/47 were sent to Iran for refurbishment which were never returned after the fall of Shah. So the totals might differ because of that.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Reichmarshal

PanzerKiel said:


> Nopes, that is a M24 Chaffee.


Nope a t 34 is parked at main entrance to the fort right next to this gate....on the right side of this gate....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JPMM

Reichmarshal said:


> Nope a t 34 is parked at main entrance to the fort right next to this gate....on the right side of this gate....
> 
> View attachment 644371


Its M24

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Reichmarshal

Apologies to both panzerkhel and jpmm, it is indeed a Chaffee.
Went their and verified it my self.....before this never paid much attention to it other than a passing glance.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## PakFactor

Aamir Hussain said:


> Eagerly waiting for correction and update.
> 
> Btw some of the M 48/47 were sent to Iran for refurbishment which were never returned after the fall of Shah. So the totals might differ because of that.



Have we gotten compensation of those M 47/47's still in Iranian hands?
Honestly, this is news to me we have equipment that wasn't returned this could have helped our border forces.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TsAr

Reichmarshal said:


> Apologies to both panzerkhel and jpmm, it is indeed a Chaffee.
> Went their and verified it my self.....before this never paid much attention to it other than a passing glance.
> View attachment 644887


u went all the way to attock to verify?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Reichmarshal

TsAr said:


> u went all the way to attock to verify?



Not that far, 1 hr - 1hr 15min drive.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PanzerKiel

Reichmarshal said:


> Apologies to both panzerkhel and jpmm, it is indeed a Chaffee.
> Went their and verified it my self.....before this never paid much attention to it other than a passing glance.
> View attachment 644887



....btw, nice Mercedes.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PakFactor

PanzerKiel said:


> ....btw, nice Mercedes.



Lol, I was going to ask which model he has.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Aamir Hussain

PakFactor said:


> Have we gotten compensation of those M 47/47's still in Iranian hands?
> Honestly, this is news to me we have equipment that wasn't returned this could have helped our border forces.



Those tank were used in the Iran-Iraq war and were destroyed. We go compensation in the shape of parts for C-130's during Musharraf era.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Dazzler



Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## PanzerKiel

Dazzler said:


>



Infantry school exercises.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## JPMM

PanzerKiel said:


> Infantry school exercises.


With T69IIMP retrofited with 100mm gun?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shah_Deu

Reichmarshal said:


> Apologies to both panzerkhel and jpmm, it is indeed a Chaffee.
> Went their and verified it my self.....before this never paid much attention to it other than a passing glance.
> View attachment 644887


Well i might be wrong, but you are most probably sitting behind a MB W-204, to the like of one shown here. Whether a facelift or not, I cant say!

PS: Forgive me Mods for being 'slightly' off topic

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## gangsta_rap



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Ahmet Pasha

What kind of tank is that??


Dazzler said:


>


----------



## Reichmarshal

Shah_Deu said:


> Well i might be wrong, but you are most probably sitting behind a MB W-204, to the like of one shown here. Whether a facelift or not, I cant say!
> 
> PS: Forgive me Mods for being 'slightly' off topic
> 
> View attachment 646971



Does it matter or has any thing to do with this thread ?
While we are at it could even be be a mercedes w212.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sms

Shah_Deu said:


> Well i might be wrong, but you are most probably sitting behind a MB W-204, to the like of one shown here. Whether a facelift or not, I cant say!
> 
> PS: Forgive me Mods for being 'slightly' off topic
> 
> View attachment 646971


Nice car!
Time to upgrade, new modals look stunning!


----------



## Reichmarshal

sms said:


> Nice car!
> Time to upgrade, new modals look stunning!



Easier said than done
Due to the ever appreciating dollar n criminally foolish govt auto policy, the price of all imports has registered a sharp increase making them impractical from a price stand point.
On the other hand if I ever decide to move to some where in Europe or Aus, will surely buy a maybach. 

Any way let's not derail the topic.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sms

Reichmarshal said:


> Easier said than done
> Due to the ever appreciating dollar n criminally foolish govt auto policy, the price of all imports has registered a sharp increase making them impractical from a price stand point.
> On the other hand if I ever decide to move to some where in Europe or Aus, will surely buy a maybach.
> 
> Any way let's not derail the topic.



Couldn't agree more. I'm driving 6 year old car.
Let's get back to topic.


----------



## Aamir Hussain

*Wanted to share this. It is a Battle Order of a typical Combined Arms Battalion of US Army. This formation is used in US Army since 2016 *

*U.S. Army Combined Arms Battalion (2016) 
By Brendan Matsuyama, Editor*

*The following is an overview of the current Combined Arms Battalion (CAB) of the U.S. Army Armored Brigade Combat Team (ABCT) as of 2016. These are the core maneuver battalions of the ABCT and are the U.S. Army's primary mechanized infantry and armor battalions.
Changes were made to the CAB in 2016, taking the battalion from 4 companies to 3 companies with 2 variations. One variation is biased towards armor while the other is biased towards infantry. An ABCT will have 1 Infantry CAB and 2 Armor CABs. This article covers both.*

*Contents:*

*Organization*
*Infantry CAB*
*Armor CAB*

*Discussion*
*Sources*



*
Combined Arms Battalion (Infantry)*

*Type: Combined Arms Battalion*
*Origin: U.S. Army (United States)*
*Integral Personnel: 40 Officers and 474 Enlisted*
*Attached Personnel: 10 Officers, 1 WO, 161 Enlisted*

*1× Headquarters & Headquarters Company (HHC)*

*1× Command Group — 12 Officers, 24 Enlisted*
*1× Intelligence Section (S2)*
*1× Operations Section (S3)*
*1× Fire Support Section*
*1× Liaison Officer (LNO)*
*1× Tactical Air Control Party (USAF Personnel)*

*1× Combat Trains — 5 Officers, 22 Enlisted*
*1× Personnel Section (S1)*
*1× Logistics Section (S4)*
*1× Communication Section (S6)*
*1× Unit Ministry Team (UMT)*

*1× Re-transmission Team — 3 Enlisted*
*1× Scout Platoon — 1 Officer, 35 Enlisted*
*1× Heavy Mortar Platoon — 1 Officer, 23 Enlisted*
*1× Sniper Squad — 10 Enlisted*
*1× Medical Treatment Platoon — 4 Officers, 34 Enlisted*
*1× Mine Roller Section — 1 Enlisted*
*1× Company Headquarters — 2 Officers, 5 Enlisted
*
*1× Attached Fire Support Cell* — 3 Officers, 21 Enlisted*
*1× Attached Fire Support Platoon** — 2 Officers, 5 Enlisted*
**Attached from Field Artillery Battalion. Attached Fire Support Cell is with the Command Group Fire Support Section when deployed.
**Attached from Field Artillery Battalion.

2× Mechanized Rifle Companies*

*1× Company Headquarters — 2 Officers, 10 Enlisted*
*3× Rifle Platoons — 1 Officer, 40 Enlisted each*
*1× Armor Company*

*1× Company Headquarters — 2 Officers, 12 Enlisted*
*3× Tank Platoons — 1 Officer, 15 Enlisted each*
*1× Forward Support Company**

*1× Company Headquarters — 2 Officers, 3 Enlisted*
*1× Field Feeding Section — 15 Enlisted*
*1× Distribution Platoon — 1 Officer, 30 Enlisted*
*1× Maintenance Platoon — 2 Officers, 1 Warrant Officer, 86 Enlisted*
**Attached from Brigade Support Battalion.

Combined Arms Battalion (Armor)*

*Type: Combined Arms Battalion*
*Origin: U.S. Army (United States)*
*Integral Personnel: 40 Officers and 400 Enlisted*
*Attached Personnel: 10 Officers, 1 WO, 161 Enlisted*

*1× Headquarters & Headquarters Company (HHC)*

*1× Command Group — 12 Officers, 24 Enlisted*
*1× Intelligence Section (S2)*
*1× Operations Section (S3)*
*1× Fire Support Section*
*1× Liaison Officer (LNO)*
*1× Tactical Air Control Party (USAF Personnel)*

*1× Combat Trains — 5 Officers, 22 Enlisted*
*1× Personnel Section (S1)*
*1× Logistics Section (S4)*
*1× Communication Section (S6)*
*1× Unit Ministry Team (UMT)*

*1× Re-transmission Team — 3 Enlisted*
*1× Scout Platoon — 1 Officer, 35 Enlisted*
*1× Heavy Mortar Platoon — 1 Officer, 23 Enlisted*
*1× Sniper Squad — 10 Enlisted*
*1× Medical Treatment Platoon — 4 Officers, 32 Enlisted*
*2× Mine Roller Sections — 1 Enlisted each*
*1× Company Headquarters — 2 Officers, 5 Enlisted
*
*1× Attached Fire Support Cell* — 3 Officers, 21 Enlisted*
*1× Attached Fire Support Platoon** — 2 Officers, 5 Enlisted*
**Attached from Field Artillery Battalion.
Attached Fire Support Cell is with the Command Group Fire Support Sect. when deployed.
**Attached from Field Artillery Battalion.

1× Mechanized Rifle Company*

*1× Company Headquarters — 2 Officers, 10 Enlisted*
*3× Rifle Platoons — 1 Officer, 40 Enlisted each*
*2× Armor Companies*

*1× Company Headquarters — 2 Officers, 12 Enlisted*
*3× Tank Platoons — 1 Officer, 15 Enlisted each*
*1× Forward Support Company**

*1× Company Headquarters — 2 Officers, 2 Enlisted*
*1× Field Feeding Section — 15 Enlisted*
*1× Distribution Platoon — 1 Officer, 30 Enlisted*
*1× Maintenance Platoon — 2 Officers, 1 Warrant Officer, 91 Enlisted*
**Attached from Brigade Support Battalion.

Discussion*
The Combined Arms Battalion (CAB) is the primary maneuver unit of the Armored Brigade Combat Team (ABCT; Heavy Brigade Combat Team before 2012). Since 2016, the CAB has had a heterogeneous organization within ABCTs. Prior, CABs consisted principally of 2 Armor Companies and 2 Mechanized Infantry Rifle Companies. Following, CABs either consist of 1 Armor Company and 2 Mechanized Rifle Companies or 2 Armor Companies and 1 Mechanized Rifle Company. There are typically 1 of the former and 2 of the latter type per ABCT. The most noteworthy features of the CAB are the M1A1/M1A2 Abrams main battle tanks and M2A3 Bradley infantry fighting vehicles, composing the US Army's main armored force. As such, Armored BCTs are more oriented towards high-intensity, conventional warfare, although they did operate in Iraq in a counter-insurgency capacity following the initial invasion.



The ABCT is the heaviest basic unit of maneuver within the US Army. Their tracked armored vehicles compare to the wheeled Stryker BCT (motorized infantry with potential upgrade to mechanized infantry through Dragoon upgrades) and Infantry BCTs (who are organizationally foot mobile with potential for motorization with light trucks or MRAPs when in theater). This means CABs have the most firepower of any of the other BCT maneuver battalions and are very tactically mobile (especially when compared to Infantry BCTs). However, the logistical burden of a large amount of armored vehicles increases costs and reduces deployability. Further, many of the Armored BCTs advantages are negated by complex terrain. Deployability concerns can be mitigated by planning and by virtue of the fact that large conventional operations that'd explicitly require an Armored BCT would typically be heavily supported (and thus require a large airlift and/or sealift effort anyways) and have significant time in preparation. For more urgent, rapid reaction type scenarios that require immediate airlift delivery, an Infantry BCT would be more appropriate. In terms of deployability and firepower, the Stryker BCTs are essentially a middle of the road intermediary between the Infantry and Armored BCTs.


The Combined Arms Battalion consists of a Battalion HHC (headquarters and headquarters company), 3 maneuver companies, and a Forward Support Company attached from the Armored BCT's Brigade Support Battalion. The battalion comes under the overall command of a Lieutenant Colonel.


The Battalion HHC serves as the primary command and combat support element of the CAB, as well as providing combat service functions and leadership. One of the distinct features of CABs versus legacy tank or mechanized battalions is the presence of both armor and infantry leadership in the battalion. In both Armor and Infantry CABs, the Battalion Commander is allotted an Abrams main battle tank for combat (presumably so they are not limited by the lesser protection of the M2A3 Bradley if they need to travel with an Armor Company). The HHC includes an important portion of the Combat Trains, as well as a Scout Platoon (in HMMVW trucks and M3A3 Bradleys), 120mm Heavy Mortars, Sniper Squad, and Medical Treatment Platoon with M113 ambulances and combat medics to be attached to the companies. There is also 1 Mine Roller Section per Armor Company, which consist of an M916A1 tractor and semi-trailer for hauling 3 mine clearing blades and 1 mine clearing roller for attachment to Abrams tanks. Three Bradleys with fire support personnel and forward observers are also typically attached from the brigade's Field Artillery Battalion to be attached to the maneuver companies. A Company Intelligence Support Team (COIST) is also typically attached to the battalion intelligence staff from the brigade Military Intelligence Company (BEB) with a Company Intelligence Analyst) being made available to each company.


The Forward Support Company (FSC) attached from the Brigade Service Battalion provides additional combat service support. This includes a Field Feeding Section (battalion mess), ammunition/equipment/petrol distribution services, field maintenance, and armored recovery. Field Maintenance Teams can be attached from the FSC to Armor and Mechanized Infantry Company trains for second-line maintenance and recovery. These teams include an M88A2 IRV "Hercules" recovery vehicle (for Armor Companies) or M88A1 Medium recovery vehicle (for Mechanized Infantry Companies), an M7 Forward Repair System mounted on a PLS Transporter, an M984A1 HEMTT Wrecker, an M1084 cargo truck, and 2 HMMVW trucks. Key personnel include a Motor Sergeant, general mechanics, Abrams systems specialists, Bradley mechanics, and wheeled vehicle mechanics.


The CAB's maneuver elements are the mechanized infantry Rifle Company and Armor Company. We have dedicated articles on these formations you can read if you want to know exactly what personnel each type of company has, but the Sparknotes is Rifle Companies are mechanized infantry mounted in M2A3 Bradleys and Armor Companies are M1A2 or M1A1 Abrams main battle tanks. Both companies are broadly organized the same, with 1 Company Headquarters (2 armored fighting vehicles each) and 3 Platoons (with 4 vehicles each). Supporting non-combat elements in their Company Headquarters are broadly identical. A Company Intelligence Analyst, Emergency Care/Combat Medic personnel, and a Fire Support Team (FIST) with their own Bradley are typically attached to maneuver companies. In some cases the FIST's Bradley can replaced the integral M113 as a mobile armored command post. For Armor Companies, a Field Maintenance Team is usually attached. The CAB commander may task organize their Rifle Companies and Armor Companies into Armor and Mechanized Infantry Company Teams, forming ad hoc combined arms companies able to conduct a wide range of close combat missions.



Such task organizations can be used to negate the disadvantages inherent to infantry and tanks through mutual combined arms support. One of the most significant issues the Company Team addresses is the tank's limited use in retaining ground that has been taken and more limited situational awareness during security; roles more suited to the infantry. Infantry are also more well suited to asymmetrical threats and are generally more versatile in their delivery, while tanks have the advantage in lethality and survivability.



At the same time, there has been concern raised by some that the reorganization of specialist battalions into combined arms battalions reduces the core competency of the unit as a whole. The fact that US Army officers cycle out of tactical command billets into non-tactical staff positions outside of an ABCT periodically, thus reducing the time an officer can gain competency and hone skill, is reduced. This contrasts with the Russian system, where tactical commanders typically don't cycle through non-tactical staff positions. Further, because Russian brigades retain pure battalions, there is a clear throughline from tank platoon leader, to the tank company, to the tank battalion. Thus, a Russian battalion commander typically has more experience as a commanding officer or deputy commanding officer in their specific competency than their American equivalent. It could be argued that CABs combine two types of units with very different training and sustainment requirements under the command of individuals that may or may not have significant experience in either the armor or mechanized infantry fields. This presents the interesting question of whether the close integration of the CAB is superior or inferior to pure Tank Battalions and Mechanized Infantry Battalions that can train in their own domains and be task organized at the brigade-level with other types of companies when needed.


Comparable Units Abroad


The Russian Grounds Forces don't typically operate combined arms battalions on a permanent basis, but brigades usually deploy their sub units as either ad hoc, combined arms Battalion Tactical Groups (BTG) or Company Tactical Groups (CTG). The BTG is the most directly applicable comparison, typically being a reinforced Motorized Rifle Battalion or Tank Battalion with a reinforcing Tank or Motorized Rifle Company respectively and additional brigade-level fires and sustainment. While it appears to be a goal for the Russians to make its brigades entirely deployable as 2-3 BTGs, unlike the American case it seems as though the choice of deploying only 1/3rd of the brigade maneuver elements is at least partially influenced by manpower concerns. The BTG isn't a new concept in the Russian practice, however, originating within the Forward Detachments of Soviet Motorized Rifle or Tank Regiments and organized in a similar manner.


The Swedish Army's Mechanized Battalions are organized similarly to the pre-2016 CAB, with 2 Tank Companies mounted in Strv 122 tanks and 2 Mechanized Companies mounted in Strf 9040.


The equivalent concept in the British Army is the Battle-group, which are task organized formations formed around either an Infantry Battalion or Armored Regiment (different terminology, but both battalion sized) within an Armored Infantry Brigade. Unlike CABs these are not permanent formations and can be reformed at the brigade-level to meet different threats. Armored Brigades would probably have about 3 to 4 Battle-groups depending on composition. A possible example composition could be 2 Armored Infantry Companies (see our article on the platoon) and 1 Armored Squadron. These could also be formed with Heavy Protected Mobility Infantry Companies, with each brigade typically having 1 Armored Regiment, 2 Armored Infantry Battalions, and 1 Heavy Protected Mobility Battalion.


The French Army's equivalent is the Combined Arms Battle Group (Groupement tactique interarmes or GTIA) which are essentially regiments (battalion-sized formations) reinforced with other combat arms and fires/sustainment from the brigade-level. The infantry-dominant versions are structured basically as 3 infantry companies and 1 tank company. The Battle Group is the first level at which combined arms formations take place.

Sources

MCoE Supplemental Manual 3-90 Force Structure Reference Data "Armored Brigade Combat Team" published October 2016
ATP 3-90.1 "Armor and Mechanized Infantry Company Team" published January 2016
FM 3-96 "Brigade Combat Team" published October 2015
Norris, Pete (2016) "Maximizing the Lethality of Armored Forces" published on The Strategy Brigade

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Joe Shearer

That was a great read.

A slightly heavier piece might be interesting reading to those who have gone through this. The file is attached.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Incog_nito

Is Pak Army looking to acquire more T-54/55s from ex-operators with upgrades?


----------



## Signalian

Aamir Hussain said:


> *Wanted to share this. It is a Battle Order of a typical Combined Arms Battalion of US Army. This formation is used in US Army since 2016 *
> 
> *U.S. Army Combined Arms Battalion (2016)
> By Brendan Matsuyama, Editor*
> 
> *The following is an overview of the current Combined Arms Battalion (CAB) of the U.S. Army Armored Brigade Combat Team (ABCT) as of 2016. These are the core maneuver battalions of the ABCT and are the U.S. Army's primary mechanized infantry and armor battalions.
> Changes were made to the CAB in 2016, taking the battalion from 4 companies to 3 companies with 2 variations. One variation is biased towards armor while the other is biased towards infantry. An ABCT will have 1 Infantry CAB and 2 Armor CABs. This article covers both.*
> 
> *Contents:*
> 
> *Organization*
> *Infantry CAB*
> *Armor CAB*
> 
> *Discussion*
> *Sources*
> 
> 
> 
> *
> Combined Arms Battalion (Infantry)*
> 
> *Type: Combined Arms Battalion*
> *Origin: U.S. Army (United States)*
> *Integral Personnel: 40 Officers and 474 Enlisted*
> *Attached Personnel: 10 Officers, 1 WO, 161 Enlisted*
> 
> *1× Headquarters & Headquarters Company (HHC)*
> 
> *1× Command Group — 12 Officers, 24 Enlisted*
> *1× Intelligence Section (S2)*
> *1× Operations Section (S3)*
> *1× Fire Support Section*
> *1× Liaison Officer (LNO)*
> *1× Tactical Air Control Party (USAF Personnel)*
> 
> *1× Combat Trains — 5 Officers, 22 Enlisted*
> *1× Personnel Section (S1)*
> *1× Logistics Section (S4)*
> *1× Communication Section (S6)*
> *1× Unit Ministry Team (UMT)*
> 
> *1× Re-transmission Team — 3 Enlisted*
> *1× Scout Platoon — 1 Officer, 35 Enlisted*
> *1× Heavy Mortar Platoon — 1 Officer, 23 Enlisted*
> *1× Sniper Squad — 10 Enlisted*
> *1× Medical Treatment Platoon — 4 Officers, 34 Enlisted*
> *1× Mine Roller Section — 1 Enlisted*
> *1× Company Headquarters — 2 Officers, 5 Enlisted
> *
> *1× Attached Fire Support Cell* — 3 Officers, 21 Enlisted*
> *1× Attached Fire Support Platoon** — 2 Officers, 5 Enlisted*
> **Attached from Field Artillery Battalion. Attached Fire Support Cell is with the Command Group Fire Support Section when deployed.
> **Attached from Field Artillery Battalion.
> 
> 2× Mechanized Rifle Companies*
> 
> *1× Company Headquarters — 2 Officers, 10 Enlisted*
> *3× Rifle Platoons — 1 Officer, 40 Enlisted each*
> *1× Armor Company*
> 
> *1× Company Headquarters — 2 Officers, 12 Enlisted*
> *3× Tank Platoons — 1 Officer, 15 Enlisted each*
> *1× Forward Support Company**
> 
> *1× Company Headquarters — 2 Officers, 3 Enlisted*
> *1× Field Feeding Section — 15 Enlisted*
> *1× Distribution Platoon — 1 Officer, 30 Enlisted*
> *1× Maintenance Platoon — 2 Officers, 1 Warrant Officer, 86 Enlisted*
> **Attached from Brigade Support Battalion.
> 
> Combined Arms Battalion (Armor)*
> 
> *Type: Combined Arms Battalion*
> *Origin: U.S. Army (United States)*
> *Integral Personnel: 40 Officers and 400 Enlisted*
> *Attached Personnel: 10 Officers, 1 WO, 161 Enlisted*
> 
> *1× Headquarters & Headquarters Company (HHC)*
> 
> *1× Command Group — 12 Officers, 24 Enlisted*
> *1× Intelligence Section (S2)*
> *1× Operations Section (S3)*
> *1× Fire Support Section*
> *1× Liaison Officer (LNO)*
> *1× Tactical Air Control Party (USAF Personnel)*
> 
> *1× Combat Trains — 5 Officers, 22 Enlisted*
> *1× Personnel Section (S1)*
> *1× Logistics Section (S4)*
> *1× Communication Section (S6)*
> *1× Unit Ministry Team (UMT)*
> 
> *1× Re-transmission Team — 3 Enlisted*
> *1× Scout Platoon — 1 Officer, 35 Enlisted*
> *1× Heavy Mortar Platoon — 1 Officer, 23 Enlisted*
> *1× Sniper Squad — 10 Enlisted*
> *1× Medical Treatment Platoon — 4 Officers, 32 Enlisted*
> *2× Mine Roller Sections — 1 Enlisted each*
> *1× Company Headquarters — 2 Officers, 5 Enlisted
> *
> *1× Attached Fire Support Cell* — 3 Officers, 21 Enlisted*
> *1× Attached Fire Support Platoon** — 2 Officers, 5 Enlisted*
> **Attached from Field Artillery Battalion.
> Attached Fire Support Cell is with the Command Group Fire Support Sect. when deployed.
> **Attached from Field Artillery Battalion.
> 
> 1× Mechanized Rifle Company*
> 
> *1× Company Headquarters — 2 Officers, 10 Enlisted*
> *3× Rifle Platoons — 1 Officer, 40 Enlisted each*
> *2× Armor Companies*
> 
> *1× Company Headquarters — 2 Officers, 12 Enlisted*
> *3× Tank Platoons — 1 Officer, 15 Enlisted each*
> *1× Forward Support Company**
> 
> *1× Company Headquarters — 2 Officers, 2 Enlisted*
> *1× Field Feeding Section — 15 Enlisted*
> *1× Distribution Platoon — 1 Officer, 30 Enlisted*
> *1× Maintenance Platoon — 2 Officers, 1 Warrant Officer, 91 Enlisted*
> **Attached from Brigade Support Battalion.
> 
> Discussion*
> The Combined Arms Battalion (CAB) is the primary maneuver unit of the Armored Brigade Combat Team (ABCT; Heavy Brigade Combat Team before 2012). Since 2016, the CAB has had a heterogeneous organization within ABCTs. Prior, CABs consisted principally of 2 Armor Companies and 2 Mechanized Infantry Rifle Companies. Following, CABs either consist of 1 Armor Company and 2 Mechanized Rifle Companies or 2 Armor Companies and 1 Mechanized Rifle Company. There are typically 1 of the former and 2 of the latter type per ABCT. The most noteworthy features of the CAB are the M1A1/M1A2 Abrams main battle tanks and M2A3 Bradley infantry fighting vehicles, composing the US Army's main armored force. As such, Armored BCTs are more oriented towards high-intensity, conventional warfare, although they did operate in Iraq in a counter-insurgency capacity following the initial invasion.
> 
> 
> 
> The ABCT is the heaviest basic unit of maneuver within the US Army. Their tracked armored vehicles compare to the wheeled Stryker BCT (motorized infantry with potential upgrade to mechanized infantry through Dragoon upgrades) and Infantry BCTs (who are organizationally foot mobile with potential for motorization with light trucks or MRAPs when in theater). This means CABs have the most firepower of any of the other BCT maneuver battalions and are very tactically mobile (especially when compared to Infantry BCTs). However, the logistical burden of a large amount of armored vehicles increases costs and reduces deployability. Further, many of the Armored BCTs advantages are negated by complex terrain. Deployability concerns can be mitigated by planning and by virtue of the fact that large conventional operations that'd explicitly require an Armored BCT would typically be heavily supported (and thus require a large airlift and/or sealift effort anyways) and have significant time in preparation. For more urgent, rapid reaction type scenarios that require immediate airlift delivery, an Infantry BCT would be more appropriate. In terms of deployability and firepower, the Stryker BCTs are essentially a middle of the road intermediary between the Infantry and Armored BCTs.
> 
> 
> The Combined Arms Battalion consists of a Battalion HHC (headquarters and headquarters company), 3 maneuver companies, and a Forward Support Company attached from the Armored BCT's Brigade Support Battalion. The battalion comes under the overall command of a Lieutenant Colonel.
> 
> 
> The Battalion HHC serves as the primary command and combat support element of the CAB, as well as providing combat service functions and leadership. One of the distinct features of CABs versus legacy tank or mechanized battalions is the presence of both armor and infantry leadership in the battalion. In both Armor and Infantry CABs, the Battalion Commander is allotted an Abrams main battle tank for combat (presumably so they are not limited by the lesser protection of the M2A3 Bradley if they need to travel with an Armor Company). The HHC includes an important portion of the Combat Trains, as well as a Scout Platoon (in HMMVW trucks and M3A3 Bradleys), 120mm Heavy Mortars, Sniper Squad, and Medical Treatment Platoon with M113 ambulances and combat medics to be attached to the companies. There is also 1 Mine Roller Section per Armor Company, which consist of an M916A1 tractor and semi-trailer for hauling 3 mine clearing blades and 1 mine clearing roller for attachment to Abrams tanks. Three Bradleys with fire support personnel and forward observers are also typically attached from the brigade's Field Artillery Battalion to be attached to the maneuver companies. A Company Intelligence Support Team (COIST) is also typically attached to the battalion intelligence staff from the brigade Military Intelligence Company (BEB) with a Company Intelligence Analyst) being made available to each company.
> 
> 
> The Forward Support Company (FSC) attached from the Brigade Service Battalion provides additional combat service support. This includes a Field Feeding Section (battalion mess), ammunition/equipment/petrol distribution services, field maintenance, and armored recovery. Field Maintenance Teams can be attached from the FSC to Armor and Mechanized Infantry Company trains for second-line maintenance and recovery. These teams include an M88A2 IRV "Hercules" recovery vehicle (for Armor Companies) or M88A1 Medium recovery vehicle (for Mechanized Infantry Companies), an M7 Forward Repair System mounted on a PLS Transporter, an M984A1 HEMTT Wrecker, an M1084 cargo truck, and 2 HMMVW trucks. Key personnel include a Motor Sergeant, general mechanics, Abrams systems specialists, Bradley mechanics, and wheeled vehicle mechanics.
> 
> 
> The CAB's maneuver elements are the mechanized infantry Rifle Company and Armor Company. We have dedicated articles on these formations you can read if you want to know exactly what personnel each type of company has, but the Sparknotes is Rifle Companies are mechanized infantry mounted in M2A3 Bradleys and Armor Companies are M1A2 or M1A1 Abrams main battle tanks. Both companies are broadly organized the same, with 1 Company Headquarters (2 armored fighting vehicles each) and 3 Platoons (with 4 vehicles each). Supporting non-combat elements in their Company Headquarters are broadly identical. A Company Intelligence Analyst, Emergency Care/Combat Medic personnel, and a Fire Support Team (FIST) with their own Bradley are typically attached to maneuver companies. In some cases the FIST's Bradley can replaced the integral M113 as a mobile armored command post. For Armor Companies, a Field Maintenance Team is usually attached. The CAB commander may task organize their Rifle Companies and Armor Companies into Armor and Mechanized Infantry Company Teams, forming ad hoc combined arms companies able to conduct a wide range of close combat missions.
> 
> 
> 
> Such task organizations can be used to negate the disadvantages inherent to infantry and tanks through mutual combined arms support. One of the most significant issues the Company Team addresses is the tank's limited use in retaining ground that has been taken and more limited situational awareness during security; roles more suited to the infantry. Infantry are also more well suited to asymmetrical threats and are generally more versatile in their delivery, while tanks have the advantage in lethality and survivability.
> 
> 
> 
> At the same time, there has been concern raised by some that the reorganization of specialist battalions into combined arms battalions reduces the core competency of the unit as a whole. The fact that US Army officers cycle out of tactical command billets into non-tactical staff positions outside of an ABCT periodically, thus reducing the time an officer can gain competency and hone skill, is reduced. This contrasts with the Russian system, where tactical commanders typically don't cycle through non-tactical staff positions. Further, because Russian brigades retain pure battalions, there is a clear throughline from tank platoon leader, to the tank company, to the tank battalion. Thus, a Russian battalion commander typically has more experience as a commanding officer or deputy commanding officer in their specific competency than their American equivalent. It could be argued that CABs combine two types of units with very different training and sustainment requirements under the command of individuals that may or may not have significant experience in either the armor or mechanized infantry fields. This presents the interesting question of whether the close integration of the CAB is superior or inferior to pure Tank Battalions and Mechanized Infantry Battalions that can train in their own domains and be task organized at the brigade-level with other types of companies when needed.
> 
> 
> Comparable Units Abroad
> 
> 
> The Russian Grounds Forces don't typically operate combined arms battalions on a permanent basis, but brigades usually deploy their sub units as either ad hoc, combined arms Battalion Tactical Groups (BTG) or Company Tactical Groups (CTG). The BTG is the most directly applicable comparison, typically being a reinforced Motorized Rifle Battalion or Tank Battalion with a reinforcing Tank or Motorized Rifle Company respectively and additional brigade-level fires and sustainment. While it appears to be a goal for the Russians to make its brigades entirely deployable as 2-3 BTGs, unlike the American case it seems as though the choice of deploying only 1/3rd of the brigade maneuver elements is at least partially influenced by manpower concerns. The BTG isn't a new concept in the Russian practice, however, originating within the Forward Detachments of Soviet Motorized Rifle or Tank Regiments and organized in a similar manner.
> 
> 
> The Swedish Army's Mechanized Battalions are organized similarly to the pre-2016 CAB, with 2 Tank Companies mounted in Strv 122 tanks and 2 Mechanized Companies mounted in Strf 9040.
> 
> 
> The equivalent concept in the British Army is the Battle-group, which are task organized formations formed around either an Infantry Battalion or Armored Regiment (different terminology, but both battalion sized) within an Armored Infantry Brigade. Unlike CABs these are not permanent formations and can be reformed at the brigade-level to meet different threats. Armored Brigades would probably have about 3 to 4 Battle-groups depending on composition. A possible example composition could be 2 Armored Infantry Companies (see our article on the platoon) and 1 Armored Squadron. These could also be formed with Heavy Protected Mobility Infantry Companies, with each brigade typically having 1 Armored Regiment, 2 Armored Infantry Battalions, and 1 Heavy Protected Mobility Battalion.
> 
> 
> The French Army's equivalent is the Combined Arms Battle Group (Groupement tactique interarmes or GTIA) which are essentially regiments (battalion-sized formations) reinforced with other combat arms and fires/sustainment from the brigade-level. The infantry-dominant versions are structured basically as 3 infantry companies and 1 tank company. The Battle Group is the first level at which combined arms formations take place.
> 
> Sources
> 
> MCoE Supplemental Manual 3-90 Force Structure Reference Data "Armored Brigade Combat Team" published October 2016
> ATP 3-90.1 "Armor and Mechanized Infantry Company Team" published January 2016
> FM 3-96 "Brigade Combat Team" published October 2015
> Norris, Pete (2016) "Maximizing the Lethality of Armored Forces" published on The Strategy Brigade



https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/combined-arms-division.546907/

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Aamir Hussain

Signalian said:


> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/combined-arms-division.546907/



Great Write up. Makes sense!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Nilgiri

Had to look why this suddenly popped up in my feed, 10 pages back there was some banter I was having with signalian. I have to read these 10 later pages a bit later....silly PDF alert glitch that goes awol a whole year heh.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## JPMM

In Portugal we use the British system:
Agrupamento Tático Mecanizado- Mechanized Tactical Group
- 2 Mech Rifle Coys + 1 Tank Sqn
Agrupamento Tático Blindado - Armoured Tactical Group​-1 Mech Rifle Coy + 2 Tank Sqns

I say British system becouse (contrary to the US Army) they are divided even further in:
Subagrupamento Tático Mecanizado - Mechanized Tactical SubGroup
- 2 Mech Rifle Plts + 1 Tank Troop
Subagrupamento Tático Blindado - Armoured Tactical SubGroup
- 1 Mech Rifle Plt + 2 Tank Troops

It evolved from a British procedure from their Army in Germany during the Cold War.
The idea is to spread some SubGroups in Key Terrain Features, like road crossings, rail stations and small towns, making the Battle deployment and engagement of the larger Soviet formations. Then concentrate larger number of SubGroups counter-attacking those formations on flanks and rear. While the Soviet formations are "stuck" in those small SubGroups, its time for "Air-Land Battle" Concept of sweping them from the air.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Inception-06

PanzerKiel said:


> T34s stayed with us till almost 1975.


T 34 tank held by 15 Lancers from 1969 to 1975

Reactions: Like Like:
9 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Dazzler

Inception-06 said:


> T 34 tank held by 15 Lancers from 1969 to 1975
> View attachment 675929



There is one displayed as a gate guard outside an undisclosed ammo depo

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## farooqbhai007

Dazzler said:


> There is one displayed as a gate guard outside an undisclosed ammo depo


Ammo depos with exotic vehicles as gate guard Ze Pakistani style . 
There's also a extremely rare 9K33 transloader lying somewhere at a gate of a similar but well known facility.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Dazzler said:


> There is one displayed as a gate guard outside an undisclosed ammo depo



know maybe a side question, is the Alzarrar Programm still Running, if not, then why ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HRK

Inception-06 said:


> know maybe a side question, is the Alzarrar Programm still Running, if not, then why ?


it is as per MODP year book 2017-2018 ....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## farooqbhai007

farooqbhai007 said:


> Ammo depos with exotic vehicles as gate guard Ze Pakistani style .
> There's also a extremely rare 9K33 transloader lying somewhere at a gate of a similar but well known facility.


By the way does anyone know the story behind how that 9K33 OSA *Reloading *vehicle ended up in Pakistan, since we never used those. ( camo is green on the vehicle )
Captured in Afghanistan during soviet era ?


----------



## Inception-06

So Pakistan buys the Defender from Turkey !

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

Probably just the license


----------



## Inception-06

On the way back from Nightshift I was listening a podcast and found that interesting picture:

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Inception-06

@ Do the Pakistan Army has still dedicated mechanized infantry and foot infantry for
reconnaissance role? And anything like long-range patrols in hostile territory (for example Baluchistan and Waziristan )?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PanzerKiel

Inception-06 said:


> @ Do the Pakistan Army has still dedicated mechanized infantry and foot infantry for
> reconnaissance role? And anything like long-range patrols in hostile territory (for example Baluchistan and Waziristan )?


Yes, all of the above.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Inception-06

PanzerKiel said:


> Yes, all of the above.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
3


----------



## Inception-06

*RL-83 Blindicide*




@PanzerKiel see its still in use, rocket looks fresh !
The *RL-83 Blindicide* is primarily an antitank rocket launcher, but other rockets can be fired. It was produced by Mecar SA of Belgium and was an improved derivative of the M20A1 Bazooka.


----------



## PanzerKiel

Inception-06 said:


> *RL-83 Blindicide*
> View attachment 682262
> 
> @PanzerKiel see its still in use, rocket looks fresh !
> The *RL-83 Blindicide* is primarily an antitank rocket launcher, but other rockets can be fired. It was produced by Mecar SA of Belgium and was an improved derivative of the M20A1 Bazooka.
> View attachment 682264


These are old ones. We are using Alcotan now.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Inception-06

PanzerKiel said:


> These are old ones. We are using Alcotan now.



Yes, I know, but seems the old ones are still in service with units in Lahore, and it's not a bad thing, they are enough to blow up Indian BMPs! That's positive sign opposite to the civilian institution for example Pakistan Railways in the army nothing gets wasted!


----------



## PanzerKiel

Inception-06 said:


> Yes, I know, but seems the old ones are still in service with units in Lahore, and it's not a bad thing, they are enough to blow up Indian BMPs! That's positive sign opposite to the civilian institution for example Pakistan Railways in the army nothing gets wasted!


Blindicides are not being used by the regular army or even reserve units. Probably they are with second line forces.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Inception-06

PanzerKiel said:


> Blindicides are not being used by the regular army or even reserve units. Probably they are with second line forces.



and whats about the 106mm recoilless gun also now second-line or active service?


----------



## PanzerKiel

Inception-06 said:


> and whats about the 106mm recoilless gun also now second-line or active service?


All replaced by BSWS.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## truthfollower

PanzerKiel said:


> All replaced by BSWS


what is BSWS?


----------



## TheTallGuy

truthfollower said:


> what is BSWS?


Bhaktar shikhan Weapon system

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Cuirassier

Alcotans with Mech Inf only? @PanzerKiel


----------



## PanzerKiel

Cuirassier said:


> Alcotans with Mech Inf only? @PanzerKiel


nopes, others as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## farooqbhai007

Are there any pics of SH-1 (not SH-15) or any high res pics of MRLS from recent exercises.


----------



## Raja Porus

Where are most of our AKs deployed as i remember signalion once said that they are with inf divs if so what's the reason or did he meant mech inf divs. I think that they might be deployed in sindh as I've seen most if them there
Similarly what about type 85s
Also what about the mech div being raised in pano aqil. And which tanks are being used in mech inf divs

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Inception-06



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Signalian



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## farooqbhai007

Inception-06 said:


> View attachment 688890
> View attachment 688891


8x8 Chinese Bridge Layer , Spotted alot recently in exercises , probably either has replaced or complements the older TATRA 8x8 Bridge Layers


----------



## Raja Porus

The question that puzzles me is that why have the LATs( apart from where 4×4 can not be used) been equipped with Apcs? Don't they lose their sole purpose of being small light and fast troops which can still pack a punch and wreak havoc. With the large M113s they are no more small and fast. They can't place ambushes as their signature would be greater. Moreover tanks can recognize and engage tank sized targets at a greater range than it can target infantry and jeeps.The only use of m113s in LATs would be that they would provide some protection against smaal arms fire while carrying the same number of launcher but it compromises the tactical advantage of them. The only difference bw HATs and LATs is of the atgm used which seems to be ridiculous. Infact the word "light" seems to be out of place.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> The question that puzzles me is that why have the LATs( apart from where 4×4 can not be used) been equipped with Apcs? Don't they lose their sole purpose of being small light and fast troops which can still pack a punch and wreak havoc. With the large M113s they are no more small and fast. They can't place ambushes as their signature would be greater. Moreover tanks can recognize and engage tank sized targets at a greater range than it can target infantry and jeeps.The only use of m113s in LATs would be that they would provide some protection against smaal arms fire while carrying the same number of launcher but it compromises the tactical advantage of them. The only difference bw HATs and LATs is of the atgm used which seems to be ridiculous. Infact the word "light" seems to be out of place.


Dear, you have only defined the broad differences.... Otherwise, to be honest, c the amount of automatic firepower of LAT is still unmatched....


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> Dear, you have only defined the broad differences.... Otherwise, to be honest, c the amount of automatic firepower of LAT is still unmatched....


 Sorry, Couldn't get you. By automatic firepower you mean 12.7mm?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Inception-06



Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Sayfullah

PanzerKiel said:


> All replaced by BSWS.


Can a BSWS penetrate Indian t-90s tank? 
Also why doesn’t Pakistan get newer atgms from China like hj-12?


----------



## Syntage

Jf-17 block 3 said:


> Can a BSWS penetrate Indian t-90s tank?
> Also why doesn’t Pakistan get newer atgms from China like hj-12?


I think we already are using those.

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Jf-17 block 3 said:


> Can a BSWS penetrate Indian t-90s tank?
> Also why doesn’t Pakistan get newer atgms from China like hj-12?



Yes, it can damage the Tank.


----------



## PanzerKiel

Jf-17 block 3 said:


> Can a BSWS penetrate Indian t-90s tank?
> Also why doesn’t Pakistan get newer atgms from China like hj-12?


Depends on where exactly it hits.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Raja Porus

Jf-17 block 3 said:


> Can a BSWS penetrate Indian t-90s tank?
> Also why doesn’t Pakistan get newer atgms from China like hj-12?


I don't think so the simple BSWS( hj8) can do it especially with ERA plates. That's why we have moved to Hj8-D, which has a tandem warhead.@PanzerKiel have we transitioned completely? Don't you think hj10 was a better option


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> View attachment 694980


I thought it is of Bahawlpur corps as the formation sign on the tank is of 26 mech div


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> I don't think so the simple BSWS( hj8) can do it especially with ERA plates. That's why we have moved to Hj8-D, which has a tandem warhead.@PanzerKiel have we transitioned completely? Don't you think hj10 was a better option


Even simple HJ-8 can play havoc provided you hit at a weak point. ERA plates are not everywhere. Thats where you tactical siting of BSWS and fire control comes into play. If you have a big heart, you will not engage a tank head on where its armor is strong and reinforced with ERA plates. You will hold your fire, let the tank go past you and then go for a broadside or a rear shot...

Transition is almost complete.


Desert Fox 1 said:


> I thought it is of Bahawlpur corps as the formation sign on the tank is of 26 mech div


This particular workshop will look after the needs of 2 and 31 Corps both.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sayfullah

Syntage said:


> I think we already are using those.


When did we buy those and how many do we have?


PanzerKiel said:


> Even simple HJ-8 can play havoc provided you hit at a weak point. ERA plates are not everywhere. Thats where you tactical siting of BSWS and fire control comes into play. If you have a big heart, you will not engage a tank head on where its armor is strong and reinforced with ERA plates. You will hold your fire, let the tank go past you and then go for a broadside or a rear shot...
> 
> Transition is almost complete.
> 
> This particular workshop will look after the needs of 2 and 31 Corps both.


 T-90 weak spot is lower front hull right? 

Also does pak army have any plans on buying new atgms soon?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Jf-17 block 3 said:


> When did we buy those and how many do we have?
> 
> T-90 weak spot is lower front hull right?
> 
> Also does pak army have any plans on buying new atgms soon?


In fact that is the weak spot of every tank


PanzerKiel said:


> This particular workshop will look after the needs of 2 and 31 Corps both.


Previously the tanks came to pindi's 502? Or was there another one in Sindh?


PanzerKiel said:


> Even simple HJ-8 can play havoc provided you hit at a weak point. ERA plates are not everywhere. Thats where you tactical siting of BSWS and fire control comes into play. If you have a big heart, you will not engage a tank head on where its armor is strong and reinforced with ERA plates. You will hold your fire, let the tank go past you and then go for a broadside or a rear shot...


That is almost how LATs would perform, right? But with apcs they might not be able to do that because their signature will be too large

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> In fact that is the weak spot of every tank
> 
> Previously the tanks came to pindi's 502? Or was there another one in Sindh?
> 
> That is almost how LATs would perform, right? But with apcs they might not be able to do that because their signature will be too large


Dear, 502 and HIT are looking after it at present. 

APCs can always be dug in, in Hull down positions, whereby only the weapon system is above the ground. Such positions are always p prepared once time is available.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Dreamer.

Inception-06 said:


> View attachment 694980


which tank is in picture?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

Dreamer. said:


> which tank is in picture?


T-85 and T-80 i think

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

farooqbhai007 said:


> T-85 and T-80 i think





Dreamer. said:


> which tank is in picture?


Its an AK, 26 mech div has AKs and I think 25 mech div also have AKs


----------



## farooqbhai007

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Its an AK, 26 mech div has AKs and I think 25 mech div also have AKs








This particular camo and black side skirts are only found on type 85s , numerous available showing the same config on T-85 , AK never has had black side skirts

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Dreamer.

I think T-85 aswell. AlKhalid has engine exhaust at the back and the tank in picture does not.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sayfullah

Thoughts on this video?


----------



## Sayfullah

Also I read somewhere Pakistan getting its t-80ud upgraded to oplot m standard. It was a year old article.
Does anyone have more info on this?


----------



## Raja Porus

farooqbhai007 said:


> View attachment 695318
> 
> This particular camo and black side skirts are only found on type 85s , numerous available showing the same config on T-85 , AK never has had black side skirts


Then perhaps it's the t85 upgraded to AZ standards.
@PanzerKiel there was a news that PA tends to upgrade T80s to oplot m standards, is it true?
Also does the 26 mech div has type 85s?and what about 25th?
Also has the panu aqil div been made a mech div?

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> @PanzerKiel
> Also does the 26 mech div has type 85s?and what about 25th?
> Also has the panu aqil div been made a mech div?


Yes.

For your second question, several Mech Divs have come up recently.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Sayfullah

Is al zarrar any good? 
I know it has a very powerful 125mm gun but how good is its armour? 
Also is the era on them good like can we put Chinese fy-IV era on them?


----------



## PanzerKiel

Jf-17 block 3 said:


> Is al zarrar any good?
> I know it has a very powerful 125mm gun but how good is its armour?
> Also is the era on them good like can we put Chinese fy-IV era on them?


In my opinion, no tank is good or bad. It all depends upon the level of training of the crew inside. A highly trained crew inside a vintage tank can be equally deadly.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sayfullah

PanzerKiel said:


> In my opinion, no tank is good or bad. It all depends upon the level of training of the crew inside. A highly trained crew inside a vintage tank can be equally deadly.



Is it possible to put modern era on it like Chinese fy-IV and make the 12.7 mm machine gun remote controlled?


----------



## PanzerKiel

Jf-17 block 3 said:


> Is it possible to put modern era on it like Chinese fy-IV and make the 12.7 mm machine gun remote controlled?


Not at least in AZ. would require too much customization of that already cramped turret.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Neurath

PanzerKiel said:


> Yes.
> 
> For your second question, several Mech Divs have come up recently.


Do you have a list of Pakistan Army divisions that don't have mechanized in their name but are mechanized divisions in nature?


----------



## PanzerKiel

Neurath said:


> Do you have a list of Pakistan Army divisions that don't have mechanized in their name but are mechanized divisions in nature?


Dear, I know it but won't like to share for obvious reasons as you may understand.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Sayfullah

PanzerKiel said:


> It's on my finger tips but won't like to share for obvious reasons as you may understand.



What’s the main difference between al khalid and al khalid 1? 
Also are older al khalids going to be upgraded to al khalid 1 standard?

Reactions: Sad Sad:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

bhai tu pura interview lay lay

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
7


----------



## Tipu7

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Then perhaps it's the t85 upgraded to AZ standards.


The upgraded T85 are called T85-UG. And it shares no relationship with AZ which is an entirely different tank optimized to operate in different conditions.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> Yes.
> 
> For your second question, several Mech Divs have come up recently.


Yes, but do they have lower armoured component like the 11th inf div?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Yes, but do they have lower armoured component like the 11th inf div?


Armor component of 11 Div has also been increased extensively.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
3


----------



## m52k85

Jf-17 block 3 said:


> Thoughts on this video?


I believe @Dazzler has refuted most of these in depth: 
1. Turret and Hull protection vs APFDS is not 400 and 300
2. ERA mounting in war time will be more comprehensive than on front of turret only
3. Commander does have thermals (Al Khalid has been Hunter-Killer from start)
etc
he can point you to the right resources.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Inception-06

m52k85 said:


> I believe @Dazzler has refuted most of these in depth, he can point you to the right resources.



In some points the guy is right, especially when he talks about the ERA protection, Alkhalid lacks a proper cover of ERA, I am pointing out this for 20 years!


----------



## m52k85

@JF-17ThunderBlock3 check this thread https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/mbt-modernization-program-a-step-in-the-right-direction.660224/page-5


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> In some points the guy is right, especially when he talks about the ERA protection, Alkhalid lacks a proper cover of ERA, I am pointing out this for 20 years!


As @m52k85 said, during war time the ERA mounting will be more comprehensive.
Also @m52k85 will you provide the link of dazzlers post you talked about
Moreover,this YouTube guy seems to be russian and for him a t72 is better than abrams so don't take him seriously. Also his sources would be TOI or Eurasian times

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## m52k85

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Also @m52k85 will you provide the link of dazzlers post you talked about


Its mostly contained in the 10 pages of this thread as conversation between @Dazzler @Tipu7 and @HRK : https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/mbt-modernization-program-a-step-in-the-right-direction.660224/page-5

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## m52k85

PanzerKiel said:


> For your second question, several Mech Divs have come up recently.





PanzerKiel said:


> Dear, I know it but won't like to share for obvious reasons as you may understand.





PanzerKiel said:


> Armor component of 11 Div has also been increased extensively.


Sir, without going into the Division numbers my question is where did we get the tank numbers from for this extensive mechanization?

Assuming the following based on formations that are known to be armoured :
1. Armoured Div: 7 tank regiments x 2 (6th and 1st)
2. Mech Div: 5 tank regiments x 2 (25th and 26th)
3. Ind Arm Brigade: 2 tank regiments x 9 (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan_Army#/media/File:Pakistan_Army_Structure.png)

That gives 42 regiments.

The tank numbers we have prior to VT-4 arrival:

1. AK-1: 2 (maybe even 1)
2. AK: 7
3: T-80s: 7
4. Type85: 7
5. Al Zarrar: max estimate 14

Thats a total of 37 tank regiments while we need 42 to fulfil the number plated divisions and brigades let alone secret ones.

Thanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

m52k85 said:


> Sir, without going into the Division numbers my question is where did we get the tank numbers from for this extensive mechanization?
> 
> Assuming the following based on formations that are known to be armoured :
> 1. Armoured Div: 7 tank regiments x 2 (6th and 1st)
> 2. Mech Div: 5 tank regiments x 2 (25th and 26th)
> 3. Ind Arm Brigade: 2 tank regiments x 9 (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan_Army#/media/File:Pakistan_Army_Structure.png)
> 
> That gives 42 regiments.
> 
> The tank numbers we have prior to VT-4 arrival:
> 
> 1. AK-1: 2 (maybe even 1)
> 2. AK: 7
> 3: T-80s: 7
> 4. Type85: 7
> 5. Al Zarrar: max estimate 14
> 
> Thats a total of 37 tank regiments while we need 42 to fulfil the number plated divisions and brigades let alone secret ones.
> 
> Thanks.


The correct number of armour regiments is now more than 60....

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
4


----------



## m52k85

PanzerKiel said:


> The correct number of armour regiments is now more than 60....


That would mean more the 2,400 tanks. So do you mean apart from the 1,500 to 1,600 AKs, T-80s, Type85 and Al Zarrar the remaining 800 are older T59s and 69s? I thought those had been phased out to FC or put into storage.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

m52k85 said:


> So do you mean apart from the 1,500 to 1,600 AKs, T-80s, Type85 and Al Zarrar the remaining 800 are older T59s and 69s?


Nopes, not the older tanks.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## m52k85

PanzerKiel said:


> Nopes, not the older tanks.


What am I missing? If we've managed to hide the production/ acquisition of 600 to 800 hundred tanks that would be a first (outside WW2 atleast). @Dazzler @Tipu7 @HRK @Signalian if you guys can help. Thanks

Reactions: Haha Haha:
3


----------



## Dazzler

m52k85 said:


> What am I missing? If we've managed to hide the production/ acquisition of 600 to 800 hundred tanks that would be a first (outside WW2 atleast). @Dazzler @Tipu7 @HRK @Signalian if you guys can help. Thanks



Classified. Some things are better left unsaid.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Wow Wow:
2


----------



## m52k85

Dazzler said:


> Classified. Some things are better left unsaid.


Ok thanks.


----------



## farooqbhai007

Will there be any induction of shorter bridge layers ? also why did the PA choose a older North Benz chassis for the TATRA based AM-50 bridge layer replacement, while the chinese are currently exporting the same GQL-111 system on the basis of a more modern HOWO truck to different countries like ethiopia and equador recently.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bossman

Inception-06 said:


> View attachment 694980


This is a fairly big set up and can take over some of the pressure from HIT as far as rebuilding is concerned both for T series tanks and M series APCs. This will allow HIT to focus on new production.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> Nopes, not the older tanks.





Dazzler said:


> Classified. Some things are better left unsaid.


That means,
The number of AKs declared publicly is smaller than the real figure ir the number of type59/69 converted to AZ is higher.
Or we have some supernatural tanks in a secret facility which would be revealed only in case of war

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

Desert Fox 1 said:


> That means,
> The number of AKs declared publicly is smaller than the real figure ir the number of type59/69 converted to AZ is higher.
> Or we have some supernatural tanks in a secret facility which would be revealed only in case of war


If PA can have undeclared mrls then why not more tanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Raja Porus

farooqbhai007 said:


> If PA can have undeclared mrls then why not more tanks.


Yep, that looks like the only solution


----------



## GriffinsRule

or we have fewer tanks in each regiment than before, thus more regiments w the same number of tanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Raja Porus

GriffinsRule said:


> or we have fewer tanks in each regiment than before, thus more regiments w the same number of tanks.


Yes but the issue here is that @PanzerKiel is saying that we have lesser number of old t59/69s as according to the data available. So they must have been replaced by some other tanks which has not been disclosed

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Yes but the issue here is that @PanzerKiel is saying that we have lesser number of old t59/69s as according to the data available. So they must have been replaced by some other tanks which has not been disclosed



The numbers of all Tank types could be higher then officially claimed.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> The numbers of all Tank types could be higher then officially claimed.


Yes, especially Alkhalids'

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Yes, especially Alkhalids'



I agree !

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Yes, especially Alkhalids'

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## HRK

ROBOTIC WELDING OF AK-1 HULL

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Dr. Strangelove

Inception-06 said:


> The numbers of all Tank types could be higher then officially claimed.


Exactly MODP Year Books are full of shit on purpose if you go through them it looks like some one has just edited a few things here and there every year and kept the rest as it is. Data released via them is just for public consumption nothing more.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## m52k85

farooqbhai007 said:


> If PA can have undeclared mrls then why not more tanks.


Local production of Khalids and Zarrars have too many components from abroad like engine and targeting sights etc which makes it more difficult (but not impossible) to hide production. I imagine MRLS can take a range of commercially available non-military engines...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

@PanzerKiel , where is the 25th cav located nowadays and with which tanks is it equipped?

Reactions: Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Desert Fox 1 said:


> @PanzerKiel , where is the 25th cav located nowadays and with which tanks is it equipped?


@PanzerKiel is it classified( I mean wrt a public forum)? If yes then no problem

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Signalian

GriffinsRule said:


> or we have fewer tanks in each regiment than before, thus more regiments w the same number of tanks.


3 Sqns + HQs are good enough


----------



## Raja Porus

Signalian said:


> 3 Sqns + HQs are good enough





Signalian said:


> 3 Sqns + HQs are good enough


Yep. Armoured warfare is more about mobility nad using that the outmanouvering and out witting the enemy. 
Now most of the people will jump to the point that our armd regts would be hard pressed against IA but the thing is that we shall not use our armd regts against IA except for the most desperate of situations. They are solely for counter attacking after the initial thrust has been absorbed and more suitably repulsed. This can be derived from the fact that all our armoured divs and mechanised divs are held as reserves and most importantly many holding corps have been raised to relieve the strike corps from any defensive op(and the best example is Gujranwala corps, which has an anti tank brigade at its disposal). I think this the point everyone must learn before jumping on any conclusion

Reactions: Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Signalian

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Yep. Armoured warfare is more about mobility nad using that the outmanouvering and out witting the enemy.
> Now most of the people will jump to the point that our armd regts would be hard pressed against IA but the thing is that we shall not use our armd regts against IA except for the most desperate of situations. They are solely for counter attacking after the initial thrust has been absorbed and more suitably repulsed. This can be derived from the fact that all our armoured divs and mechanised divs are held as reserves and most importantly many holding corps have been raised to relieve the strike corps from any defensive op(and the best example is Gujranwala corps, which has an anti tank brigade at its disposal). I think this the point everyone must learn before jumping on any conclusion


Send complete I-Corps to capture Jammu. Protect right flank using XXX Corps and left flank using elements of X Corps like 23 ID and 19 ID. Hopefully, armor will be put to good use by capturing an important city. If 6th Armor Div survives after taking part in capturing Jammu, then send it south-east.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

Signalian said:


> Send complete I-Corps to capture Jammu. Protect right flank using XXX Corps and left flank using elements of X Corps like 23 ID and 19 ID. Hopefully, armor will be put to good use by capturing an important city. If 6th Armor Div survives after taking part in capturing Jammu, then send it south-east.


I think PA will not and cannot do this. PA will never attack India first especially with a strike corps. That would be against our offensive defensive doctrine. If the 6th armd div goes in it will be up against both the strike as well as the holding corps of the whole Indian Northern and Northern Western command and if the attack is blunted or our armd div has serious losses than we will loose the offensive power in the very beginning and would not be able to counter attacka and make most of the situation when IA attack is bogged down and it in turn loses it offensive capability. Then our armoured divs can and will pounce and attack when the enemy is weakest. For limited counter attacking we have armd regts with inf divs( i pray that the inf divs are given armd bdes instead of only a single regt) plus the indp/corps armoured bdes. A bit similar to Zhukov's defense but only a bit.
No need to attack where the enemy and when the enemy is strongest. Wear him down and then pounce. Remember what Salahuddin Ayubi did to the crusaders befor the battle of Hattin. He harassed them and when the enemy was worn down completely he struck the decisive blow, but of course we don't have that much strategic depth but just to give an example. Plus the airforces of both the countries will play the decisive role . Just my piece of mind

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Signalian

Desert Fox 1 said:


> I think PA will not and cannot do this. PA will never attack India first especially with a strike corps. That would be against our offensive defensive doctrine. If the 6th armd div goes in it will be up against both the strike as well as the holding corps of the whole Indian Northern and Northern Western command and if the attack is blunted or our armd div has serious losses than we will loose the offensive power in the very beginning and would not be able to counter attacka and make most of the situation when IA attack is bogged down and it in turn loses it offensive capability. Then our armoured divs can and will pounce and attack when the enemy is weakest. For limited counter attacking we have armd regts with inf divs( i pray that the inf divs are given armd bdes instead of only a single regt) plus the indp/corps armoured bdes. A bit similar to Zhukov's defense but only a bit.
> No need to attack where the enemy and when the enemy is strongest. Wear him down and then pounce. Remember what Salahuddin Ayubi did to the crusaders befor the battle of Hattin. He harassed them and when the enemy was worn down completely he struck the decisive blow, but of course we don't have that much strategic depth but just to give an example. Plus the airforces of both the countries will play the decisive role


Repeat of 1971. Armor Divs resting at tank sheds as reserve analogy. Keep the shiny and well oiled tanks sit in their tracks then. Take them out on 23rd March Parade and park them again till next year. 

The amount of time taken in hide and seek will never be enough for both countries to make gains at all. Salahuddin Ayubi had time and repeated opportunities at his hands, whereas in Indo-Pak scenario a nuclear weapon can end it all on the second day of war. You cannot wear India down, well maybe delay Indian forces for a certain amount of time. India has more troops, more tanks, more replacements, more resources. 

If Infantry Div is given the job, it will suffer more casualties and take alot more time. The terrain leading up to Jammu may not be tank friendly as the forces get closer to Jammu. Let 6th Armor Div penetrate 10, 20 or 50 km into J&K towards Jammu. Both Armor Divisions give PA a chance each to conduct an offensive. They make the bridgeheads, then the infantry can come and clean up as the armor can be pulled back later on. Otherwise go through the air, drop airborne forces at Jammu, calculate the chances of success yourself, but first where are the resources. Make do of what is available - tanks.

Either PA takes Kashmir or let the Kashmir/LOC drama drag on for another century. Lose 50 soldiers annually for PA and 100 soldiers annually for IA on LOC. Drag on Siachen issue side by side also. Keep buying weapons like 5th gen aircraft and 4th gen tanks and nuclear submarines while universities and hospitals can be built and money can be thrown in research. A utopian view of Pakistan as a welfare state could be thought of eventually, which is impossible to even think right now.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Signalian said:


> Repeat of 1971. Armor Divs resting at tank sheds as reserve analogy. Keep the shiny and well oiled tanks sit in their tracks then. Take them out on 23rd March Parade and park them again till next year.
> 
> The amount of time taken in hide and seek will never be enough for both countries to make gains at all. Salahuddin Ayubi had time and repeated opportunities at his hands, whereas in Indo-Pak scenario a nuclear weapon can end it all on the second day of war. You cannot wear India down, well maybe delay Indian forces for a certain amount of time. India has more troops, more tanks, more replacements, more resources.
> 
> If Infantry Div is given the job, it will suffer more casualties and take alot more time. The terrain leading up to Jammu may not be tank friendly as the forces get closer to Jammu. Let 6th Armor Div penetrate 10, 20 or 50 km into J&K towards Jammu. Both Armor Divisions give PA a chance each to conduct an offensive. They make the bridgeheads, then the infantry can come and clean up as the armor can be pulled back later on. Otherwise go through the air, drop airborne forces at Jammu, calculate the chances of success yourself, but first where are the resources. Make do of what is available - tanks.
> 
> Either PA takes Kashmir or let the Kashmir/LOC drama drag on for another century. Lose 50 soldiers annually for PA and 100 soldiers annually for IA on LOC. Drag on Siachen issue side by side also. Keep buying weapons like 5th gen aircraft and 4th gen tanks and nuclear submarines while universities and hospitals can be built and money can be thrown in research. A utopian view of Pakistan as a welfare state could be thought of eventually, which is impossible to even think right now.


Sir, but from political and diplomatic point of view we never want to be the aggressor otherwise, of course what you are saying is ideal especially if we are able to achieve air superiority in the concerned sectors and if the ISI is able to restart the armed struggle in Kashmir once again. 
In 71 it was more of a politcal decision alongwith pressure from China as well as USA to not to open the western front. Andby wearing down IA i meant that allow IA to use some of its resources to attack on other sectors which otherwise can be used against the 6th armoured div making road ways into the indian territory. Plus I meant that if the inf divs are given armd bdes they can also do some limited counter attacking against the enemy force they are defending. But this all must be preceded by a pre emptive strike in IAF air Field. Still, of course you know much more than me
@PanzerKiel is their anything wrong in my post, sir?

Reactions: Sad Sad:
1


----------



## aziqbal

can someone gives advantages of AK-1 over AK?

whats the improvements ?

and what was the final number of AK built

it seems like PAC can build more JF17 than HIT can do AK


----------



## Raja Porus

aziqbal said:


> can someone gives advantages of AK-1 over AK?
> 
> whats the improvements ?
> 
> and what was the final number of AK built
> 
> it seems like PAC can build more JF17 than HIT can do AK


Ask @Dazzler


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Yep. Armoured warfare is more about mobility nad using that the outmanouvering and out witting the enemy.
> Now most of the people will jump to the point that our armd regts would be hard pressed against IA but the thing is that we shall not use our armd regts against IA except for the most desperate of situations. They are solely for counter attacking after the initial thrust has been absorbed and more suitably repulsed. This can be derived from the fact that all our armoured divs and mechanised divs are held as reserves and most importantly many holding corps have been raised to relieve the strike corps from any defensive op(and the best example is Gujranwala corps, which has an anti tank brigade at its disposal). I think this the point everyone must learn before jumping on any conclusion


There are some armor formations which are primarily for offensive tasks, and their training is also on the same lines.

Gujranwala Corps has no special anti tank brigade....PA as a whole doesnt have anti tank brigades (a Soviet concept)....


Desert Fox 1 said:


> I think PA will not and cannot do this. PA will never attack India first especially with a strike corps. That would be against our offensive defensive doctrine. If the 6th armd div goes in it will be up against both the strike as well as the holding corps of the whole Indian Northern and Northern Western command and if the attack is blunted or our armd div has serious losses than we will loose the offensive power in the very beginning and would not be able to counter attacka and make most of the situation when IA attack is bogged down and it in turn loses it offensive capability. Then our armoured divs can and will pounce and attack when the enemy is weakest. For limited counter attacking we have armd regts with inf divs( i pray that the inf divs are given armd bdes instead of only a single regt) plus the indp/corps armoured bdes. A bit similar to Zhukov's defense but only a bit.
> No need to attack where the enemy and when the enemy is strongest. Wear him down and then pounce. Remember what Salahuddin Ayubi did to the crusaders befor the battle of Hattin. He harassed them and when the enemy was worn down completely he struck the decisive blow, but of course we don't have that much strategic depth but just to give an example. Plus the airforces of both the countries will play the decisive role . Just my piece of mind


PA can do this.

Attacking first with a Strike Corps is not against our offensive doctrine. At some sensitive places, the geography forces or allows us to strike first and make significant gains.

Indian Strike Corps is not that much nearer to our border, like our 1 Corps. 1 Corps therefore enjoys this big advantage.

Armored brigades in infantry divisions are already there.


Desert Fox 1 said:


> Sir, but from political and diplomatic point of view we never want to be the aggressor otherwise, of course what you are saying is ideal especially if we are able to achieve air superiority in the concerned sectors and if the ISI is able to restart the armed struggle in Kashmir once again.
> In 71 it was more of a politcal decision alongwith pressure from China as well as USA to not to open the western front. Andby wearing down IA i meant that allow IA to use some of its resources to attack on other sectors which otherwise can be used against the 6th armoured div making road ways into the indian territory. Plus I meant that if the inf divs are given armd bdes they can also do some limited counter attacking against the enemy force they are defending. But this all must be preceded by a pre emptive strike in IAF air Field. Still, of course you know much more than me
> @PanzerKiel is their anything wrong in my post, sir?


You can still be called aggressor if PAF goes in first (due to its high speed) instead of PA.

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Love Love:
3


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> There are some armor formations which are primarily for offensive tasks, and their training is also on the same lines.
> 
> Gujranwala Corps has no special anti tank brigade....PA as a whole doesnt have anti tank brigades (a Soviet concept)....
> 
> PA can do this.
> 
> Attacking first with a Strike Corps is not against our offensive doctrine. At some sensitive places, the geography forces or allows us to strike first and make significant gains.
> 
> Indian Strike is not that much nearer to our border, like our 1 Corps. 1 Corps therefore enjoys this big advantage.
> 
> Armored brigades in infantry divisions are already there.
> 
> You can still be called aggressor if PAF goes in first (due to its high speed) instead of PA.


Thank you very much sir. I am very much obliged. I am still learning from members like you, signalian, dazzler,tipu. You are some of those who are keeping this forum alive and preventing it from becoming just a rogue type where everyone one just jumps in and gives his own opinion without facts and figures. Thank you again.Will continue to learn


PanzerKiel said:


> Armored brigades


With all?or those in important regions?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Readerdefence

PanzerKiel said:


> There are some armor formations which are primarily for offensive tasks, and their training is also on the same lines.
> 
> Gujranwala Corps has no special anti tank brigade....PA as a whole doesnt have anti tank brigades (a Soviet concept)....
> 
> PA can do this.
> 
> Attacking first with a Strike Corps is not against our offensive doctrine. At some sensitive places, the geography forces or allows us to strike first and make significant gains.
> 
> Indian Strike Corps is not that much nearer to our border, like our 1 Corps. 1 Corps therefore enjoys this big advantage.
> 
> Armored brigades in infantry divisions are already there.
> 
> You can still be called aggressor if PAF goes in first (due to its high speed) instead of PA.


Hi sir just a quick Q from my side what will happen in lieu of going into J&K PA will be able to hold that for enough time in that region another Qs is how will and how aggressive Indian action will be through Sindh border will PA be able to thwart that attack with ample force and resources 
thank you

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Sir, but from political and diplomatic point of view we never want to be the aggressor otherwise, of course what you are saying is ideal especially if we are able to achieve air superiority in the concerned sectors and if the ISI is able to restart the armed struggle in Kashmir once again.
> In 71 it was more of a politcal decision alongwith pressure from China as well as USA to not to open the western front. Andby wearing down IA i meant that allow IA to use some of its resources to attack on other sectors which otherwise can be used against the 6th armoured div making road ways into the indian territory. Plus I meant that if the inf divs are given armd bdes they can also do some limited counter attacking against the enemy force they are defending. But this all must be preceded by a pre emptive strike in IAF air Field. Still, of course you know much more than me
> @PanzerKiel is their anything wrong in my post, sir?



If a war starts, PA has to take initiative. 
In 1971, it was lack of guts from both countries for not using Amor Divs. USA complained and still complains that Pakistan acts on its own while Pakistan complains that USA keeps its own interests in front, not Pakistan's.

There are 4 x Divisions of PA that have offensive capability so why not use them instead of throwing in Infantry Divs from onset.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

A


Signalian said:


> If a war starts, PA has to take initiative.
> In 1971, it was lack of guts from both countries for not using Amor Divs. USA complained and still complains that Pakistan acts on its own while Pakistan complains that USA keeps its own interests in front, not Pakistan's.
> 
> There are 4 x Divisions of PA that have offensive capability so why not use them instead of throwing in Infantry Divs from onset.


Agreed sir

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Inception-06

@Desert Fox 
Try this one!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Y


Inception-06 said:


> @Desert Fox
> Try this one!!
> 
> View attachment 707971


You have found a gem. 
Btw are you German? I'd love to learn German.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Y
> You have found a gem.
> Btw are you German? I'd love to learn German.



I just live in Germany, that’s a podcast may be you can finde it also in youTube just Google it, otherwise you can Test Spotify for one month, and then cancel the membership, there many more Pakistan armored warfare contests. You will learn that war’s can be won by men, tactics and strategy, maintenance and upgrading of equipment not only quality and quantity. You remember how Isreali Tank comanders stopped many Syrian Tanks on the Golan hights,the syrian had better equipment and higher numbers. Same on the Egyptian Sinai canal frontline, Israelis knocked out many Egyptian Tanks before they were blown off, and also in this case they had less numbers and not quality or quantity.

Do you know That because lack of coordination and communication Indians did blow off their own Tanks during Indo -Pack wars, or Pakistani Tank Generals and commanders were not capable to lead their formations in to the battle. What do you think how it goes on when a Pakistani Alzarrar Tank squadron gets the Task to stopp a Indian Tank wave. War starts from here, first the Pakistani Commander’s have to estimate the time and location where they could FINDE the enemy, then estimates the numbers, then make a plan hiding all Tanks in duck in Positions, or should all be mobil or both there are so many Parameters which @Signalian and @PanzerKiel are mentioning since years, but you young Greenhorns = Grünschnabel are only interest to discuss the numbers or Type of Pakistan armoured Corps. Learning Starts from books and the handling of a single Tank, which is not possible for us Hobby Generals that’s why we have to rely on war veterans Interviews and Military history books, Film’s etc. !

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Sayfullah

Signalian said:


> Send complete I-Corps to capture Jammu. Protect right flank using XXX Corps and left flank using elements of X Corps like 23 ID and 19 ID. Hopefully, armor will be put to good use by capturing an important city. If 6th Armor Div survives after taking part in capturing Jammu, then send it south-east.



Can Pakistan attack Jammu, Aknoor and Dras at the same time?


----------



## Signalian

Jf-17 block 3 said:


> Can Pakistan attack Jammu, Aknoor and Dras at the same time?


Best bet is to concentrate on one at a time due to scarcity of men and material. Ensure that target is captured and can be defended till end of war from repeated counter attacks after capture.

If PA has 10 extra Divisions in the salient as well as logistics system to support all 10 divisions, then yeah attack to capture all 3. Mountain warfare becomes complex due to nature of terrain which limits angle of attacks and support routes by road. A well deployed platoon can hold off a company strength attack for a good amount of time, as seen in Kargil war.

Direct Explosive firepower of tanks helps in softening targets while rapid deployment through helicopter or APCs helps in minimizing time frame of capturing that area. Time is important so enemy cannot send reinforcements towards the target area. Artillery and tanks may have the same muzzle caliber but direct fire of tanks is faster than indirect fire of artillery. Numbers also matter, an artillery regiment will be firing 12-18 guns while a tank regiment will have 44 tanks blazing their guns from different directions. In Mountains if you take out the tanks, then the other option is gunships, maybe 4 or 6 and those also under PAF's air escort and maneuvering constantly to escape from enemy AD units. And when you have 44 tanks then you will also have 50 M-113s following them which means 50 x 12.7 mm guns for fire support. These will have 18 M-109's behind them and a contingent of AD tube launchers.

If Jammu is taken then Rajauri and Poonch can be strangled as the road access from south east side will be blocked. Later the road access towards Srinagar can be blocked from south so Srinagar will have access only from air through supplies landing in areas like Leh or Anantnag etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
3


----------



## Signalian

@farooqbhai007 

You would usually have an artillery regiment supporting a brigade or 6 guns battery supporting a battalion. Im anticipating that in case of a major offensive more artillery guns will be assigned.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Sayfullah

Signalian said:


> Best bet is to concentrate on one at a time due to scarcity of men and material. Ensure that target is captured and can be defended till end of war from repeated counter attacks after capture.
> 
> If PA has 10 extra Divisions in the salient as well as logistics system to support all 10 divisions, then yeah attack to capture all 3. Mountain warfare becomes complex due to nature of terrain which limits angle of attacks and support routes by road. A well deployed platoon can hold off a company strength attack for a good amount of time, as seen in Kargil war.
> 
> Direct Explosive firepower of tanks helps in softening targets while rapid deployment through helicopter or APCs helps in minimizing time frame of capturing that area. Time is important so enemy cannot send reinforcements towards the target area. Artillery and tanks may have the same muzzle caliber but direct fire of tanks is faster than indirect fire of artillery. Numbers also matter, an artillery regiment will be firing 12-18 guns while a tank regiment will have 44 tanks blazing their guns from different directions. In Mountains if you take out the tanks, then the other option is gunships, maybe 4 or 6 and those also under PAF's air escort and maneuvering constantly to escape from enemy AD units. And when you have 44 tanks then you will also have 50 M-113s following them which means 50 x 12.7 mm guns for fire support. These will have 18 M-109's behind them and a contingent of AD tube launchers.
> 
> If Jammu is taken then Rajauri and Poonch can be strangled as the road access from south east side will be blocked. Later the road access towards Srinagar can be blocked from south so Srinagar will have access only from air through supplies landing in areas like Leh or Anantnag etc.



Is aknoor more valuable or Jammu?


----------



## Raja Porus

Jf-17 block 3 said:


> Can Pakistan attack Jammu, Aknoor and Dras at the same time?


You hit somebody with your fist and not with your fingers spread.( Heinz Guderian)

Reactions: Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Jf-17 block 3 said:


> Is aknoor more valuable or Jammu?


In fact,Operation Grand Slam was a plan drawn up by the PA in May 1965 that consisted of an attack on the vital Akhnoor Bridge in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir. The bridge was not only the lifeline of an entire infantry division of the Indian Army, but could also be used to threaten the city of Jammu, an important logistical point for Indian forces.
The Operation Grand Slam was designed as a twin of the Operation Gibraltar, both of which were meant to jeopardise India's control of Kashmir and bring it to the negotiating table without risking a general war across the international border.The idea for Grand Slam came from President Ayub Khan. When he reviewed the plans for Gibraltar in May 1965, he pointed to Akhnur on the map and called it a "jugular" for India. By seizing Akhnur, India's overland supply route to Kashmir would be cut off.
Ayub Khan was mistaken. India's supply route to Kashmir did not pass through Akhnur. (The National Highway 1A passed through Udhampur and Ramban, not Akhnur.) *General Akhtar Malik, who was in charge of both Gibraltar and Grand Slam, however understood the President's demand for a "jugular". He developed secret plans to proceed to Jammu after taking Akhnur, where he could cut off the highway. These plans were not revealed to the President, who would have apprehended the possibility of a general war.*
However one of the many reasons of its failure were the opening of a general front against PA by india, due to which the 10 inf( also included Shabbir shareef's 6ff) bde whoose AOR included Akhnoor was pulled back and sent to Sialkot when the prized bridge lay there just to be taken. In fact it is also noted that after 10th inf bde left the sector not an inch of Indian Territory was further gained. Also, another reason was the sudden change of command when Yahya Khan took over.

Reactions: Sad Sad:
2


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> In fact,Operation Grand Slam was a plan drawn up by the PA in May 1965 that consisted of an attack on the vital Akhnoor Bridge in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir. The bridge was not only the lifeline of an entire infantry division of the Indian Army, but could also be used to threaten the city of Jammu, an important logistical point for Indian forces.
> The Operation Grand Slam was designed as a twin of the Operation Gibraltar, both of which were meant to jeopardise India's control of Kashmir and bring it to the negotiating table without risking a general war across the international border.The idea for Grand Slam came from President Ayub Khan. When he reviewed the plans for Gibraltar in May 1965, he pointed to Akhnur on the map and called it a "jugular" for India. By seizing Akhnur, India's overland supply route to Kashmir would be cut off.
> Ayub Khan was mistaken. India's supply route to Kashmir did not pass through Akhnur. (The National Highway 1A passed through Udhampur and Ramban, not Akhnur.) *General Akhtar Malik, who was in charge of both Gibraltar and Grand Slam, however understood the President's demand for a "jugular". He developed secret plans to proceed to Jammu after taking Akhnur, where he could cut off the highway. These plans were not revealed to the President, who would have apprehended the possibility of a general war.*
> However one of the many reasons of its failure were the opening of a general front against PA by india, due to which the 10 inf( also included Shabbir shareef's 6ff) bde whoose AOR included Akhnoor was pulled back and sent to Sialkot when the prized bridge lay there just to be taken. In fact it is also noted that after 10th inf bde left the sector not an inch of Indian Territory was further gained. Also, another reason was the sudden change of command when Yahya Khan took over.


Several factual mistakes and wrong inferences.....

Op Grandslam was a multi brigade operation. You need to study about 10 Brigade, its role as per intial plan, what it actually did, role of its commander Brig Hayat, nature of relations between Brig Hayat, Gen Malik and Gen Yahya (GOC 7 Div from where this 10 Brigade was pulled out).....

10 Brigade departure was of no consequence.....12 Div or 7 Div (since operations were later on handed over to 7 Div) were still strong enough to take Akhnur despite departure of 10 Brigade or IA opening on International Border....

...Gen Yahya was invited to Staff College as a guest speaker in 1978 i think....he was asked this question that why didnt he take Akhnur, he simply said that he was ordered not to.

...and also lets not forget the role of Zulfiqar Bhutto and Kashmir Cell.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## PanzerKiel

If things would have gone according to GOC 12 Division desires, 12 Division would have veered towards Jammu, with 7 Division going towards Naushara.......Kashmir would have been more or less cut off from mainland India, road Jammu-Samba-Kathua interdicted.....

Losses in Jura and Bedori were negligible when compared with gains in Munawar gap by Grandslam..These losses were expected due to bad troops to space ratio in 12 Division...
however, these losses were still within the limited laid down by Pak GHQ.

In the end, IA committed more forces against Jura and Bedori, while having nothing to counter any Pak thrust towards Akhnur...Two IA brigades had already been pulled out of Jammu...so IA was playing almost as per the needs of Gen Akhtar Malik, GOC 12 Division...

In fact, the full value of Gibralter was have been encashed only after capture of Akhnur, once 12 and 7 Division would have veered towards Naushara and Jammu....if this would have happened, there would have been no Operation Nepal by Indian 1 Corps.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Inception-06

PanzerKiel said:


> If things would have gone according to GOC 12 Division desires, 12 Division would have veered towards Jammu, with 7 Division going towards Naushara.......Kashmir would have been more or less cut off from mainland India, road Jammu-Samba-Kathua interdicted.....
> 
> Losses in Jura and Bedori were negligible when compared with gains in Munawar gap by Grandslam..These losses were expected due to bad troops to space ratio in 12 Division...
> however, these losses were still within the limited laid down by Pak GHQ.
> 
> In the end, IA committed more forces against Jura and Bedori, while having nothing to counter any Pak thrust towards Akhnur...Two IA brigades had already been pulled out of Jammu...so IA was playing almost as per the needs of Gen Akhtar Malik, GOC 12 Division...
> 
> In fact, the full value of Gibralter was have been encashed only after capture of Akhnur, once 12 and 7 Division would have veered towards Naushara and Jammu....if this would have happened, there would have been no Operation Nepal by Indian 1 Corps.



and what was wrong with my post ? ^^

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

*GENERAL AKHTER HUSSAIN MALIK LETTER TO GENERAL ABDUL ALI MALIK*

My Dear brother,
I hope you and the family are very well. Thank you for your letter of 14 Oct. 67. The answers to your questions are as follows:

a. The de facto command changed the very first day of the ops [operations] after the fall of Chamb when Azmat Hayat broke off wireless communications with me. I personally tried to find his HQ [headquarters] by chopper and failed. In late afternoon I sent Gulzar and Vahid, my MP [military police] officers, to try and locate him, but they too failed. The next day I tore into him and he sheepishly and nervously informed me that he was ‘Yahya’s brigadier’. I had no doubt left that Yahya had reached him the previous day and instructed him not to take further orders from me, while the formal change in command had yet to take place. This was a betrayal of many dimensions.

b. I reasoned and then pleaded with Yahya that if it was credit he was looking for, he should take the overall command but let me go up to Akhnur as his subordinate, but he refused. He went a step further and even changed the plan. He kept banging his head against Troti, letting the Indian fall back to Akhnur. We lost the initiative on the very first day of the war and never recovered it. Eventually it was the desperate stand at Chawinda that prevented the Indians from cutting through.

c. At no time was I assigned any reason for being removed from command by Ayub, Musa or Yahya. They were all sheepish at best. I think the reasons will be given when I am no more.

d. Not informing pro-Pak Kashmiri elements before launching Gibraltar was a command decision and it was mine. The aim of the op was to de freeze the Kashmir issue, raise it from its moribund state, and bring it to the notice of the world. To achieve this aim the first phase of the op was vital, that is, to effect undetected infiltration of thousands across the CFL [cease-fire line]. I was not willing to compromise this in any event. And the whole op could be made stillborn by just one double agent.

e. Haji Pir [Pass] did not cause me much anxiety. Because [the] impending Grand Slam Indian concentration in Haji Pir could only help us after Akhnur, and they would have to pull out troops from there to counter the new threats and surrender their gains, and maybe more, in the process. Actually it was only after the fall of Akhnur that we would have encashed the full value of Gibraltar, but that was not to be!

f. Bhutto kept insisting that his sources had assured him that India would not attack if we did not violate the international border. I however was certain that Gibraltar would lead to war and told GHQ so. I needed no op intelligence to come to this conclusion. It was simple common sense. If I got you by the throat, it would be silly for me to expect that you will kiss me for it. Because I was certain that war would follow, my first choice as objective for Grand Slam was Jammu. From there we could have exploited our success either toward Samba or Kashmir proper as the situation demanded. In any case whether it was Jammu or Akhnur, if we had taken the objective, I do not see how the Indians could have attacked Sialkot before clearing out either of these towns.

g. I have given serious consideration to writing a book, but given up the idea. The book would be the truth. And truth and the popular reaction to it would be good for my ego. But in the long run it would be an unpatriotic act. It will destroy the morale of the army, lower its prestige among the people, be banned in Pakistan, and become a textbook for the Indians. I have little doubt that the Indians will never forgive us the slight of 65 and will avenge it at the first opportunity. I am certain they will hit us in E. Pak [East Pakistan] and we will need all we have to save the situation. The first day of Grand Slam will be fateful in many ways. The worst has still to come and we have to prepare for it. The book is therefore out.
I hope this gives you the gist of what you needed to know. And yes, Ayub was fully involved in the enterprise. As a matter of fact it was his idea. And it was he who ordered me to by-pass Musa while Gibraltar etc. was being planned. I was dealing more with him and Sher Bahadur than with the C-in-C. It is tragic that despite having a good military mind, the FM’s [Foreign Minister Z.A. Bhutto’s] heart was prone to give way. The biggest tragedy is that in this instance it gave way before the eruption of a crisis. Or were they already celebrating a final victory!!
In case you need a more exact description of events, I will need war diaries and maps, which you could send me through the diplomatic bag.
Please remember me to all the family.
Yours,
Akhtar Hussain Malik


Inception-06 said:


> and what was wrong with my post ? ^^


Nichts mein Freund

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Inception-06

PanzerKiel said:


> *GENERAL AKHTER HUSSAIN MALIK LETTER TO GENERAL ABDUL ALI MALIK*
> 
> My Dear brother,
> I hope you and the family are very well. Thank you for your letter of 14 Oct. 67. The answers to your questions are as follows:
> 
> a. The de facto command changed the very first day of the ops [operations] after the fall of Chamb when Azmat Hayat broke off wireless communications with me. I personally tried to find his HQ [headquarters] by chopper and failed. In late afternoon I sent Gulzar and Vahid, my MP [military police] officers, to try and locate him, but they too failed. The next day I tore into him and he sheepishly and nervously informed me that he was ‘Yahya’s brigadier’. I had no doubt left that Yahya had reached him the previous day and instructed him not to take further orders from me, while the formal change in command had yet to take place. This was a betrayal of many dimensions.
> 
> b. I reasoned and then pleaded with Yahya that if it was credit he was looking for, he should take the overall command but let me go up to Akhnur as his subordinate, but he refused. He went a step further and even changed the plan. He kept banging his head against Troti, letting the Indian fall back to Akhnur. We lost the initiative on the very first day of the war and never recovered it. Eventually it was the desperate stand at Chawinda that prevented the Indians from cutting through.
> 
> c. At no time was I assigned any reason for being removed from command by Ayub, Musa or Yahya. They were all sheepish at best. I think the reasons will be given when I am no more.
> 
> d. Not informing pro-Pak Kashmiri elements before launching Gibraltar was a command decision and it was mine. The aim of the op was to de freeze the Kashmir issue, raise it from its moribund state, and bring it to the notice of the world. To achieve this aim the first phase of the op was vital, that is, to effect undetected infiltration of thousands across the CFL [cease-fire line]. I was not willing to compromise this in any event. And the whole op could be made stillborn by just one double agent.
> 
> e. Haji Pir [Pass] did not cause me much anxiety. Because [the] impending Grand Slam Indian concentration in Haji Pir could only help us after Akhnur, and they would have to pull out troops from there to counter the new threats and surrender their gains, and maybe more, in the process. Actually it was only after the fall of Akhnur that we would have encashed the full value of Gibraltar, but that was not to be!
> 
> f. Bhutto kept insisting that his sources had assured him that India would not attack if we did not violate the international border. I however was certain that Gibraltar would lead to war and told GHQ so. I needed no op intelligence to come to this conclusion. It was simple common sense. If I got you by the throat, it would be silly for me to expect that you will kiss me for it. Because I was certain that war would follow, my first choice as objective for Grand Slam was Jammu. From there we could have exploited our success either toward Samba or Kashmir proper as the situation demanded. In any case whether it was Jammu or Akhnur, if we had taken the objective, I do not see how the Indians could have attacked Sialkot before clearing out either of these towns.
> 
> g. I have given serious consideration to writing a book, but given up the idea. The book would be the truth. And truth and the popular reaction to it would be good for my ego. But in the long run it would be an unpatriotic act. It will destroy the morale of the army, lower its prestige among the people, be banned in Pakistan, and become a textbook for the Indians. I have little doubt that the Indians will never forgive us the slight of 65 and will avenge it at the first opportunity. I am certain they will hit us in E. Pak [East Pakistan] and we will need all we have to save the situation. The first day of Grand Slam will be fateful in many ways. The worst has still to come and we have to prepare for it. The book is therefore out.
> I hope this gives you the gist of what you needed to know. And yes, Ayub was fully involved in the enterprise. As a matter of fact it was his idea. And it was he who ordered me to by-pass Musa while Gibraltar etc. was being planned. I was dealing more with him and Sher Bahadur than with the C-in-C. It is tragic that despite having a good military mind, the FM’s [Foreign Minister Z.A. Bhutto’s] heart was prone to give way. The biggest tragedy is that in this instance it gave way before the eruption of a crisis. Or were they already celebrating a final victory!!
> In case you need a more exact description of events, I will need war diaries and maps, which you could send me through the diplomatic bag.
> Please remember me to all the family.
> Yours,
> Akhtar Hussain Malik
> 
> Nichts mein Freund


Yahya Khan made to many failures, he remembered me the german failure not to take Dunkirk. Such personality’s should have been brought to court, imagine this idiot become president and mishandled East Pakistan to Bangla -desh ! Hopefully the Pakistan Army has taken consequences from the previous failures, to put the Bambus stick in wrong hands.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Signalian

Jf-17 block 3 said:


> Is aknoor more valuable or Jammu?


Akhnoor is more closer to the LOC. Its a vital location. If a divisional strength formation can capture it, well and good. For Jammu, a divisional strength formation may not be enough. Thats why I mentioned a whole Corps like 1st Corps.

IMHO, 1st Corps also cannot capture Jammu unless a miracle takes place.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Sal12

Signalian said:


> Repeat of 1971. Armor Divs resting at tank sheds as reserve analogy. Keep the shiny and well oiled tanks sit in their tracks then. Take them out on 23rd March Parade and park them again till next year.
> 
> The amount of time taken in hide and seek will never be enough for both countries to make gains at all. Salahuddin Ayubi had time and repeated opportunities at his hands, whereas in Indo-Pak scenario a nuclear weapon can end it all on the second day of war. You cannot wear India down, well maybe delay Indian forces for a certain amount of time. India has more troops, more tanks, more replacements, more resources.
> 
> If Infantry Div is given the job, it will suffer more casualties and take alot more time. The terrain leading up to Jammu may not be tank friendly as the forces get closer to Jammu. Let 6th Armor Div penetrate 10, 20 or 50 km into J&K towards Jammu. Both Armor Divisions give PA a chance each to conduct an offensive. They make the bridgeheads, then the infantry can come and clean up as the armor can be pulled back later on. Otherwise go through the air, drop airborne forces at Jammu, calculate the chances of success yourself, but first where are the resources. Make do of what is available - tanks.
> 
> Either PA takes Kashmir or let the Kashmir/LOC drama drag on for another century. Lose 50 soldiers annually for PA and 100 soldiers annually for IA on LOC. Drag on Siachen issue side by side also. Keep buying weapons like 5th gen aircraft and 4th gen tanks and nuclear submarines while universities and hospitals can be built and money can be thrown in research. A utopian view of Pakistan as a welfare state could be thought of eventually, which is impossible to even think right now.



Are there any plans in Pak army to raise another division equivalent to FCNA in Gilgit Baltistan for any offensive from Gilgit to Ladakh. It looks like PA has all attentions towards Jammu and Kashmir but not western Ladakh. On contrary, looks like this will be India who tries to capture GB from Ladakh.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## farooqbhai007

Signalian said:


> @farooqbhai007
> 
> You would usually have an artillery regiment supporting a brigade or 6 guns battery supporting a battalion. Im anticipating that in case of a major offensive more artillery guns will be assigned.


my question was something else , images were attached to post before i deleted that , but i showed 16 x M109s + 3 M113/Talha Command APCs at some garrisson , so i was wondering if 2 M109s were missing , 
The indians also follow same amount of Arty , 18 K-9s per regiment as shown in a sat image.


----------



## PanzerKiel

farooqbhai007 said:


> my question was something else , images were attached to post before i deleted that , but i showed 16 x M109s + 3 M113/Talha Command APCs at some garrisson , so i was wondering if 2 M109s were missing ,
> The indians also follow same amount of Arty , 18 K-9s per regiment as shown in a sat image.


Generally. two to three pieces are missing in every Regiment due to regular maintenance or overhaul.... Otherwise, tables of organization and equipment for both armies are ALMOST equal.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## farooqbhai007

PanzerKiel said:


> Generally. two to three pieces are missing in every Regiment due to regular maintenance or overhaul.... Otherwise, tables of organization and equipment for both armies are ALMOST equal.


ahh i see


----------



## Signalian

farooqbhai007 said:


> my question was something else , images were attached to post before i deleted that , but i showed 16 x M109s + 3 M113/Talha Command APCs at some garrisson , so i was wondering if 2 M109s were missing ,
> The indians also follow same amount of Arty , 18 K-9s per regiment as shown in a sat image.


I saw what you posted and went a step ahead of your question to answer you. Its at commander's discretion how many pieces of equipment he allots to a certain force.

The first pic you posted had 3 x batteries of 6 x M-109 each, totaling 18 x M-109.
The second pic you posted had 16 x M-109. Regarding this pic, maybe you took that from OSINT sources. These 16 were standing under the sun. What if other 2 ended up in EME workshop ? or HIT ? or were sent for any demonstration ? or standing under a covered shed somewhere ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

Signalian said:


> I saw what you posted and went a step ahead of your question to answer you. Its at commander's discretion how many pieces of equipment he allots to a certain force.
> 
> The first pic you posted had 3 x batteries of 6 x M-109 each, totaling 18 x M-109.
> The second pic you posted had 16 x M-109. Regarding this pic, maybe you took that from OSINT sources. These 16 were standing under the sun. What if other 2 ended up in EME workshop ? or HIT ? or were sent for any demonstration ? or standing under a covered shed somewhere ?


Ah i see , PanzerKiel answered already but thanks for replying, 
Also the 18 SPH pic was of K-9 Vajras of ze 31st armoured division's Artillery brigade of Indian Army.
While the 16 M109 was from M109 compound in a garrison , so probably the arty would have been in Shed or at maintenance.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sine Nomine

Signalian said:


> Either PA takes Kashmir or let the Kashmir/LOC drama drag on for another century. Lose 50 soldiers annually for PA and 100 soldiers annually for IA on LOC. Drag on Siachen issue side by side also. Keep buying weapons like 5th gen aircraft and 4th gen tanks and nuclear submarines while universities and hospitals can be built and money can be thrown in research. A utopian view of Pakistan as a welfare state could be thought of eventually, which is impossible to even think right now.


I suppose signalian i.d hasn't been hacked by some rough person.


----------



## Signalian

Sine Nomine said:


> I suppose signalian i.d hasn't been hacked by some rough person.


Extremely rough, in fact a rogue person 

If i have offended you through my post then i apologize to you, if you had to bear my words generally then i am thankful to you.

Its the kashmiris who are supposed to be the deciding factor, do they really want to be a part of Pakistan ? do they want independence from India and also dont want to join Pakistan rather want an independent country for themselves ?

My concern is that Pakistani military has to solve this issue of LOC ASAP but unfortunately military doesn't have strength in numbers neither is equipped perfectly for a war that can end in any direction, even a nuclear outcome is possible.

So buy all the VT-4s or M-113s or churn out AK-IIs from HIT (whenever) but which one of these can PA really deploy in J&K mountains ?

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Sine Nomine

Signalian said:


> Extremely rough, in fact a rogue person
> 
> If i have offended you through my post then i apologize to you, if you had to bear my words generally then i am thankful to you.
> 
> Its the kashmiris who are supposed to be the deciding factor, do they really want to be a part of Pakistan ? do they want independence from India and also dont want to join Pakistan rather want an independent country for themselves ?
> 
> My concern is that Pakistani military has to solve this issue of LOC ASAP but unfortunately military doesn't have strength in numbers neither is equipped perfectly for a war that can end in any direction, even a nuclear outcome is possible.
> 
> So buy all the VT-4s or M-113s or churn out AK-IIs from HIT (whenever) but which one of these can PA really deploy in J&K mountains ?


Some time ago when i purposed going ballistic,it was you who said that it's not in our interest to fight a total war.
Our fight in J&K requires almost 30 LID's trained in mountain warfare no less than that,otherwise this issue would drag on.
P.S:-You should probably read about first failed coup of PA(If you haven't)the main character has same thinking,according to him this would drag on.


I don't know if this has been posted already but HIT has started M109A2 rebuilt factory.
*SELF PROPELLED (SP) GUN
M-109A2*

SP Gun Rebuilt at HRF(M) is a symbol of pride, technological advancement and landmark in the achievement of self reliance. The SP Gun is rebuilt to the OEM’s specifications and parameters through state of the art rebuilt facilities, machinery/equipment, test benches, optimum quality standards and dedication of the professional work force. Most economical rebuild is achieved through maximum reclamation, engineering management and computerized `inventory.








HIT-Products


@Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Sine Nomine said:


> 30 LID'


You mean 30 Light infantry divs!!!?. That's greater than the entire PA

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Sine Nomine

Desert Fox 1 said:


> You mean 30 Light infantry divs!!!?. That's greater than the entire PA


Mountain Warfare is nasty business,for reaching a point where we can safely flex our muscles when it comes to J&K we almost need a ground force which is triple the size of current one(_that's purely my assumption_).

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Sine Nomine said:


> Mountain Warfare is nasty business,for reaching a point where we can safely flex our muscles when it comes to J&K we almost need a ground force which is triple the size of current one(_that's purely my assumption_).


That means we should forget taking Kashmir by force


----------



## Signalian

Sine Nomine said:


> Some time ago when i purposed going ballistic,it was you who said that it's not in our interest to fight a total war.
> Our fight in J&K requires almost 30 LID's trained in mountain warfare no less than that,otherwise this issue would drag on.
> P.S:-You should probably read about first failed coup of PA(If you haven't)the main character has same thinking,according to him this would drag on.


Any advance in J&K will spread to IB at some point and a total war will begin. PA is getting tanks, APCs and SP Arty etc. These machines are used in plains and desert, maybe hills to some extent. 

PA doesnt have required man power to take J&K, not even the resources. So if the conflict is started in Kashmir and J&K cannot be taken while a total war starts, whats the end result ? You dont get J&K, you lose territory somewhere else and risk a nuclear war. 

PA and IA both are losing soldiers on LOC and in Siachen. what is to be done ? There is no end in sight.

Regarding your PS:
The threat of CMs, BMs, surgical strikes, retaliatory strikes, proxy war through ongoing insurgency , nuclear war etc was not at that time. This 5th gen warfare is a destructive game. 



Sine Nomine said:


> Mountain Warfare is nasty business,for reaching a point where we can safely flex our muscles when it comes to J&K we almost need a ground force which is triple the size of current one(_that's purely my assumption_).


If the numbers are not there, then compensation is mobility and fire power. This concept is not new, PA already uses this concept in infantry regiments (LATs).

There could be a way, the helicopter use of Vietnam war era. 100's of transport helicopters, those which can operate at night and in adverse weather in mountain regions at high altitudes. That would require complete cooperation from PAF - to provide air cover, carry mountain strikes and conduct DEAD Ops. There are hardly any air assault formations else than SF. Kargil was a covert Ops till its compromise, and lacked PAF support. This one could be conventional warfare on peaks and covert Ops in urban streets of J&K, both amalgamated into each other.

So this opens the topic of AIrborne and Air assault Ops in PA. Not from SSG like in COIN Ops but a Brigade level or Divisional level Ops from Air Assault Infantry. This would mean raising new formations. 30 LIDs you said ? I don't know. 10, 20 or 30. How much progress can be made before India fires first CM or India assaults on IB or before Uncle SAM starts screaming.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
3


----------



## Raja Porus

Does anyone has new pictures of the VT4s of PA?


----------



## Raja Porus

Seems like 8 inf div, Sialkot. @PanzerKiel is this in service or trials only

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> View attachment 709359
> 
> Seems like 8 inf div, Sialkot. @PanzerKiel is this in service or trials only


I used it somewhere about 8 years ago once it was finally inducted.....

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> I used it somewhere about 8 years ago once it was finally inducted.....


Company level?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> I used it somewhere about 8 years ago once it was finally inducted.....


This came to me as a surprise as I have been going to exercises and firing ranges with my father since childhood but never saw one. Perhaps this has to do with him being in signals. Becharay kabootar

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Reichmarshal

Signals walas need to do saber shukar as the corps was almost disbanded. Had the c4i setup not been handed to them which btw was build n setup by eme, they would have stood redundant as their utility in the army would be zero.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Reichmarshal said:


> Signals walas need to do saber shukar as the corps was almost disbanded. Had the c4i set not been handed to them which btw was build n setup by eme, they would have stood redundant as their utility in the army would be zero.



excuse me please what again in clear words ? Shukria

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

What ab


Reichmarshal said:


> Signals walas need to do saber shukar as the corps was almost disbanded. Had the c4i set not been handed to them which btw was build n setup by eme, they would have stood redundant as their utility in the army would be zero.


What about pascom,defcom etc. Aslo the scu units on the LoC?

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Reichmarshal

Desert Fox 1 said:


> What ab
> What about pascom,defcom etc. Aslo the scu units on the LoC?



All relics of an age gone by.

Reactions: Sad Sad:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

Reichmarshal said:


> All relics of an age gone by.


Satellite comms?😁


----------



## In arduis fidelis

Sorry if this has already been answered just wanted to know if there is planned induction of IFVs or 8x8 armoured vehicles to replace M113 in PA svc?


----------



## Inception-06

In arduis fidelis said:


> Sorry if this has already been answered just wanted to know if there is planned induction of IFVs or 8x8 armoured vehicles to replace M113 in PA svc?



No !


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> No !


Unfortunately

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## In arduis fidelis

Inception-06 said:


> No !


So the Viper IFV was never even tested?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

In arduis fidelis said:


> Sorry if this has already been answered just wanted to know if there is planned induction of IFVs or 8x8 armoured vehicles to replace M113 in PA svc?


Wheels vs Tracked is another Pandora's box.

Should a wheeled APC formation be termed "mechanized" ?

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Tipu7

Signalian said:


> Wheels vs Tracked is another Pandora's box.
> 
> Should a wheeled APC formation be termed "mechanized" ?


Motorized...

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Signalian

Tipu7 said:


> Motorized...


Motor rifle - the soviet way

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
3


----------



## In arduis fidelis

Signalian said:


> Wheels vs Tracked is another Pandora's box.
> 
> Should a wheeled APC formation be termed "mechanized" ?


Stryker/BTR vs M113. I am pretty sure what i would like in a mech div if i were to be a part of one.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Metal 0-1

*In 2012 Pakistan Army successfully conducted exercise to "Jam Enemy Tanks". Also used Laser Tech*

_The Pakistan armed forces successfully experimented with the technique of jamming movement of tanks and using laser technology in modern warfare. ‘Enemy’ tanks were tracked and jammed through centrally controlled laser technology via wireless supervision and monitoring. _

*Source:*
*Muzaffargarh Ranges: Kayani witnesses jamming of tanks*








Muzaffargarh Ranges: Kayani witnesses jamming of tanks | The Express Tribune


Forces experiment with use of laser technology in summer exercises.




tribune.com.pk

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

Metal 0-1 said:


> *In 2012 Pakistan Army successfully conducted exercise to "Jam Enemy Tanks". Also used Laser Tech*
> 
> _The Pakistan armed forces successfully experimented with the technique of jamming movement of tanks and using laser technology in modern warfare. ‘Enemy’ tanks were tracked and jammed through centrally controlled laser technology via wireless supervision and monitoring. _
> 
> *Source:*
> *Muzaffargarh Ranges: Kayani witnesses jamming of tanks*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Muzaffargarh Ranges: Kayani witnesses jamming of tanks | The Express Tribune
> 
> 
> Forces experiment with use of laser technology in summer exercises.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tribune.com.pk


Interesting. Wondering how it was achieved?


----------



## Metal 0-1

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Interesting. Wondering how it was achieved?


My best guess is a directed EMP source. And it makes sense too.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

Metal 0-1 said:


> *In 2012 Pakistan Army successfully conducted exercise to "Jam Enemy Tanks". Also used Laser Tech*
> 
> _The Pakistan armed forces successfully experimented with the technique of jamming movement of tanks and using laser technology in modern warfare. ‘Enemy’ tanks were tracked and jammed through centrally controlled laser technology via wireless supervision and monitoring. _
> 
> *Source:*
> *Muzaffargarh Ranges: Kayani witnesses jamming of tanks*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Muzaffargarh Ranges: Kayani witnesses jamming of tanks | The Express Tribune
> 
> 
> Forces experiment with use of laser technology in summer exercises.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tribune.com.pk


bhai bahoot kuch hai PA kay pass , google earth par gdf say related radar nazar ajatay jo inventory mey nahi, to yeh to bohot agay ki cheez

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Packee

Metal 0-1 said:


> *In 2012 Pakistan Army successfully conducted exercise to "Jam Enemy Tanks". Also used Laser Tech*
> 
> _The Pakistan armed forces successfully experimented with the technique of jamming movement of tanks and using laser technology in modern warfare. ‘Enemy’ tanks were tracked and jammed through centrally controlled laser technology via wireless supervision and monitoring. _
> 
> *Source:*
> *Muzaffargarh Ranges: Kayani witnesses jamming of tanks*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Muzaffargarh Ranges: Kayani witnesses jamming of tanks | The Express Tribune
> 
> 
> Forces experiment with use of laser technology in summer exercises.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tribune.com.pk


Wasn't this just an exercise where the Tank rounds were simulated digitally.


----------



## ghazi52

c. 1950s: Pakistan Day Parade in Peshawar.

Any idea what type of cars were?

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Wow Wow:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

ghazi52 said:


> c. 1950s: Pakistan Day Parade in Peshawar.
> 
> Any idea what type of cars were?
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 710181


GMC Fox MK I

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Metal 0-1 said:


> *In 2012 Pakistan Army successfully conducted exercise to "Jam Enemy Tanks". Also used Laser Tech*
> 
> _The Pakistan armed forces successfully experimented with the technique of jamming movement of tanks and using laser technology in modern warfare. ‘Enemy’ tanks were tracked and jammed through centrally controlled laser technology via wireless supervision and monitoring. _
> 
> *Source:*
> *Muzaffargarh Ranges: Kayani witnesses jamming of tanks*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Muzaffargarh Ranges: Kayani witnesses jamming of tanks | The Express Tribune
> 
> 
> Forces experiment with use of laser technology in summer exercises.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tribune.com.pk


Yeh kiya post kar diya, ab Dazzler se daant paray gi.


ghazi52 said:


> c. 1950s: Pakistan Day Parade in Peshawar.
> 
> Any idea what type of cars were?
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 710181


These could be part of an armored brigade that PA had composed of those little honeys, Stuart tanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Metal 0-1

Signalian said:


> eh kiya post kar diya, ab Dazzler se daant paray gi.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Metal 0-1 said:


> *In 2012 Pakistan Army successfully conducted exercise to "Jam Enemy Tanks". Also used Laser Tech*
> 
> _The Pakistan armed forces successfully experimented with the technique of jamming movement of tanks and using laser technology in modern warfare. ‘Enemy’ tanks were tracked and jammed through centrally controlled laser technology via wireless supervision and monitoring. _
> 
> *Source:*
> *Muzaffargarh Ranges: Kayani witnesses jamming of tanks*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Muzaffargarh Ranges: Kayani witnesses jamming of tanks | The Express Tribune
> 
> 
> Forces experiment with use of laser technology in summer exercises.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tribune.com.pk



It was just a experiment, not further developed and deployed.


Signalian said:


> Yeh kiya post kar diya, ab Dazzler se daant paray gi.
> 
> These could be part of an armored brigade that PA had composed of those little honeys, Stuart tanks.



Did they had any role in Indo Pak war ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> It was just a experiment, not further developed and deployed.
> 
> 
> Did they had any role in Indo Pak war ?


Must have been replaced i think with the American assistance

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Inception-06 said:


> It was just a experiment, not further developed and deployed.
> 
> 
> Did they had any role in Indo Pak war ?


Stuarts were employed in 1965 in different sectors, including Rann of Kutch skirmish....


Desert Fox 1 said:


> Must have been replaced i think with the American assistance


Later, much later....


Signalian said:


> Yeh kiya post kar diya, ab Dazzler se daant paray gi.
> 
> These could be part of an armored brigade that PA had composed of those little honeys, Stuart tanks.


That was 3 IAB.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## farooqbhai007

in addition to GMC Fox scout cars , PA also had the ferret ones

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sine Nomine

Desert Fox 1 said:


> That means we should forget taking Kashmir by force


Nope sometimes combination of correct timing and TACTICS can outmaneuver larger foes.Pakistan in past 70 years hasn't tried taking J&K even once at national level.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Sine Nomine

Signalian said:


> Any advance in J&K will spread to IB at some point and a total war will begin. PA is getting tanks, APCs and SP Arty etc. These machines are used in plains and desert, maybe hills to some extent.
> 
> PA doesnt have required man power to take J&K, not even the resources. So if the conflict is started in Kashmir and J&K cannot be taken while a total war starts, whats the end result ? You dont get J&K, you lose territory somewhere else and risk a nuclear war.


We havn't tried taking J&K even once at national level,correct me if i am wrong when did Pakistan ever drew a plan engaging all vectors of state for this single task?Never



Signalian said:


> If the numbers are not there, then compensation is mobility and fire power. This concept is not new, PA already uses this concept in infantry regiments (LATs).


It's going to be battle uphill in hills, we need tons of small equipment and manpower.After Pakistan breaks IA at LOC if everything goes according to plan,it would be slow,bitter and bloody fight involving small arms,rpg's,AA guns,mortars and pack howitzers.



Signalian said:


> There could be a way, the helicopter use of Vietnam war era. 100's of transport helicopters, those which can operate at night and in adverse weather in mountain regions at high altitudes. That would require complete cooperation from PAF - to provide air cover, carry mountain strikes and conduct DEAD Ops. There are hardly any air assault formations else than SF. Kargil was a covert Ops till its compromise, and lacked PAF support. This one could be conventional warfare on peaks and covert Ops in urban streets of J&K, both amalgamated into each other.


I have studied all of these options wrp to J&k;
1-Heliborne ops in first phase are out of question,SAM's,AA guns and shoulder fired missiles would be major obstruction on top of that it requires huge no of rotary assets.
2-Kargil was a missed opportunity,was started without proper buildup and ended in humiliation for us.It would have been started if GHQ was able to make Bharati buildup at IB akin to signing of death warrant for IA troops in siachen.
3-Days of doing a covert ops in J&K are long gone,locals won't trust this time and if they even do, it won't impact anything except tying up 1 or 2 inf div's of IA.




Signalian said:


> So this opens the topic of AIrborne and Air assault Ops in PA. Not from SSG like in COIN Ops but a Brigade level or Divisional level Ops from Air Assault Infantry. This would mean raising new formations. 30 LIDs you said ? I don't know. 10, 20 or 30. How much progress can be made before India fires first CM or India assaults on IB or before Uncle SAM starts screaming.


Only a Divisional level Paradrop in valley would make difference but there is more into that;
0-Our mission is to capture valley.
1-It would require complete air superiority over J&k and highly contested airspace over rest of area that too in favour of PAF.
2-SEAD/DEAD ops by PAF.
Both 1 & 2 require atleast double the amount of current PAF assets.
3-Huge transport fleet both tact and strat.
4-A good amount of launching bases from where troops and equipment can be uplifted and dropped at DLZ's.
5-A determined three pronged attack from Bagh for capturing Baramullah,Poonch, Gulmarg and establishing rendezvous with elements of paradrop.
5-That ops has to be completed in less than 24 hours.
For pulling all this off we need balls of steel and $$$.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Wow Wow:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

But in a hilly region paradrop would produce nothing but chaos. What if the paradrop is successful after the Indian airforce as well as AD has been completely neutralised. What will they do if there is no proper link up and the link up troops have been bogged down or even delayed by the indians. It will be a far cry like Operation Market Garden The only use of paradrop would be sabotage ops by small SFs.The only way we can get Kashmir is by simultaneous offensive ops by both 1 corps as well as 10th corps and complete air superiority over the concerned sectors but then a general war will start over the whole of IB. Moreover,remember that among the thresholds for the use of nuclear weapons is space threshold.

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Sine Nomine

Desert Fox 1 said:


> But in a hilly region paradrop would produce nothing but chaos. What if the paradrop is successful after the Indian airforce as well as AD has been completely neutralised. What will they do if there is no proper link up and the link up troops have been bogged down or even delayed by the indians. It will be a far cry like Operation Market Garden The only use of paradrop would be sabotage ops by small SFs.The only way we can get Kashmir is by simultaneous offensive ops by both 1 corps as well as 10th corps and complete air superiority over the concerned sectors but then a general war will start over the whole of IB. Moreover,remember that among the thresholds for the use of nuclear weapons is space threshold.


What PAF would do when hostile assets have been neutralised?
It would run non stop CAS for clearing enemy entrenched troops coupled with UAV and Gunships.
It cannot be compared to ops Market Garden since we are not looking for a 100 Km long salient as objective that too in almost plain area,our main objective just lies 50 Km away from PA front line on top of that after Paradropped troops have secured an airfield under cover of PAF,more units can be deployed via mixture of helos and aircrafts.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GriffinsRule

Sine Nomine said:


> We havn't tried taking J&K even once at national level,correct me if i am wrong when did Pakistan ever drew a plan engaging all vectors of state for this single task?Never
> 
> 
> It's going to be battle uphill in hills, we need tons of small equipment and manpower.After Pakistan breaks IA at LOC if everything goes according to plan,it would be slow,bitter and bloody fight involving small arms,rpg's,AA guns,mortars and pack howitzers.
> 
> 
> I have studied all of these options wrp to J&k;
> 1-Heliborne ops in first phase are out of question,SAM's,AA guns and shoulder fired missiles would be major obstruction on top of that it requires huge no of rotary assets.
> 2-Kargil was a missed opportunity,was started without proper buildup and ended in humiliation for us.It would have been started if GHQ was able to make Bharati buildup at IB akin to signing of death warrant for IA troops in siachen.
> 3-Days of doing a covert ops in J&K are long gone,locals won't trust this time and if they even do, it won't impact anything except tying up 1 or 2 inf div's of IA.
> 
> 
> 
> Only a Divisional level Paradrop in valley would make difference but there is more into that;
> 0-Our mission is to capture valley.
> 1-It would require complete air superiority over J&k and highly contested airspace over rest of area that too in favour of PAF.
> 2-SEAD/DEAD ops by PAF.
> Both 1 & 2 require atleast double the amount of current PAF assets.
> 3-Huge transport fleet both tact and strat.
> 4-A good amount of launching bases from where troops and equipment can be uplifted and dropped at DLZ's.
> 5-A determined three pronged attack from Bagh for capturing Baramullah,Poonch, Gulmarg and establishing rendezvous with elements of paradrop.
> 5-That ops has to be completed in less than 24 hours.
> For pulling all this off we need balls of steel and $$$.


Not just that, to achieve success, we have to be the aggressors as well, that means attacking without provocation and gaining the element of surprise. Not sure that is possible really given the Indian surveillance capabilities and the Americans playing spoilers, but that would have to be it. Cant take J&K when India is prepared and waiting, or in fact attacking as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Eagle_Nest

Sine Nomine said:


> Nope sometimes combination of correct timing and TACTICS can outmaneuver larger foes.Pakistan in past 70 years hasn't tried taking J&K even once at national level.


"Operation Gibraltar"


----------



## Sine Nomine

Eagle_Nest said:


> "Operation Gibraltar"


Sir it wasn't.


GriffinsRule said:


> Not just that, to achieve success, we have to be the aggressors as well, that means attacking without provocation and gaining the element of surprise. Not sure that is possible really given the Indian surveillance capabilities and the Americans playing spoilers, but that would have to be it. Cant take J&K when India is prepared and waiting, or in fact attacking as well.


That's why if we want to take J&K,a plan must be at national level,preparing mil into a juggernaut from which enemy even with prior knowledge won't be able to escape.

Reactions: Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Signalian

Desert Fox 1 said:


> But in a hilly region paradrop would produce nothing but chaos. What if the paradrop is successful after the Indian airforce as well as AD has been completely neutralised. What will they do if there is no proper link up and the link up troops have been bogged down or even delayed by the indians. It will be a far cry like Operation Market Garden The only use of paradrop would be sabotage ops by small SFs.The only way we can get Kashmir is by simultaneous offensive ops by both 1 corps as well as 10th corps and complete air superiority over the concerned sectors but then a general war will start over the whole of IB. Moreover,remember that among the thresholds for the use of nuclear weapons is space threshold.


Air assault and para drop (airborne) are different.


Sine Nomine said:


> What PAF would do when hostile assets have been neutralised?
> It would run non stop CAS for clearing enemy entrenched troops coupled with UAV and Gunships.
> It cannot be compared to ops Market Garden since we are not looking for a 100 Km long salient as objective that too in almost plain area,our main objective just lies 50 Km away from PA front line on top of that after Paradropped troops have secured an airfield under cover of PAF,more units can be deployed via mixture of helos and aircrafts.


which motorized or mechanized vehicle can effectively support troops in mountains? 
ATV? M113 ? 4x4 light armored Jeep ? armored Humvee ? 8 x 8 or 6 x 6 wheeled IFV ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sine Nomine

Signalian said:


> which motorized or mechanized vehicle can effectively support troops in mountains?
> ATV? M113 ? 4x4 light armored Jeep ? armored Humvee ? 8 x 8 or 6 x 6 wheeled IFV


M113 is out of question,a mixture of armored Humvees and wheeled IFV is best bet in such terrain.
P.S:-Have you taken look at Dongfeng CSK-181?If not not do take a look at it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

I think that first we should define the objectives and then the means of reaching them...
By the way I think that the best way of getting Kashmir is by first establishing complete air superiority over concerned sectors then by using the light troops you are talking about for ambushes and restricting movement plus the airforce can help destroy bridges and other infrastructure of strategic importance, thus preventing reinforcements. This will be followed by a quick link up by elements of 10corps. Like water,our troops will be fluid in their movements leaving pockets of resistance and well defended garrisons for follow up troops and artillery. 1corps may also be used, as general war would undoubtedly be started,to pinch at the gurdaspur district preventing outflanking of 10corps from south and also keeping the enemy at defensive.
A somewhat similar strategy was adopted by the irregulars in 1948 where they would first set up ambushes and blocking positions behind the garrisons then lay siege to it and after the reinforcements were dealt with they would leave as small sieging force and move up to another objective.

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Signalian

Sine Nomine said:


> M113 is out of question,a mixture of armored Humvees and wheeled IFV is best bet in such terrain.
> P.S:-Have you taken look at Dongfeng CSK-181?If not not do take a look at it.


Yes i had a look at it.

Why not M-113 ? you think the engine is not powerful or the tracks wont go any further on the paved road ?
IA took Stuart up in the mountains weighing 14.5 T, M-113 is almost same weight. From combat point, M-113 burns badly so a RPG hit can be disastrous. T-59 II also dragged itself up on a mountain peak. Now that 105mm gun would be very useful but T-59 II will be slow in mobility.

So what are we looking at now ? mobility or firepower or Armor protection in mountains on paved roads and dirt tracks. 

There will be lots of 2.5, 5, 10 Ton trucks too. Support vehicles are usually soft skinned.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Metal 0-1

Signalian said:


> which motorized or mechanized vehicle can effectively support troops in mountains?
> ATV? M113 ? 4x4 light armored Jeep ? armored Humvee ? 8 x 8 or 6 x 6 wheeled IFV ?



4x4, 6x6, 8x8 Armored vehicles OR IFVs and M113s are out of equation.

With light and fast vehicles you can out flank enemy armour which will be struggling in given terrain and couple of shots from ATGMs OR RPG-7s will definitely knock them out.












They can be air lifted with troops in OA.





OR Light Land Rovers.





SAS using them for years.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

But first we should define the objectives for our troops, then can we talk about the equipment and supplies that'll be needed to attain and sustain those objectives


Metal 0-1 said:


> OR Light Land Rovers.


This one is beautiful. It also has smoke grenade launchers. Looks a bit similar to our defenders

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Sine Nomine

Signalian said:


> Yes i had a look at it.
> 
> Why not M-113 ? you think the engine is not powerful or the tracks wont go any further on the paved road ?
> IA took Stuart up in the mountains weighing 14.5 T, M-113 is almost same weight. From combat point, M-113 burns badly so a RPG hit can be disastrous. T-59 II also dragged itself up on a mountain peak. Now that 105mm gun would be very useful but T-59 II will be slow in mobility.
> 
> So what are we looking at now ? mobility or firepower or Armor protection in mountains on paved roads and dirt tracks.
> 
> There will be lots of 2.5, 5, 10 Ton trucks too. Support vehicles are usually soft skinned.


Leave M-113 for Mech formations operating in plains.Any tracked vehicle is going to put constraint on logistics,best bet is mixture of same type of vehicles armored and unarmored wheeled one's.
Tracked vehicle at best in these areas can be deployed for psychological factors rather than operational one's.
Our best bet is light infantry(in huge numbers) with lighter and lethal firepower aided by AC,Gunships, UCAV's and sound logistics chain.


Desert Fox 1 said:


> But first we should define the objectives for our troops, then can we talk about the equipment and supplies that'll be needed to attain and sustain those objectives


For me our first objective should be Valley,an area where population supports us and which is easy as compared to Kargil area and Jammu.


----------



## Raja Porus

Sine Nomine said:


> For me our first objective should be Valley,an area where population supports us and which is easy as compared to Kargil area and Jammu


Yes but you see that many garrisons and military strongholds are there between Srinagar and AK. It is not a free run. First we have to identify which salients have to be attacked and occupied which to be bypassed and which to be contained. There are the garrisons of poonch,rajouri in the way to Srinagar. Not mentioning Baramulla that lies to Northwest of Srinagar and pulwama which lies to the south East. Just mentioning a few.
If we go straight for poonch without containing rajouri then they can flank us from the south, similarly if we go from poonch to Srinagar there will be baramulla to the North of our forces and badgam is also Infront of Srinagar.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Yes but you see that many garrisons and military strongholds are there between Srinagar and AK. It is not a free run. First we have to identify which salients have to be attacked and occupied which to be bypassed and which to be contained. There are the garrisons of poonch,rajouri in the way to Srinagar. Not mentioning Baramulla that lies to Northwest of Srinagar and pulwama which lies to the south East. Just mentioning a few.
> If we go straight for poonch without containing rajouri then they can flank us from the south, similarly if we go from poonch to Srinagar there will be baramulla to the North of our forces and badgam is also Infront of Srinagar.


Keeping in view the current force dispositions and reserves on both sides in Kashmir , major territorial losses or gains may not be possible for any side.

This thing was recognized by IA at the onset of 71 war. Therefore, instead of coming for AK frontally, General Candeth launched his main thrust along working boundary in Sialkot and Shakargarh sectors. His aim being to outflank our strong defences along LOC.

If war would have continued, this thrust along with frontal attacks against our 12 division would have been difficult for us to handle. We would have been forced to commit the infantry component of ARN initially, and later of ARS as well.

With ARS diluted, their strike forces, along with forces shifted from Eastern Command, world have been able to operate with impunity south of Lahore and in desert.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Yes but you see that many garrisons and military strongholds are there between Srinagar and AK. It is not a free run. First we have to identify which salients have to be attacked and occupied which to be bypassed and which to be contained. There are the garrisons of poonch,rajouri in the way to Srinagar. Not mentioning Baramulla that lies to Northwest of Srinagar and pulwama which lies to the south East. Just mentioning a few.
> If we go straight for poonch without containing rajouri then they can flank us from the south, similarly if we go from poonch to Srinagar there will be baramulla to the North of our forces and badgam is also Infront of Srinagar.



In mountains, fight is always for the peaks since they dominate a wide area all around, you dominate in terms of observation as well as fire.

A buildup in the face of an enemy who is on the peaks cannot be hidden for long. Surprise is difficult to achieve, unless infiltration is resorted to, that too in small groups. 2 Naga, 18 Grenadiers and 8 Sikhs, as part of 192 Brigade, had to face the same kind of domination during their assaults on Tiger Hill.
The defender can easily reinforce his defences if he gets even a whiff of a buildup. (Poonch 1971, 12 Division's 2 brigade attack against Indian 2 brigades)

In simple words, if you have to attack, then you must aim to to capture a peak quickly, then must open the logistics route so tthat the newly captured ground is able to sustain the counter attacks of the defender.

Remember, the defender is already taxed since he has to attack uphill to regain his lost position. He can only succeed if he can deny the attacker on the top urgently needed re-supply of ammo and heavy weapons. If defender can deny that, then with support of heavy artillery ofcourse to keep the heads down of the people at top, he has some chance of success.

LOC is already full of salients and bulges at present. They are being held just because the defences at the tops have been fortified and well stuffed supplies to last for weeks.

While India can induct reinforcements into the sector in wartime, Pakistan may not be able to spare much because of its army is much smaller. Nonetheless, compared to earlier wars, Pakistan is far better off even allowing for land’s reinforcements.

India might seem to have many opportunities to attack in this sector because of its superior strength. The problem is that the Indian line of communications runs very close to LOC. The loss of the road itself would not be fatal because:

All formations have large reserve stockpiles of equipment to enable them to fight for many months..and..
Air re-supply is available on a considerable scale.

The location of existing roads and the need to protect them force India into some very predictable moves. For example, IA always has to attack from Kargil and from Dras to push the PA as far back as possible. This predictability limits IA flexibility and prevents the achievement of surprise.

Moreover, still the force to space ratio in this area is very low. This is to say that given the length of the front, the number of troops is insubstantial. This should provide excellent opportunity for maneuver. The high mountains, however, impose severe constraints on which areas can be used for operations.

While India has good lateral east- west communications, Pakistan has good north-south communication through the river valleys. It is easier for IA to defend than to attack: but the converse is true for Pakistan.

Historically, the only fighting that resulted in strategic gains in North Kashmir took place in 1947-48. Initially, there were no Indian regular troops in the area, and the few levies of the Maharaja of Kashmir proved ineffective. The area was considered inaccessible, though this did not stop the Azad troops from capturing it. India could not even spare a single regular battalion as Army HQ was totally focused towards the valley. This omission, however logical it may have appeared at that time, was to cost us IA badly, especially after the Pakistan-China ties warmed up.

India started to worry about the area only in the late 1950s, when trouble with China began brewing. Then it was discovered that holding Ladakh while simultaneously protecting the cease-fire line against Pakistan was a tough proposition, which it remains to this day.

Both in 1965 and 1971 there were no strategic gains in this sector. Fighting took place for piquets dominating the Leh road. In both cases India did better than Pakistan, because Pakistan depended on the ruggedness of the terrain and therefore had committed few resources. IA had large numbers of regular troops, Pakistan had none.

Coming back to mountain terrain.....
Take the example of 19 Division (IA).
If we conceive this sector as the left half of a lady’s Chinese fan, we see that the roads from the fan’s hinge (Srinagar) to the periphery (Uri, Tithwal, Gurais) are excellent, but that the links along the periphery are inadequate or non-existent. Thus, reserves from Srinagar and Baramula can be sent quickly to Uri, Tithwal and Gurais, but there can be no movement between these three sectors without first returning to the Valley.

This creates the worst possible situation for a military commander: his forces are deployed as long fingers and no finger can support the other. Each sector must fight its own battle and must, then, be correspondingly self-sufficient in forces.

Pakistan, on the other hand, has excellent lateral communications. It holds a shallow part of mountainous Western Kashmir with the plains behind. So it can switch forces and concentrate at will at any point along the line between Jammu and Tithwal.

This gives PA the initiative in the entire area.
Nonetheless, India holds one advantage not enjoyed by Pakistan. IA has to attack downhill, whereas Pakistan has to move uphill.

The complication in all the Jammu and Kashmir sectors is the political importance of the ground. No first strike can be countered without giving up some ground. In Jammu and Kashmir every square kilometre lost no matter what the reason is held against the commander with his superiors and their political superiors.

This unfortunate situation should have been corrected years ago.

The only remedy then becomes to over-ensure in each sector, and to maintain troops right on the line, holding every kilometre as closely as possible, even though this involves violating the principles of war relating to surprise and economy of force. There can be no economy or concentration of force because the enemy is aware of your compulsions to avoid giving up ground, and can, therefore, accurately predict your actions.

This, however, is only one of the two reasons (FOR IA) why such large forces have to be mentioned along LOC. The other, seldom openly stated, is the perceived need to contend with a hostile domestic population in wartime.

The battle will, then, be on two fronts. Take the example of 161 Brigade. Normally, it has the usual five regular and one BSF battalion. The Brigade commander, however, does not regard his forces as equal to 2/3rds of a division. He allots three infantry battalions, a normal brigade, to the front. And he allots the other three battalions to keep open his Line of Communications, with Baramula, 60 kms away.

So the commander, 161 Brigade has, from his viewpoint, only the minimum number of troops required for his job. Given the importance of the ground, we may speculate he would like a minimum of another regular battalion. And the Indian Army, at least, is no stranger to seven battalion brigades.

Because of the mountainous terrain, however, neither side is likely to achieve major gains. As a caveat it should be said that if one side makes a breakthrough for example, if Pakistan took Poonch or India took Kotli, depending on how panicked the defence becomes, it is possible the whole front will unravel and permit a strategic victory. But if both sides hold reasonably firm, neither side will make any strategic gain.

Mountain positions stoutly defended are virtually impossible to assault frontally. They are usually taken by a slow process of infiltration around the position, and then a surprise attack, say from three sides. Cutting roads behind and between positions is of the utmost importance. A brigade attacking battalion position can break through after some time, but not if reinforcements arrive. This not only takes time but, with active/aggressive patrolling the defender can prevent encirclement. The Central Italian campaign of 1944 is an excellent example of how difficult it is to take mountain positions. And, of course, the Italian mountains are quite geographically tame compared to ours.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
2 | Like Like:
8


----------



## arjunk

Sine Nomine said:


> For me our first objective should be Valley,an area where population supports us and which is easy as compared to Kargil area and Jammu



Alternatively, we could attack Kargil and Pathankot/Jammu while forcing the Indian army to commit troops for counter insurgency ops in the valley, simultaneously stretching their forces out and cutting their supply routes. 

Supplying weapons to the valley will greatly increase Indian losses and destroy their morale. The valley will fall under anti India militant control similar to 1947 or Afghanistan. As long as there's no superpower distributing freedom packages it will remain so, and said militants will not turn against us.

OR we could even open a front further south on the IB while IA dedicates most of its troops to attack regulars and irregulars through the mountains.

Keep in mind they will have to keep many troops in Northeast India as well, because of the danger of attacking a CPEC project and pissing the Chinese off.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mrc

Kashmir cannot be taken from LOC.. Too mountainous too well defended... 

Flanking it is possible in pathankot jammu area and then territory can be swapped for one in valley. 

Risk is nuclear exchange off course

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sine Nomine

PanzerKiel said:


> In mountains, fight is always for the peaks since they dominate a wide area all around, you dominate in terms of observation as well as fire.
> 
> A buildup in the face of an enemy who is on the peaks cannot be hidden for long. Surprise is difficult to achieve, unless infiltration is resorted to, that too in small groups. 2 Naga, 18 Grenadiers and 8 Sikhs, as part of 192 Brigade, had to face the same kind of domination during their assaults on Tiger Hill.
> The defender can easily reinforce his defences if he gets even a whiff of a buildup. (Poonch 1971, 12 Division's 2 brigade attack against Indian 2 brigades)
> 
> In simple words, if you have to attack, then you must aim to to capture a peak quickly, then must open the logistics route so tthat the newly captured ground is able to sustain the counter attacks of the defender.
> 
> Remember, the defender is already taxed since he has to attack uphill to regain his lost position. He can only succeed if he can deny the attacker on the top urgently needed re-supply of ammo and heavy weapons. If defender can deny that, then with support of heavy artillery ofcourse to keep the heads down of the people at top, he has some chance of success.
> 
> LOC is already full of salients and bulges at present. They are being held just because the defences at the tops have been fortified and well stuffed supplies to last for weeks.
> 
> While India can induct reinforcements into the sector in wartime, Pakistan may not be able to spare much because of its army is much smaller. Nonetheless, compared to earlier wars, Pakistan is far better off even allowing for land’s reinforcements.
> 
> India might seem to have many opportunities to attack in this sector because of its superior strength. The problem is that the Indian line of communications runs very close to LOC. The loss of the road itself would not be fatal because:
> 
> All formations have large reserve stockpiles of equipment to enable them to fight for many months..and..
> Air re-supply is available on a considerable scale.
> 
> The location of existing roads and the need to protect them force India into some very predictable moves. For example, IA always has to attack from Kargil and from Dras to push the PA as far back as possible. This predictability limits IA flexibility and prevents the achievement of surprise.
> 
> Moreover, still the force to space ratio in this area is very low. This is to say that given the length of the front, the number of troops is insubstantial. This should provide excellent opportunity for maneuver. The high mountains, however, impose severe constraints on which areas can be used for operations.
> 
> While India has good lateral east- west communications, Pakistan has good north-south communication through the river valleys. It is easier for IA to defend than to attack: but the converse is true for Pakistan.
> 
> Historically, the only fighting that resulted in strategic gains in North Kashmir took place in 1947-48. Initially, there were no Indian regular troops in the area, and the few levies of the Maharaja of Kashmir proved ineffective. The area was considered inaccessible, though this did not stop the Azad troops from capturing it. India could not even spare a single regular battalion as Army HQ was totally focused towards the valley. This omission, however logical it may have appeared at that time, was to cost us IA badly, especially after the Pakistan-China ties warmed up.
> 
> India started to worry about the area only in the late 1950s, when trouble with China began brewing. Then it was discovered that holding Ladakh while simultaneously protecting the cease-fire line against Pakistan was a tough proposition, which it remains to this day.
> 
> Both in 1965 and 1971 there were no strategic gains in this sector. Fighting took place for piquets dominating the Leh road. In both cases India did better than Pakistan, because Pakistan depended on the ruggedness of the terrain and therefore had committed few resources. IA had large numbers of regular troops, Pakistan had none.
> 
> Coming back to mountain terrain.....
> Take the example of 19 Division (IA).
> If we conceive this sector as the left half of a lady’s Chinese fan, we see that the roads from the fan’s hinge (Srinagar) to the periphery (Uri, Tithwal, Gurais) are excellent, but that the links along the periphery are inadequate or non-existent. Thus, reserves from Srinagar and Baramula can be sent quickly to Uri, Tithwal and Gurais, but there can be no movement between these three sectors without first returning to the Valley.
> 
> This creates the worst possible situation for a military commander: his forces are deployed as long fingers and no finger can support the other. Each sector must fight its own battle and must, then, be correspondingly self-sufficient in forces.
> 
> Pakistan, on the other hand, has excellent lateral communications. It holds a shallow part of mountainous Western Kashmir with the plains behind. So it can switch forces and concentrate at will at any point along the line between Jammu and Tithwal.
> 
> This gives PA the initiative in the entire area.
> Nonetheless, India holds one advantage not enjoyed by Pakistan. IA has to attack downhill, whereas Pakistan has to move uphill.
> 
> The complication in all the Jammu and Kashmir sectors is the political importance of the ground. No first strike can be countered without giving up some ground. In Jammu and Kashmir every square kilometre lost no matter what the reason is held against the commander with his superiors and their political superiors.
> 
> This unfortunate situation should have been corrected years ago.
> 
> The only remedy then becomes to over-ensure in each sector, and to maintain troops right on the line, holding every kilometre as closely as possible, even though this involves violating the principles of war relating to surprise and economy of force. There can be no economy or concentration of force because the enemy is aware of your compulsions to avoid giving up ground, and can, therefore, accurately predict your actions.
> 
> This, however, is only one of the two reasons (FOR IA) why such large forces have to be mentioned along LOC. The other, seldom openly stated, is the perceived need to contend with a hostile domestic population in wartime.
> 
> The battle will, then, be on two fronts. Take the example of 161 Brigade. Normally, it has the usual five regular and one BSF battalion. The Brigade commander, however, does not regard his forces as equal to 2/3rds of a division. He allots three infantry battalions, a normal brigade, to the front. And he allots the other three battalions to keep open his Line of Communications, with Baramula, 60 kms away.
> 
> So the commander, 161 Brigade has, from his viewpoint, only the minimum number of troops required for his job. Given the importance of the ground, we may speculate he would like a minimum of another regular battalion. And the Indian Army, at least, is no stranger to seven battalion brigades.
> 
> Because of the mountainous terrain, however, neither side is likely to achieve major gains. As a caveat it should be said that if one side makes a breakthrough for example, if Pakistan took Poonch or India took Kotli, depending on how panicked the defence becomes, it is possible the whole front will unravel and permit a strategic victory. But if both sides hold reasonably firm, neither side will make any strategic gain.
> 
> Mountain positions stoutly defended are virtually impossible to assault frontally. They are usually taken by a slow process of infiltration around the position, and then a surprise attack, say from three sides. Cutting roads behind and between positions is of the utmost importance. A brigade attacking battalion position can break through after some time, but not if reinforcements arrive. This not only takes time but, with active/aggressive patrolling the defender can prevent encirclement. The Central Italian campaign of 1944 is an excellent example of how difficult it is to take mountain positions. And, of course, the Italian mountains are quite geographically tame compared to ours.


Long time ago when i read different accounts of German XV Mountain Corps during operation Rosselsprung i realised that,sitution in J&K is quagmire for both Armies.Bharat isn't much interested in taking rest of J&K and we lack both will and money for that.
I request you to present a build up scenario which would turn our side into unstoppable juggernaut.


Desert Fox 1 said:


> Yes but you see that many garrisons and military strongholds are there between Srinagar and AK. It is not a free run. First we have to identify which salients have to be attacked and occupied which to be bypassed and which to be contained. There are the garrisons of poonch,rajouri in the way to Srinagar. Not mentioning Baramulla that lies to Northwest of Srinagar and pulwama which lies to the south East. Just mentioning a few.
> If we go straight for poonch without containing rajouri then they can flank us from the south, similarly if we go from poonch to Srinagar there will be baramulla to the North of our forces and badgam is also Infront of Srinagar.


@Signalian and me are discussing something which avoids this all,in time of conflict these garrisons are likely to be manned by very few troops,what we are thinking is;
1-After DEAD ops,heliborne ops for capturing vital peaks and passes.
2-Massive airdrop in and around srinagar for capturing city and airfield.
3-By that point IA front line would be already in panic mode and it would be stretched when they would have to commit troops for routing PA para troops in valley.

Basically we want to cut fortified positions out of equation,and proceed to capture srinagar with continue pouring of LI troops in valley.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

And how will PAF achieve air superiority over Kashmir which is the most crucial thing for the ops we are talking about, we should also discuss that.
Also airdropped troops require resupplying in 24 to 48 hours and should RZ with the link up troops as quickly as possible otherwise they will just evaporate, so we should also discuss how those follow up troops will link up with the troops we are going to drop in Srinagar and what route they should follow so they meet the least possible resistance.
Also garrisons like poonch and rajouri etc are not cantonments like chaklala but actually they are strongholds which the IA will defend at all costs. Also troops are not just paradropped over the target area, they land away from the target and that area is called dropping zone, which has to be defended if you want to have resupplies so the paradropped troops will have to fight against IA in Srinagar but that'll be made easier due to the pro Pakistanis. For that ISI will have restart the armed movement.
Moreover, if the link up troops fail to be RZ at planned time then the lightly armed paratroopers will have to defend Srinagar against the IA troops at pulwama, baramulla,budgam etc. We also have to discuss how that'll be achieved.
But most importantly we should discuss how PAF will attain/sustainair superiority and how AD assets of IA will be neutralised.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## araz

Desert Fox 1 said:


> And how will PAF achieve air superiority over Kashmir which is the most crucial thing for the ops we are talking about, we should also discuss that.
> Also airdropped troops require resupplying in 24 to 48 hours and should RZ with the link up troops as quickly as possible otherwise they will just evaporate, so we should also discuss how those follow up troops will link up with the troops we are going to drop in Srinagar and what route they should follow so they meet the least possible resistance.
> Also garrisons like poonch and rajouri etc are not cantonments like chaklala but actually they are strongholds which the IA will defend at all costs. Also troops are not just paradropped over the target area, they land away from the target and that area is called dropping zone, which has to be defended if you want to have resupplies so the paradropped troops will have to fight against IA in Srinagar but that'll be made easier due to the pro Pakistanis. For that ISI will have restart the armed movement.
> Moreover, if the link up troops fail to be RZ at planned time then the lightly armed paratroopers will have to defend Srinagar against the IA troops at pulwama, baramulla,budgam etc. We also have to discuss how that'll be achieved.
> But most importantly we should discuss how PAF will attain/sustainair superiority and how AD assets of IA will be neutralised.


Para drops over Kashmir will be slaughtered as well as immense platform loss will be sustained. We cannot do that without neutralizing Air defences. 
I was told that if you want to establish air superiority, you need to have a 3:1 ratio of air platforms as your losses will be higher. We do not have that. 
We can take on their HQs with CMs but that would invite a Nuclear response. WE CAN HAVE A JOINT CHINESE-PAK op (IF AT ALL THE CHINESE WOULD AGREE TO THAT!) but that would push the Indians to go Nuclear.
And after all of this even if we did gain Kashmir as an aggressor, we would have to vacate it as per international laws. If we did not there would eventually be a movement from Inside Kashmir against us as they want independence from both Pak and India. If that were to happen you know who is going to come and sit there!!! So there are a lot more problems then there are solutions#
Regards
A

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## The Eagle

In view of security concerns, please avoid OPSEC discussion/debate at all. 

Regards,

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Raja Porus

The Eagle said:


> In view of security concerns, please avoid OPSEC discussion/debate at all.
> 
> Regards,


Roger, sorry

Reactions: Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Seems impressive but our logistics and economy might not be able to support it


----------



## Signalian

Should PA form a light armored battalion/motorized battalion whose purpose will be to hit vulnerable points like HQs, depots, supply lines, recon units etc and harass enemy reinforcements and supply convoys from reaching the front lines. It forms as part of an Armored Division and leaps into action once a breakthrough has been made. It gets equipped with wheeled armored vehicles or fast agile 4x4s and retreats back to armored division to replenish fuel and ammo. Its never used in main offensives but works closely with Divisions recon battalion.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Signalian said:


> Should PA form a light armored battalion/motorized battalion whose purpose will be to hit vulnerable points like HQs, depots, supply lines, recon units etc and harass enemy reinforcements and supply convoys from reaching the front lines. It forms as part of an Armored Division and leaps into action once a breakthrough has been made. It gets equipped with wheeled armored vehicles or fast agile 4x4s and retreats back to armored division to replenish fuel and ammo. Its never used in main offensives but works closely with Divisions recon battalion.


Chinese ZBD 04A will be the best choice for such a regt. Equip sime with atgms and let some be normal ifvs

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1367355694102511617
T-85UG ( Type 85-IIs ) , M113 , KRL-122 & HQ-16 battery in the end

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
3 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Signalian

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Chinese ZBD 04A will be the best choice for such a regt. Equip sime with atgms and let some be normal ifvs


wheeled, not tracked. High mobility.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## CriticalThought

farooqbhai007 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1367355694102511617
> T-85UG ( Type 85-IIs ) , M113 , KRL-122 & HQ-16 battery in the end



@PanzerKiel I hope they have some means of visibility through all that dust. Whichever side cracks this problem would have a huge advantage. Are you allowed to discuss general technological solutions to this visibility problem? Would IR/thermal lenses be able to cut through the dust?


----------



## Raja Porus

farooqbhai007 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1367355694102511617
> T-85UG ( Type 85-IIs ) , M113 , KRL-122 & HQ-16 battery in the end


I hope it will also satisfy the person who was saying that there's no synergy between mlrs and armoured elements


CriticalThought said:


> @PanzerKiel I hope they have some means of visibility through all that dust. Whichever side cracks this problem would have a huge advantage. Are you allowed to discuss general technological solutions to this visibility problem? Would IR/thermal lenses be able to cut through the dust?


From what I can see the dust was always behind the tank. That doesn't effect the visibility. The only time its in front is when the tank is retreating i.e reversing,where cover is desirable, it is somewhat similar to smoke grenades launched by tanks after getting a laser lock on warning


----------



## CriticalThought

Desert Fox 1 said:


> I hope it will also satisfy the person who was saying that there's no synergy between mlrs and armoured elements
> 
> From what I can see the dust was always behind the tank. That doesn't effect the visibility. The only time its in front is when the tank is retreating i.e reversing,where cover is desirable, it is somewhat similar to smoke grenades launched by tanks after getting a laser lock on warning



When you have two armies maneuvering around each other, trying to outflank, plus the wind picks up in an unfavorable direction, you will be surrounded in a wall of sand. Not to mention the smoke from detonating ordinances. Also, what is the use of a 360 degree turret if you are blind when retreating?

Take a look at this unit. It has just turned left and is running perpendicular to tracks made by previous units. He is blind on the left flank:

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

CriticalThought said:


> @PanzerKiel I hope they have some means of visibility through all that dust. Whichever side cracks this problem would have a huge advantage. Are you allowed to discuss general technological solutions to this visibility problem? Would IR/thermal lenses be able to cut through the dust?


This problem is very much there, and there is no solution for it as of now.... On one hand the dust does restricts your visibility, but on the other hand it provides a sudden camo for Own tanks against enemy direct firing weapons such as ATGMs etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## CriticalThought

PanzerKiel said:


> This problem is very much there, and there is no solution for it as of now.... On one hand the dust does restricts your visibility, but on the other hand it provides a sudden camo for Own tanks against tanks against enemy direct firing weapons such as ATGMs etc.



You are right. Your post caused me to search for a solution, and it seems even the US has only recently acquired a solution that involves multi-sensor fusion:









Fog Of War: How Clever Technology Enables Military Pilots To See Through Smoke, Dust, Mist & Smog


Lack of visual cues caused by poor visibility can lead to loss of aircraft and lives.




www.forbes.com





I wish our top brass would pay attention to these matters and try to actively find avenues where we can gain a qualitative edge through indigenous research to surprise the enemy. This is essential for PA in the asymmetric Pak-India scenario.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Signalian

farooqbhai007 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1367355694102511617
> T-85UG ( Type 85-IIs ) , M113 , KRL-122 & HQ-16 battery in the end


Showcasing mostly MBTs in the video is a picture of strength but if they had the shown the full compliment of all arms in continuous form, treading along for an offensive, that would have portrayed a much more powerful view of armored column. HQ-16 showing presence with armored forces could mean it will provide air cover during armored offensives and could potentially go across the border inside enemy territory. At 0:12 they show a few 4x4 marching along between APCs, if I have observed correctly. No aviation support was seen. Couple of AH-1F or observation heli or surveillance drones should have taken part.

This area of Bahawalpur region is mostly desert or semi desert and it would have been interesting to see how would 2.5 T, 5 T and 10 T logistic support trucks would fare in this terrain to supply armored troops. If a 5 T truck can carry 4.5 T on road, then it would carry half of that or 2.2 T off road (or desert). More trucks would be required, more fuel, more drivers, more mechanical support workshops. This logistics part is most vulnerable domain of armored warfare. If such support lines are destroyed, it would leave enemy armored forces stranded and unable to carry on any offensives. If PA creates a dedicated light armored or motorized unit that is tasked to take out enemy logistics lines, the job of armored forces will become easier.

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Wow Wow:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## CriticalThought

PanzerKiel said:


> This problem is very much there, and there is no solution for it as of now.... On one hand the dust does restricts your visibility, but on the other hand it provides a sudden camo for Own tanks against enemy direct firing weapons such as ATGMs etc.



Came across this video, that shows the superiority of thermal sights over plain sight under sand storm conditions:

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Cheetah Armoured Tractor:
These were modified tractors by HIT intended to serve as training vehicles to reduce wear on actual combat equipment saving operating costs.They were lightly armored (Against small arms) , had electrically discharged smoke launchers and radio attached in them. They didn't have NBC system or night-vision equipment as they weren't ever intended for actual combat use.
There were three main variants

*Anti-Tank with TOW carrier





*RBS 70/Anza SAM carrier 




*14.5mm MG carrier

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
4


----------



## SQ8

Signalian said:


> Showcasing mostly MBTs in the video is a picture of strength but if they had the shown the full compliment of all arms in continuous form, treading along for an offensive, that would have portrayed a much more powerful view of armored column. HQ-16 showing presence with armored forces could mean it will provide air cover during armored offensives and could potentially go across the border inside enemy territory. At 0:12 they show a few 4x4 marching along between APCs, if I have observed correctly. No aviation support was seen. Couple of AH-1F or observation heli or surveillance drones should have taken part.
> 
> This area of Bahawalpur region is mostly desert or semi desert and it would have been interesting to see how would 2.5 T, 5 T and 10 T logistic support trucks would fare in this terrain to supply armored troops. If a 5 T truck can carry 4.5 T on road, then it would carry half of that or 2.2 T off road (or desert). More trucks would be required, more fuel, more drivers, more mechanical support workshops. This logistics part is most vulnerable domain of armored warfare. If such support lines are destroyed, it would leave enemy armored forces stranded and unable to carry on any offensives. If PA creates a dedicated light armored or motorized unit that is tasked to take out enemy logistics lines, the job of armored forces will become easier.


I wonder if the Indian goal is influenced by the above - essentially keep the shallow thrusts in range of infrastructure that can support this logistics train.
100km-200km may not mean much but many chunks of it across the border are a serious bargaining chip.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Cheetah Armoured Tractor:
> These were modified tractors by HIT intended to serve as training vehicles to reduce wear on actual combat equipment saving operating costs.They were lightly armored (Against small arms) , had electrically discharged smoke launchers and radio attached in them. They didn't have NBC system or night-vision equipment as they weren't ever intended for actual combat use.
> There were three main variants
> 
> *Anti-Tank with TOW carrier
> View attachment 722632
> 
> *RBS 70/Anza SAM carrier
> View attachment 722633
> 
> *14.5mm MG carrier
> View attachment 722634


They made their debut in Ex Zarb E Momin....they were concieved in order to offset our lack of cross country mobility in the desert sector in the late 80s.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## CriticalThought

PanzerKiel said:


> They made their debut in Ex Zarb E Momin.



They are very much relevant today for a light mechanized battalion. Note the absence of armor or infantry in the name. It should combine, MGs, AAGs, ATGMs/TOWs, VSHORAD SAMs, and even energy weapons such as sonic/laser/microwaves.


----------



## Inception-06

PanzerKiel said:


> They made their debut in Ex Zarb E Momin....they were concieved in order to offset our lack of cross country mobility in the desert sector in the late 80s.



And how they performed ?


----------



## PanzerKiel

Inception-06 said:


> And how they performed ?


.... Sank axle deep....

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
5 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## CriticalThought

PanzerKiel said:


> .... Sank axle deep....



No attempt was made to find the right platform? I think today's 6x6 wouldn't suffer the same fate.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Cheetah Armoured Tractor:
> These were modified tractors by HIT intended to serve as training vehicles to reduce wear on actual combat equipment saving operating costs.They were lightly armored (Against small arms) , had electrically discharged smoke launchers and radio attached in them. They didn't have NBC system or night-vision equipment as they weren't ever intended for actual combat use.
> There were three main variants
> 
> *Anti-Tank with TOW carrier
> View attachment 722632
> 
> *RBS 70/Anza SAM carrier
> View attachment 722633
> 
> *14.5mm MG carrier
> View attachment 722634


 You have more pictures ? Is this from book ?


----------



## CriticalThought

@PanzerKiel, as an example, this could be the underlying platform:

Reactions: Love Love:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> .... Sank axle deep....


Of course


SQ8 said:


> I wonder if the Indian goal is influenced by the above - essentially keep the shallow thrusts in range of infrastructure that can support this logistics train.
> 100km-200km may not mean much but many chunks of it across the border are a serious bargaining chip.


Indian CSD is completely flawed and is more of a fantasy than reality. India plans to form* 10-13 IBGs with about 5-6 inf/armd regts and 3 artillery regts plus supporting arms. That would mean about 7-8 thousand men per IBG. *The drawbacks of CSD as conceived by me are :
*1)Attainibilty of Objectives:*
THe objectiv of CSD is to make shallow incursions of about 70-80 km deep but recent exercises have shown that the IA advanced at a rste of 10km per day. Now if we put them against a real enemy the rate would further decrease to atleast 5km. So 70-80km would require 2 weeks if everything went smoothly and they manage to catch us sleeping
*2) Sustenance of objectives:*
Even if we consider that IA was successful in making a 70-80km deep penetration even then it would be difficult to to sustain such a force of 13 IBGs not only logistically but those brigade groups would have to fight against the whole of PA before there main strike elements are mobilised.
*3)Mindset of field Commanders*:
The breed of IA officers that have been groomed according to CSD doctrine will have their aims limited only to the shallow penetrations and if a general war, which would surely, breaks out then they would find themselves in further exploiting their gains and drawing new plans to capture the New objectives that their seniors may assign them.
*4) Limited number of IBGs:*
only ten to 13 IBGs are being raised and some of them will be against china as well so if we take the amount of IBGs specially against PA to be 10 even then they might not be that much of trouble. They will just oversized brigades and until reinforced by their strike corps(which will tkae atleast 3 weeks) they would have to face the whole of PA.
*5) Retreating:*
GIven the fact that the initial objective of IBGS would be only 70-80km their commanders would not have that much flexibility especially at tactical level. They would not be able to make tactical retreats as their depth will be to shallow and if they start retreating then the whole op would be a failure.
*6) Concentration of PA:*
Again related to sustenance of Objective.Historically IA has tried to utilize its numbers by opening new fronts and sectors but in this case their brigade sized forces would be operating in a very limited area. On the other hand PA would be able to concentrate its forces against IBGs and obliterate them.
*7)PAF:*
Similarly, PAF would be able to concentrate its efforts especially related to CAS in few sectors and will be relieved of providing support to the whole of PA throughout Pakistan. Same goes for army AD and aviation.
*8) Conservation of Strike elements of PA:*
Recently many indp armd/mech bdes have sprung up in PA which can be used to tie down the IBGs in addition to holding corps while the strike corps can be preserved purely of offensive ops. And if the strike elements of PA are able to make successful attacks on India,IA would have to commit its strike elements against them and wouldn't be able to reinforce the IBGs.
*9) Predictable avenues of Approach:*
The areas and sectors going to be attacked by the IA can be predicted. The intelligence will also play an important role in this regard. Then, different obstacles/mines can be placed apart from the mobilisation of PA.
*10)Last Nail in the Coffin of CSD:*
Though I agree that CSD might have been useful between the period 2004-2017 while about 1/3 of our army was deployed in FATA in COIN ops but now we having been successfull in those ops have fully concentrated our efforts against IA. With the restructuring of FC the 11/12 corps are now available as reserves.
*11)Condition of IA:*
The lack of synergy between the Army and the IAF is one of the foremost concerns among the Indian planners. They are also lacking in spare parts and ammo. As of 2018 IA is also short of about 7000 officers. The lack of SP artillery and AD is also a concern. Induction of 100 k9s hasn't changed much, same goes for apaches as the PA will be able to concentrate its AD as explained above.
Also I don't understand why why the Indians compare CSD with blitzkrieg. They are two totally different concepts. I think that they consider anything involving amrour and inf in coordination with airforce as blitzkrieg.
@PanzerKiel @Signalian @Inception-06 and everyone else, feel free to criticize.

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Of course
> Indian CSD is completely flawed and is more of a fantasy than reality. India plans to form* 10-13 IBGs with about 5-6 inf/armd regts and 3 artillery regts plus supporting arms. That would mean about 7-8 thousand men per IBG. *The drawbacks of CSD as conceived by me are :
> *1)Attainibilty of Objectives:*
> THe objectiv of CSD is to make shallow incursions of about 70-80 km deep but recent exercises have shown that the IA advanced at a rste of 10km per day. Now if we put them against a real enemy the rate would further decrease to atleast 5km. So 70-80km would require 2 weeks if everything went smoothly and they manage to catch us sleeping
> *2) Sustenance of objectives:*
> Even if we consider that IA was successful in making a 70-80km deep penetration even then it would be difficult to to sustain such a force of 13 IBGs not only logistically but those brigade groups would have to fight against the whole of PA before there main strike elements are mobilised.
> *3)Mindset of field Commanders*:
> The breed of IA officers that have been groomed according to CSD doctrine will have their aims limited only to the shallow penetrations and if a general war, which would surely, breaks out then they would find themselves in further exploiting their gains and drawing new plans to capture the New objectives that their seniors may assign them.
> *4) Limited number of IBGs:*
> only ten to 13 IBGs are being raised and some of them will be against china as well so if we take the amount of IBGs specially against PA to be 10 even then they might not be that much of trouble. They will just oversized brigades and until reinforced by their strike corps(which will tkae atleast 3 weeks) they would have to face the whole of PA.
> *5) Retreating:*
> GIven the fact that the initial objective of IBGS would be only 70-80km their commanders would not have that much flexibility especially at tactical level. They would not be able to make tactical retreats as their depth will be to shallow and if they start retreating then the whole op would be a failure.
> *6) Concentration of PA:*
> Again related to sustenance of Objective.Historically IA has tried to utilize its numbers by opening new fronts and sectors but in this case their brigade sized forces would be operating in a very limited area. On the other hand PA would be able to concentrate its forces against IBGs and obliterate them.
> *7)PAF:*
> Similarly, PAF would be able to concentrate its efforts especially related to CAS in few sectors and will be relieved of providing support to the whole of PA throughout Pakistan. Same goes for army AD and aviation.
> *8) Conservation of Strike elements of PA:*
> Recently many indp armd/mech bdes have sprung up in PA which can be used to tie down the IBGs in addition to holding corps while the strike corps can be preserved purely of offensive ops. And if the strike elements of PA are able to make successful attacks on India,IA would have to commit its strike elements against them and wouldn't be able to reinforce the IBGs.
> *9) Predictable avenues of Approach:*
> The areas and sectors going to be attacked by the IA can be predicted. The intelligence will also play an important role in this regard. Then, different obstacles/mines can be placed apart from the mobilisation of PA.
> *10)Last Nail in the Coffin of CSD:*
> Though I agree that CSD might have been useful between the period 2004-2017 while about 1/3 of our army was deployed in FATA in COIN ops but now we having been successfull in those ops have fully concentrated our efforts against IA. With the restructuring of FC the 11/12 corps are now available as reserves.
> *11)Condition of IA:*
> The lack of synergy between the Army and the IAF is one of the foremost concerns among the Indian planners. They are also lacking in spare parts and ammo. As of 2018 IA is also short of about 7000 officers. The lack of SP artillery and AD is also a concern. Induction of 100 k9s hasn't changed much, same goes for apaches as the PA will be able to concentrate its AD as explained above.
> Also I don't understand why why the Indians compare CSD with blitzkrieg. They are two totally different concepts. I think that they consider anything involving amrour and inf in coordination with airforce as blitzkrieg.
> @PanzerKiel @Signalian @Inception-06 and everyone else, feel free to criticize.


Main criticism for you is that CSD is no more there, there's a new doctrine, new set of objectives with new groupings, everything new...

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> You have more pictures ? Is this from book ?


No these were the only ones I could get

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> Main criticism for you is that CSD is no more there, there's a new doctrine, new set of objectives with new groupings, everything new...


Threat, terrain and task

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> No these were the only ones I could get


But what is your source ? Net or Book, I am trying @PanzerKiel since years to get the Book Men of Steel from Abrar Hussain, but it’s impossible to get it or finde it, if someone can help, I am ready pay for effort, the book and shipping.

Otherwise that’s also a great source:



Battle of Chawinda

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## The Maverick

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Of course
> Indian CSD is completely flawed and is more of a fantasy than reality. India plans to form* 10-13 IBGs with about 5-6 inf/armd regts and 3 artillery regts plus supporting arms. That would mean about 7-8 thousand men per IBG. *The drawbacks of CSD as conceived by me are :
> *1)Attainibilty of Objectives:*
> THe objectiv of CSD is to make shallow incursions of about 70-80 km deep but recent exercises have shown that the IA advanced at a rste of 10km per day. Now if we put them against a real enemy the rate would further decrease to atleast 5km. So 70-80km would require 2 weeks if everything went smoothly and they manage to catch us sleeping
> *2) Sustenance of objectives:*
> Even if we consider that IA was successful in making a 70-80km deep penetration even then it would be difficult to to sustain such a force of 13 IBGs not only logistically but those brigade groups would have to fight against the whole of PA before there main strike elements are mobilised.
> *3)Mindset of field Commanders*:
> The breed of IA officers that have been groomed according to CSD doctrine will have their aims limited only to the shallow penetrations and if a general war, which would surely, breaks out then they would find themselves in further exploiting their gains and drawing new plans to capture the New objectives that their seniors may assign them.
> *4) Limited number of IBGs:*
> only ten to 13 IBGs are being raised and some of them will be against china as well so if we take the amount of IBGs specially against PA to be 10 even then they might not be that much of trouble. They will just oversized brigades and until reinforced by their strike corps(which will tkae atleast 3 weeks) they would have to face the whole of PA.
> *5) Retreating:*
> GIven the fact that the initial objective of IBGS would be only 70-80km their commanders would not have that much flexibility especially at tactical level. They would not be able to make tactical retreats as their depth will be to shallow and if they start retreating then the whole op would be a failure.
> *6) Concentration of PA:*
> Again related to sustenance of Objective.Historically IA has tried to utilize its numbers by opening new fronts and sectors but in this case their brigade sized forces would be operating in a very limited area. On the other hand PA would be able to concentrate its forces against IBGs and obliterate them.
> *7)PAF:*
> Similarly, PAF would be able to concentrate its efforts especially related to CAS in few sectors and will be relieved of providing support to the whole of PA throughout Pakistan. Same goes for army AD and aviation.
> *8) Conservation of Strike elements of PA:*
> Recently many indp armd/mech bdes have sprung up in PA which can be used to tie down the IBGs in addition to holding corps while the strike corps can be preserved purely of offensive ops. And if the strike elements of PA are able to make successful attacks on India,IA would have to commit its strike elements against them and wouldn't be able to reinforce the IBGs.
> *9) Predictable avenues of Approach:*
> The areas and sectors going to be attacked by the IA can be predicted. The intelligence will also play an important role in this regard. Then, different obstacles/mines can be placed apart from the mobilisation of PA.
> *10)Last Nail in the Coffin of CSD:*
> Though I agree that CSD might have been useful between the period 2004-2017 while about 1/3 of our army was deployed in FATA in COIN ops but now we having been successfull in those ops have fully concentrated our efforts against IA. With the restructuring of FC the 11/12 corps are now available as reserves.
> *11)Condition of IA:*
> The lack of synergy between the Army and the IAF is one of the foremost concerns among the Indian planners. They are also lacking in spare parts and ammo. As of 2018 IA is also short of about 7000 officers. The lack of SP artillery and AD is also a concern. Induction of 100 k9s hasn't changed much, same goes for apaches as the PA will be able to concentrate its AD as explained above.
> Also I don't understand why why the Indians compare CSD with blitzkrieg. They are two totally different concepts. I think that they consider anything involving amrour and inf in coordination with airforce as blitzkrieg.
> @PanzerKiel @Signalian @Inception-06 and everyone else, feel free to criticize.




biggest flaw in this is the date you use 2018.

the Indians have been into at least two rounds of emergency purchases of spares,ammo and upgradedation of the strike formations. 

one more CSD has no bearing in north against China. 
our northern strategy is pure defense as we saw during ladakh build up.

Against pakistan it is all about proactive strike and fighting on pakistan soil. 

two different approaches,not linked at all..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Goritoes

PanzerKiel said:


> Main criticism for you is that CSD is no more there, there's a new doctrine, new set of objectives with new groupings, everything new...



With New Counter-Measures from our side already in place, Right?

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

The Maverick said:


> biggest flaw in this is the date you use 2018.
> 
> the Indians have been into at least two rounds of emergency purchases of spares,ammo and upgradedation of the strike formations.
> 
> one more CSD has no bearing in north against China.
> our northern strategy is pure defense as we saw during ladakh build up.
> 
> Against pakistan it is all about proactive strike and fighting on pakistan soil.
> 
> two different approaches,not linked at all..


But IBGs are for China


Inception-06 said:


> But what is your source ? Net or Book, I am trying @PanzerKiel since years to get the Book Men of Steel from Abrar Hussain, but it’s impossible to get it or finde it, if someone can help, I am ready pay for effort, the book and shipping.
> 
> Otherwise that’s also a great source:
> 
> 
> 
> Battle of Chawinda


Net. You may search it on world cat. I searched and found that it was available in many libraries of many universities in England, including Oxford, and USA as well. You may give your zip code there and find a Library nearby having that book. Another book that I'd recommend is "On the Forward edge of battle." It will be easily available

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> But IBGs are for China


IBGs are not for China. They are solely for Pakistan. All of them. And all of them will open south of Jhelum River.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## farooqbhai007

China kay liyay India kay pass mushkil sey aik ya do armoured regiments hain Eastern Sector of India mey , sab kuch concentrated hai Pak border par ,

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> IBGs are not for China. They are solely for Pakistan. All of them. And all of them will open south of Jhelum River.


But these reports say that they are for both china and Pakistan. Also they say that an IBG will be tested in a wargame in Arunachal Pradesh and another one near Sikkim border. The mountain strike corps of IA would be converted into 5-6 IBGs while they will keep another strike corps intact...




__





India Pakistan: Integrated Battle Groups on Pakistan, China borders soon


IBGs to be set up on basis of tasks, threats & terrain within the next two years.




m.economictimes.com












Army to set up more than dozen integrated battle groups by 2020


IBGs were first proposed in one of the four studies regarding the reorganising of the Army, which was commissioned last year by Army chief General Bipin Rawat.




indianexpress.com




This one is written by Praveen Sawhneyhttps://www.business-standard.com/article/economy-policy/india-s-new-land-warfare-doctrine-is-not-a-credible-deterrent-to-china-pak-118122900115_1.html

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> But these reports say that they are for both china and Pakistan. Also they say that an IBG will be tested in a wargame in Arunachal Pradesh and another one near Sikkim border. The mountain strike corps of IA would be converted into 5-6 IBGs while they will keep another strike corps intact...


These 5 to 6 IBGs of 17 MSC are in addition to the 12 or so poised towards Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> These 5 to 6 IBGs of 17 MSC are in addition to the 12 or so poised towards Pakistan.


North of Jhelum?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bossman

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Cheetah Armoured Tractor:
> These were modified tractors by HIT intended to serve as training vehicles to reduce wear on actual combat equipment saving operating costs.They were lightly armored (Against small arms) , had electrically discharged smoke launchers and radio attached in them. They didn't have NBC system or night-vision equipment as they weren't ever intended for actual combat use.
> There were three main variants
> 
> *Anti-Tank with TOW carrier
> View attachment 722632
> 
> *RBS 70/Anza SAM carrier
> View attachment 722633
> 
> *14.5mm MG carrier
> View attachment 722634


Aslam Beg’s bad idea went directly from the parade ground to the junkyard.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## farooqbhai007

Bhawalpur Maintenance Workshop , 
Al Khalid undergoing maintenance in background




Al Khalid & T-80UD undergoing maintenance in background




T-80UD & T-85UG undergoing maintenance in background , separate shots







T-80 with digital camo






Signalian said:


> Showcasing mostly MBTs in the video is a picture of strength but if they had the shown the full compliment of all arms in continuous form, treading along for an offensive, that would have portrayed a much more powerful view of armored column. HQ-16 showing presence with armored forces could mean it will provide air cover during armored offensives and could potentially go across the border inside enemy territory. At 0:12 they show a few 4x4 marching along between APCs, if I have observed correctly. No aviation support was seen. Couple of AH-1F or observation heli or surveillance drones should have taken part.
> 
> This area of Bahawalpur region is mostly desert or semi desert and it would have been interesting to see how would 2.5 T, 5 T and 10 T logistic support trucks would fare in this terrain to supply armored troops. If a 5 T truck can carry 4.5 T on road, then it would carry half of that or 2.2 T off road (or desert). More trucks would be required, more fuel, more drivers, more mechanical support workshops. This logistics part is most vulnerable domain of armored warfare. If such support lines are destroyed, it would leave enemy armored forces stranded and unable to carry on any offensives. If PA creates a dedicated light armored or motorized unit that is tasked to take out enemy logistics lines, the job of armored forces will become easier.


your wishes are fullfilled 
AH-1F




FM-90 Radar




FM-90 launchers

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Inception-06



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Goritoes

@PanzerKiel compared to the rugged Desert Plains of Sindh (Thar) how would you rate the terrain of Jehlum and what are the shortcomings PA is facing on both fronts and what are possible Plans/Solution for them, if any in already work?


----------



## PanzerKiel

Goritoes said:


> @PanzerKiel compared to the rugged Desert Plains of Sindh (Thar) how would you rate the terrain of Jehlum and what are the shortcomings PA is facing on both fronts and what are possible Plans/Solution for them, if any in already work?


Broken ground, water obstacles requiring bridging equipment, armour cannot oestrogen that much freely but has to adopt defined routes which makes it predictable.... And consequently easy for defender to site his defences....

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Goritoes

PanzerKiel said:


> Broken ground, water obstacles requiring bridging equipment, armour cannot oestrogen that much freely but has to adopt defined routes which makes it predictable.... And consequently easy for defender to site his defences....



So the Punjab region will be good for defending, while the Thar will be good for Aggressive push, and the Sand and dust rise from the tanks/APC movements can make a wall of dust fog that works as a camouflage correct?

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Signalian

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Of course
> Indian CSD is completely flawed and is more of a fantasy than reality. India plans to form* 10-13 IBGs with about 5-6 inf/armd regts and 3 artillery regts plus supporting arms. That would mean about 7-8 thousand men per IBG. *The drawbacks of CSD as conceived by me are :
> *1)Attainibilty of Objectives:*
> THe objectiv of CSD is to make shallow incursions of about 70-80 km deep but recent exercises have shown that the IA advanced at a rste of 10km per day. Now if we put them against a real enemy the rate would further decrease to atleast 5km. So 70-80km would require 2 weeks if everything went smoothly and they manage to catch us sleeping
> *2) Sustenance of objectives:*
> Even if we consider that IA was successful in making a 70-80km deep penetration even then it would be difficult to to sustain such a force of 13 IBGs not only logistically but those brigade groups would have to fight against the whole of PA before there main strike elements are mobilised.
> *3)Mindset of field Commanders*:
> The breed of IA officers that have been groomed according to CSD doctrine will have their aims limited only to the shallow penetrations and if a general war, which would surely, breaks out then they would find themselves in further exploiting their gains and drawing new plans to capture the New objectives that their seniors may assign them.
> *4) Limited number of IBGs:*
> only ten to 13 IBGs are being raised and some of them will be against china as well so if we take the amount of IBGs specially against PA to be 10 even then they might not be that much of trouble. They will just oversized brigades and until reinforced by their strike corps(which will tkae atleast 3 weeks) they would have to face the whole of PA.
> *5) Retreating:*
> GIven the fact that the initial objective of IBGS would be only 70-80km their commanders would not have that much flexibility especially at tactical level. They would not be able to make tactical retreats as their depth will be to shallow and if they start retreating then the whole op would be a failure.
> *6) Concentration of PA:*
> Again related to sustenance of Objective.Historically IA has tried to utilize its numbers by opening new fronts and sectors but in this case their brigade sized forces would be operating in a very limited area. On the other hand PA would be able to concentrate its forces against IBGs and obliterate them.
> *7)PAF:*
> Similarly, PAF would be able to concentrate its efforts especially related to CAS in few sectors and will be relieved of providing support to the whole of PA throughout Pakistan. Same goes for army AD and aviation.
> *8) Conservation of Strike elements of PA:*
> Recently many indp armd/mech bdes have sprung up in PA which can be used to tie down the IBGs in addition to holding corps while the strike corps can be preserved purely of offensive ops. And if the strike elements of PA are able to make successful attacks on India,IA would have to commit its strike elements against them and wouldn't be able to reinforce the IBGs.
> *9) Predictable avenues of Approach:*
> The areas and sectors going to be attacked by the IA can be predicted. The intelligence will also play an important role in this regard. Then, different obstacles/mines can be placed apart from the mobilisation of PA.
> *10)Last Nail in the Coffin of CSD:*
> Though I agree that CSD might have been useful between the period 2004-2017 while about 1/3 of our army was deployed in FATA in COIN ops but now we having been successfull in those ops have fully concentrated our efforts against IA. With the restructuring of FC the 11/12 corps are now available as reserves.
> *11)Condition of IA:*
> The lack of synergy between the Army and the IAF is one of the foremost concerns among the Indian planners. They are also lacking in spare parts and ammo. As of 2018 IA is also short of about 7000 officers. The lack of SP artillery and AD is also a concern. Induction of 100 k9s hasn't changed much, same goes for apaches as the PA will be able to concentrate its AD as explained above.
> Also I don't understand why why the Indians compare CSD with blitzkrieg. They are two totally different concepts. I think that they consider anything involving amrour and inf in coordination with airforce as blitzkrieg.
> @PanzerKiel @Signalian @Inception-06 and everyone else, feel free to criticize.


@PanzerKiel is gathering stuff from PDF to make presentations for Staff course  So @Desert Fox 1 keep bringing in scenarios that he can present as outdated in the first 5 slides of his presentation 😁

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
4 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Signalian said:


> @PanzerKiel is gathering stuff from PDF to make presentations for Staff course  So @Desert Fox 1 keep bringing in scenarios that he can present as outdated in the first 5 slides of his presentation 😁


Staff Course was a long time ago.... And if I would've followed @Desert Fox 1 data , then I would've been kicked out of the army.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
10 | Wow Wow:
2


----------



## farooqbhai007

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Of course
> Indian CSD is completely flawed and is more of a fantasy than reality. India plans to form* 10-13 IBGs with about 5-6 inf/armd regts and 3 artillery regts plus supporting arms. That would mean about 7-8 thousand men per IBG. *The drawbacks of CSD as conceived by me are :
> *1)Attainibilty of Objectives:*
> THe objectiv of CSD is to make shallow incursions of about 70-80 km deep but recent exercises have shown that the IA advanced at a rste of 10km per day. Now if we put them against a real enemy the rate would further decrease to atleast 5km. So 70-80km would require 2 weeks if everything went smoothly and they manage to catch us sleeping
> *2) Sustenance of objectives:*
> Even if we consider that IA was successful in making a 70-80km deep penetration even then it would be difficult to to sustain such a force of 13 IBGs not only logistically but those brigade groups would have to fight against the whole of PA before there main strike elements are mobilised.
> *3)Mindset of field Commanders*:
> The breed of IA officers that have been groomed according to CSD doctrine will have their aims limited only to the shallow penetrations and if a general war, which would surely, breaks out then they would find themselves in further exploiting their gains and drawing new plans to capture the New objectives that their seniors may assign them.
> *4) Limited number of IBGs:*
> only ten to 13 IBGs are being raised and some of them will be against china as well so if we take the amount of IBGs specially against PA to be 10 even then they might not be that much of trouble. They will just oversized brigades and until reinforced by their strike corps(which will tkae atleast 3 weeks) they would have to face the whole of PA.
> *5) Retreating:*
> GIven the fact that the initial objective of IBGS would be only 70-80km their commanders would not have that much flexibility especially at tactical level. They would not be able to make tactical retreats as their depth will be to shallow and if they start retreating then the whole op would be a failure.
> *6) Concentration of PA:*
> Again related to sustenance of Objective.Historically IA has tried to utilize its numbers by opening new fronts and sectors but in this case their brigade sized forces would be operating in a very limited area. On the other hand PA would be able to concentrate its forces against IBGs and obliterate them.
> *7)PAF:*
> Similarly, PAF would be able to concentrate its efforts especially related to CAS in few sectors and will be relieved of providing support to the whole of PA throughout Pakistan. Same goes for army AD and aviation.
> *8) Conservation of Strike elements of PA:*
> Recently many indp armd/mech bdes have sprung up in PA which can be used to tie down the IBGs in addition to holding corps while the strike corps can be preserved purely of offensive ops. And if the strike elements of PA are able to make successful attacks on India,IA would have to commit its strike elements against them and wouldn't be able to reinforce the IBGs.
> *9) Predictable avenues of Approach:*
> The areas and sectors going to be attacked by the IA can be predicted. The intelligence will also play an important role in this regard. Then, different obstacles/mines can be placed apart from the mobilisation of PA.
> *10)Last Nail in the Coffin of CSD:*
> Though I agree that CSD might have been useful between the period 2004-2017 while about 1/3 of our army was deployed in FATA in COIN ops but now we having been successfull in those ops have fully concentrated our efforts against IA. With the restructuring of FC the 11/12 corps are now available as reserves.
> *11)Condition of IA:*
> The lack of synergy between the Army and the IAF is one of the foremost concerns among the Indian planners. They are also lacking in spare parts and ammo. As of 2018 IA is also short of about 7000 officers. The lack of SP artillery and AD is also a concern. Induction of 100 k9s hasn't changed much, same goes for apaches as the PA will be able to concentrate its AD as explained above.
> Also I don't understand why why the Indians compare CSD with blitzkrieg. They are two totally different concepts. I think that they consider anything involving amrour and inf in coordination with airforce as blitzkrieg.
> @PanzerKiel @Signalian @Inception-06 and everyone else, feel free to criticize.


L doctorine hay , seedha seedha mrls & ground launched guided missiles/rockets zyada tadaad mey induct karo aur IA kay units ko unkay garrissons par pre-emptive strikes mey hit karo . takreeban all IA frontline assets < 200km range mey aajatay , pechay rah gayi baat large garrissons like Gwalior aur Jhansi ji to unko long range assets say hit karo , aram say problem solve , zaroorat hi nahi tankon ki
wesay bhi Indian strategic assets ka bura haal hai , brahmos TELs missile loading areas say on average 20km road distance door based hain , for the IA that is

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## farooqbhai007

sab kuch aik jagha thop detay , yaa itna dor rakthay kay frontlines phonchtay tak war hi over ho jayay , LOC par Pinaka regiment < 10km from border based hai ,aur rajsthan mey pinaka regiment ~480km from border based hai , and other than these they only have one more Pinaka reg for pak border , which i will find soooon ,
Smerch rockets kay case mey ambala wala ~250+km from border hain aur rajasthan walay ~480+km from nearest pointon border

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> Staff Course was a long time ago.... And if I would've followed @Desert Fox 1 data , then I would've been kicked out of the army.


@PanzerKiel sir,wait for the future...


Signalian said:


> @PanzerKiel is gathering stuff from PDF to make presentations for Staff course  So @Desert Fox 1 keep bringing in scenarios that he can present as outdated in the first 5 slides of his presentation 😁


Also,no problem, you can still consult me when doing war course. insha'Allah.😁😁

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

@PanzerKiel why sad reacts??!

Reactions: Sad Sad:
2


----------



## Reichmarshal

Lots of fu@ckups in the army.....desert fox should not feel let down or disheartened.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> But IBGs are for China
> 
> Net. You may search it on world cat. I searched and found that it was available in many libraries of many universities in England, including Oxford, and USA as well. You may give your zip code there and find a Library nearby having that book. Another book that I'd recommend is "On the Forward edge of battle." It will be easily available



Thanks for recommendations I ordered this all here:

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
3


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> Thanks for recommendations I ordered this all here:
> 
> View attachment 722961


I thought that Men of Steel was unavailable on Amazon? Enjoy reading these books especially "On War". You couldn't have spent your money better


Reichmarshal said:


> Lots of fu@ckups in the army.....desert fox should not feel let down or disheartened.


Rommel sir, I'm yet to apply for the army. About a year from now. But I'll keep it in mind

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> I thought that Men of Steel was unavailable on Amazon? Enjoy reading these books especially "On War". You couldn't have spent your money better
> 
> Rommel sir, I'm yet to apply for the army. About a year from now. But I'll keep it in mind



It was available once for 900€ and yesterday for only „100€“, it was not easy decision, when I was in 2019 in Faisalabad it was nightmare to find a good book shop which is well equipped. So decided now to buy it. Main objective is to understand and write better about armoured Corps of Pakistan Army.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1374365107837235210

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1374365107837235210


That's the not the mortar variant.... It's the ATGM variant.... Visible is the lower assembly of ATGM popping out....

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Inception-06

PanzerKiel said:


> That's the not the mortar variant.... It's the ATGM variant.... Visible is the lower assembly of ATGM popping out....



And never inducted !

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

@PanzerKiel sir, don't you think that the RRs were good direct support weapons (not as AT) at company level Because BSWS isn't as versatile while mortars are for indirect fire? Or has any other weapon been inducted?
Also is BSWS a company or a platoon level asset for all inf regts including SIBs?

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> @PanzerKiel sir, don't you think that the RRs were good direct support weapons (not as AT) at company level Because BSWS isn't as versatile while mortars are for indirect fire? Or has any other weapon been inducted?
> Also is BSWS a company or a platoon level asset for all inf regts including SIBs?


BSWS has more probability of survival.
Moreover, it is preferred due to ease in...
Firing
Camouflage
Reduced firing signature
Speedy shoot and scoot
Powerful warhead
Weapon range

For SIB it is a unit level weapon, for MIB it is Platoon level....

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## RAMPAGE

PanzerKiel said:


> BSWS has more probably of survival.
> Moreover, it is preferred due to ease in...
> Firing
> Camouflage
> Reduced firing signature
> Speedy shoot and scoot
> Powerful warhead
> Weapon range
> 
> For SIB it is a unit level weapon, for MIB it is Platoon level....


By the way, why was the Carl Gustaf RR never adopted? How would you compare it with the RPG-7 and other RPG variants?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> MIB it is Platoon level....


Now I understand why you said that MIBs have tremendous firepower. But don't you think that SIBs should be provided with more HJ8s(atleast to company level) as thet are going to do most of the defensive work

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Now I understand why you said that MIBs have tremendous firepower. But don't you think that SIBs should be provided with more HJ8s(atleast to company level) as thet are going to do most of the defensive work


That goes against our firepower doctrine
... Whatever SIB will require more anti tank assets, they will be provided in the form of LAT and HAT.

Otherwise, high threat areas have HAT.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> firepower doctrine


Never heard of that🤔

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## araz

farooqbhai007 said:


> L doctorine hay , seedha seedha mrls & ground launched guided missiles/rockets zyada tadaad mey induct karo aur IA kay units ko unkay garrissons par pre-emptive strikes mey hit karo . takreeban all IA frontline assets < 200km range mey aajatay , pechay rah gayi baat large garrissons like Gwalior aur Jhansi ji to unko long range assets say hit karo , aram say problem solve , zaroorat hi nahi tankon ki
> wesay bhi Indian strategic assets ka bura haal hai , brahmos TELs missile loading areas say on average 20km road distance door based hain , for the IA that is


Bhai.
You will be responded to by Nukes. Plus they will hit your Garrisons as well. So this war will not last any time/at all. With the element/of mistrust in the w nations do you/think they/will wait to find our whether the upcoming missile from Pak side is Nuke tipped or not? They will assume the worst and instigate Nuke strike. You will have charred earth every where and MAD. THE ENSUING NUCLEAR FALLOUT will kill off the significant population of China, Russia and else where.
A

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

araz said:


> Bhai.
> You will be responded to by Nukes. Plus they will hit your Garrisons as well. So this war will not last any time/at all. With the element/of mistrust in the w nations do you/think they/will wait to find our whether the upcoming missile from Pak side is Nuke tipped or not? They will assume the worst and instigate Nuke strike. You will have charred earth every where and MAD. THE ENSUING NUCLEAR FALLOUT will kill off the significant population of China, Russia and else where.
> A


 Mera message mazak ki sense mey tha

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Windjammer

*GL-5 Active Protection System of VT4 Tank.*

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Dazzler

Windjammer said:


> *GL-5 Active Protection System of VT4 Tank.*
> 
> View attachment 728168
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 728165



Laser warning sensors. No GL5 contracted yet.

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Dazzler said:


> Laser warning sensors. No GL5 contracted yet.


Where are these sensors on an Al-Khalid/Al-Zarrar? They’re supposed to have the Altcop LWR but I’ve only seen such sensors on AK when The VARTA was equipped on it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

Active protection systems are larger in size then this


Windjammer said:


> *GL-5 Active Protection System of VT4 Tank.*
> 
> View attachment 728168
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 728165

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Dazzler

iLION12345_1 said:


> Where are these sensors on an Al-Khalid/Al-Zarrar? They’re supposed to have the Altcop LWR but I’ve only seen such sensors on AK when The VARTA was equipped on it.



On the turret behind the 12.7mm machine gunner.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Dazzler said:


> On the turret behind the 12.7mm machine gunner.


Do you have a picture of it?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

Yaar sab sirf tankon ki pictures bhejtay kabhi logistics ki bhi pics bhej diya karo , any pics of the trucks we use for logistics like those actros we use for carrying ISO containers , or any pics of any 8 axle truck we have in service , 
Also i have a question yeh Artillery towing actros 6x6 in troop carrying config ko "Navy Blue" colour mey paint karna ka kya maqsad , kuch haftay pehlay pindi mey aik khara wa tha in saddar bazar lol,

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

farooqbhai007 said:


> Yaar sab sirf tankon ki pictures bhejtay kabhi logistics ki bhi pics bhej diya karo , any pics of the trucks we use for logistics like those actros we use for carrying ISO containers , or any pics of any 8 axle truck we have in service ,
> Also i have a question yeh Artillery towing actros 6x6 in troop carrying config ko "Navy Blue" colour mey paint karna ka kya maqsad , kuch haftay pehlay pindi mey aik khara wa tha in saddar bazar lol,


Almost all army wheeled vehicles are of either olive green colour or desert camou. The one have seen might be of PAF or PN

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## iLION12345_1

farooqbhai007 said:


> Yaar sab sirf tankon ki pictures bhejtay kabhi logistics ki bhi pics bhej diya karo , any pics of the trucks we use for logistics like those actros we use for carrying ISO containers , or any pics of any 8 axle truck we have in service ,
> Also i have a question yeh Artillery towing actros 6x6 in troop carrying config ko "Navy Blue" colour mey paint karna ka kya maqsad , kuch haftay pehlay pindi mey aik khara wa tha in saddar bazar lol,


I see them often in Rawalpindi near the 502 central Workshop. Not much worth sharing on them. Trucks are from MAN and Mercedes usually. Brown or Green.
The blue ones are likely not army, might be from another service. Have also seen white ones with UN logos.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Signalian

araz said:


> Bhai.
> You will be responded to by Nukes. Plus they will hit your Garrisons as well. So this war will not last any time/at all. With the element/of mistrust in the w nations do you/think they/will wait to find our whether the upcoming missile from Pak side is Nuke tipped or not? They will assume the worst and instigate Nuke strike. You will have charred earth every where and MAD. THE ENSUING NUCLEAR FALLOUT will kill off the significant population of China, Russia and else where.
> A


How many fronts can Pakistan Army open in case of war and sustain them. The armored ones being southern Kashmir, Southern Punjab and whole of Sindh. The ones from infantry being Northern Kashmir, part of southern Kashmir and Lahore. Those are 5-6 fronts.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

iLION12345_1 said:


> I see them often in Rawalpindi near the 502 central Workshop. Not much worth sharing on them. Trucks are from MAN and Mercedes usually. Brown or Green.
> The blue ones are likely not army, might be from another service. Have also seen white ones with UN logos.


MAN trucks ki pics hain to bhejna mujhay pasand hain , Also fun fact there is a missile reloading vehicle for SA-8 captured from Afghanistan parked at 502 , there was a old pic of it uploaded to pdf like a decade ago

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Yes, one may find treats in 502 if lucky. Yesterday I saw 3 COWS of 49 div.



CAREFUL.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
2 | Haha Haha:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> CAREFUL.


Deleted sir, you may also delete it. Actually they were standing right outside the main gate. 
But I wanted to ask why vehicles from south are sent to 502 as most of our mech/armd assets are concentrated in the southern Punjab?

Reactions: Angry Angry:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Deleted sir, you may also delete it.











Desert Fox 1 said:


> Actually they were standing right outside the main gate.


... Which doesn't mean the you tell here everyone on this online forum... that which equipment is standing in front of 502 gate....

... or are you comfortable telling people from other countries and our eastern neighbor as well that three SP Guns of a specific type from one of our armored divisions are in Rawalpindi at a specific place.... Such type of Intel otherwise costs alot of money and resources which you just divulged off the cuff...

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
2 | Wow Wow:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> View attachment 728822
> 
> 
> 
> ... Which doesn't mean the you tell here everyone on this online forum... that which equipment is standing in front of 502 gate....
> 
> ... or are you comfortable telling people from other countries and our eastern neighbor as well that three SP Guns of a specific type from one of our armored divisions are in Rawalpindi at a specific place.... Such type of Intel otherwise costs alot of money and resources which you just divulged off the cuff...


Sorry sir,will be careful in the future. Please delete your previous message as it still contains the info.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

farooqbhai007 said:


> MAN trucks ki pics hain to bhejna mujhay pasand hain , Also fun fact there is a missile reloading vehicle for SA-8 captured from Afghanistan parked at 502 , there was a old pic of it uploaded to pdf like a decade ago


This above is the reason I do not take pictures of what comes in and out of 502 on those trucks. One small photo can reveal a lot of sensitive information. It’s best not to take the risk.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

PanzerKiel said:


> View attachment 728822
> 
> 
> 
> ... Which doesn't mean the you tell here everyone on this online forum... that which equipment is standing in front of 502 gate....
> 
> ... or are you comfortable telling people from other countries and our eastern neighbor as well that three SP Guns of a specific type from one of our armored divisions are in Rawalpindi at a specific place.... Such type of Intel otherwise costs alot of money and resources which you just divulged off the cuff...


Yea true don't post pics of assets , and if you do post pics of anything blurr out the background and the division signs. A certain IA corps has been doing this on it's Twitter.


iLION12345_1 said:


> This above is the reason I do not take pictures of what comes in and out of 502 on those trucks. One small photo can reveal a lot of sensitive information. It’s best not to take the risk.


Yea sorry I forgot , the SA-8 reloader is not in 502 but the Central Stores area lying in a junkyard , or at least it was when the photo was uploaded to pdf almost a decade ago , it's been re stored now , man PA shouldve have used it for opfor in exercises , like simulating capturing a IAF air field , would've been much better than the opfor "tanks" they use currently ,

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

@PanzerKiel do armd regts have recovery vehicles at company level or bn level?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> @PanzerKiel do armd regts have recovery vehicles at company level or bn level?


Yeah, lots.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## bhola record

@PanzerKiel Which tank other than our own and locally produced will do well in our operation areas ?

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

bhola record said:


> @PanzerKiel Which tank other than our own and locally produced will do well in our operation areas ?


The mountainous areas are otherwise not a place where tanks can be used as a strength. They need to be heavily supported by infantry as far as close support is concerned.....its the same for all armored vehicles.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## bhola record

PanzerKiel said:


> The mountainous areas are otherwise not a place where tanks can be used as a strength. They need to be heavily supported by infantry as far as close support is concerned.....its the same for all armored vehicles.


But M1 abrams they didnot do well in trials.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## farooqbhai007

PanzerKiel said:


> Yeah, lots.


u mean lots of different types and numbers
example tank regiment ( ss from a vid on utube )
M88




W653D




and similarly there is the newer VS-21 Recovery vehicle inducted with newer regiments like AK1 ,

Also any body watched this vid before , PA's Rapid deployable Hospital followed by a Isoli M60( newer model one)

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
3


----------



## Raja Porus

Reads" 1st OTR of Life". What does it mean? I also saw it on some SP guns some time back

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Desert Fox 1 said:


> View attachment 729572
> 
> Reads" 1st OTR of Life". What does it mean? I also saw it on some SP guns some time back


It says first “QTR” (quarter) of life.

Gun barrels have a service life after which they need to be replaced, and they also need to be checked throughly after a certain amount of usage, (say after first quarter of life is over, like you would service a car after every few thousand kilometers), for damage or deformation and such. 
These barrels have to withstand very high pressures and temperatures and hence miniature cracks or deformations can be formed in them which can negatively effect accuracy and performance or even cause explosions inside the barrel in extreme cases which can be deadly. Since these tanks are new and not being used currently, all these barrels are in their first quarter of life.

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

iLION12345_1 said:


> It says first “QTR” (quarter) of life.
> 
> Gun barrels have a service life after which they need to be replaced, and they also need to be checked throughly after a certain amount of usage, (say after first quarter of life is over, like you would service a car after every few thousand kilometers), for damage or deformation and such.
> These barrels have to withstand very high pressures and temperatures and hence miniature cracks or deformations can be formed in them which can negatively effect accuracy and performance or even cause explosions inside the barrel in extreme cases which can be deadly. Since these tanks are new and not being used currently, all these barrels are in their first quarter of life.


Thank you very much, sir.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

bhola record said:


> @PanzerKiel Which tank other than our own and locally produced will do well in our operation areas ?


Depends on which area exactly as Pakistani terrain is quite diverse. As Sir Panzerkiel mentioned mountains are generally not suited for usage of tanks, at least not in their usual role (some tanks are used by PA as mobile pillboxes along Pak-Afghan border at very high altitudes).

Tanks can be used at high-altitude plains, like the ones at ladakh between india and China, where both countries used tanks recently, Pakistan does not have such terrain.

For the Plains of Punjab and the Deserts of Sindh a similar kind of tank would work, it would just need to withstand higher temperatures further south. All the tanks in our inventory are suited to this role and tanks like the abrams would also be perfectly suited to this role, maybe even better than what we have, granted we have the logistics to support this, as US does. The abrams performed quite well in the deserts of Iran and Iraq, and also in other middle eastern conflicts, while it is true that early abrams models had issues with their engines and filters due to the excessive sand, this was quickly fixed in the later models as US would be seeing a lot of conflict in such areas. Similarly Russia also has very diverse terrains including deserts and their tanks would be particularly well suited to such roles (in the right hands, hence excluding Iraqi T72s and such), with easier logistics due to weight.

Some tanks which are built by countries like South Korea or the European nations may be less suited to desert warfare as they have less of this kind of terrain and more plains or Urban areas, hence the German Leo 2 has specific urban warfare packages and would excel at such warfare.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
4 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

iLION12345_1 said:


> German Leo 2 has specific urban warfare packages and would excel at such warfare.


Or "Tank Urban Survival Kit"(TUSK) for Abrams. This modification can even be done by the crew in operational areas
Normal abrams:




Abrams with TUSK:
(The cylindrical shaped objects are ERA for protection at all angles)




Additional attachments int the form.of TUSK:

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Our recce regts of armd divs( don't know if mech divs have them) have 36 tanks, only 8 short of a complete regt. Why not buy 4 more tanks (as 4 are already there as divisional reserve) and form a complete regt as a reserve. It can supplement an attack, support another inf div without decreasing the effectiveness of the armd div or most importantly replace a regt that may have been badly bashed by the enemy and put out of work. It will provide great flexibility and relaxation as well. Recce, if necessary, can be done by drones, LATs as they are also now equipped with M113s.
@PanzerKiel @Signalian

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## CriticalThought

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Our recce regts of armd divs( don't know if mech divs have them) have 36 tanks, only 8 short of a complete regt. Why not buy 4 more tanks (as 4 are already there as divisional reserve) and form a complete regt as a reserve. It can supplement an attack, support another inf div without decreasing the effectiveness of the armd div or most importantly replace a regt that may have been badly bashed by the enemy and put out of work. It will provide great flexibility and relaxation as well. Recce, if necessary, can be done by drones, LATs as they are also now equipped with M113s.
> @PanzerKiel @Signalian



Can you please define recce here? Is it a 'feeler' maneuver to see how the enemy responds to a small deployment to a certain area? Or to gather intel on the enemy? I would expect tanks to be completely unsuitable for the latter! Why would the army use tanks for such a purpose?


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Our recce regts of armd divs( don't know if mech divs have them) have 36 tanks, only 8 short of a complete regt. Why not buy 4 more tanks (as 4 are already there as divisional reserve) and form a complete regt as a reserve. It can supplement an attack, support another inf div without decreasing the effectiveness of the armd div or most importantly replace a regt that may have been badly bashed by the enemy and put out of work. It will provide great flexibility and relaxation as well. Recce, if necessary, can be done by drones, LATs as they are also now equipped with M113s.
> @PanzerKiel @Signalian


Recce units have 35 tanks.. 

They have a different role to play, that's why they much more heavily armed with regards to anti tank and automatic firepower than a normal armored regiment...

Recce regiment... Don't take its name in the literal sense....

LAT is not part of armored divisions, isn't equipped with tanks so it is lightly armored and cannot fulfill desired role in an armored division.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> regards to anti tank and automatic firepower than a normal armored regiment...


Yeah. I forgot that.. read it a couple of years back.


CriticalThought said:


> Can you please define recce here? Is it a 'feeler' maneuver to see how the enemy responds to a small deployment to a certain area? Or to gather intel on the enemy? I would expect tanks to be completely unsuitable for the latter! Why would the army use tanks for such a purpose?


All of the above almost but as Panzerkeil has said the word is not to be taken literally. Another thing is that tanks are/have been used for armed reconnaissance in contested and heavily defended sectors to locate weaknesses or conduct aggressive raids.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

What are these Steyr's used for except towing artillery that too in limited numbers , havent seen a large amount of them any where , i presume it would be for combat logistics for mech divs

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Yeah. I forgot that.. read it a couple of years back.
> 
> All of the above almost but as Panzerkeil has said the word is not to be taken literally. Another thing is that tanks are/have been used for armed reconnaissance in contested and heavily defended sectors to locate weaknesses or conduct aggressive raids.





farooqbhai007 said:


> View attachment 729919
> 
> What are these Steyr's used for except towing artillery that too in limited numbers , havent seen a large amount of them any where , i presume it would be for combat logistics for mech divs


Guys see what I found:

IRON FIST DOCUMENTARY IN URDU










And see you hat arrived to me !

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> Guys see what I found:
> 
> IRON FIST DOCUMENTARY IN URDU
> 
> View attachment 732422
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And see you hat arrived to me !
> View attachment 732426


Only if I had enough money😁


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Only if I had enough money😁


You will Inshallah !

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

Inception-06 said:


> You will Inshallah !


pdf karso lol . meray pass kuch Arab Revoultions & Border Wars paari huwi pdf mey

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Inception-06

farooqbhai007 said:


> pdf karso lol . meray pass kuch Arab Revoultions & Border Wars paari huwi pdf mey


It’s not allowed and illegally. Don’t want Ruin my carrier. But as I said, Inshallah.

Nice that you also read Books, Which border wars ? About Pakistan ?

Reactions: Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

Inception-06 said:


> It’s not allowed and illegally. Don’t want Ruin my carrier. But as I said, Inshallah.
> 
> Nice that you also read Books, Which border wars ? About Pakistan ?


phir to aap baray masoom ho lol ,
Arab wars , it has syria , yemen , morroco , algeria and others

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Inception-06

farooqbhai007 said:


> phir to aap baray masoom ho lol ,
> Arab wars , it has syria , yemen , morroco , algeria and others



wrong, masoom ho gea hu !

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

This Alzarrar is different from the Bajaur one, which was a baseline t59/69( i don't remember correctly)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Desert Fox 1 said:


> View attachment 734576
> 
> This Alzarrar is different from the Bajaur one, which was a baseline t59/69( i don't remember correctly)


I’m a little confused by what you mean, If a tank is a baseline Type 59 or 69, then it is not an Al-Zarrar. It is a Type 59 or 69. Apart from the earlier models, All Al-zarrars in service are the same.

interestingly many people thought this was some sort of spaced armor or that it just had fake thin metal over the turret, when in actuality This particular example took an RPG round to the turret and 7 further VBIEDS on motorbikes and was not penetrated. The composite block from the turret has been removed, probably by the army itself after they found the tank in this condition, or it was blown off by the explosions. The metal plate which would cover it can be seen on the right side of the tank, and you can see it’s not penetrated, but rather removed. There is also no impact marks on the actual turret below, which suggests composite layer was not penetrated either. If it had just been sheet metal we would see impact marks on the turret below as that could never stop an RPG.

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Tipu7

Desert Fox 1 said:


> View attachment 734576
> 
> This Alzarrar is different from the Bajaur one, which was a baseline t59/69( i don't remember correctly)


This is Al Zarrar. 
One in Bajaur was Type-59. 
There is a generation gap between both types.


----------



## Raja Porus

iLION12345_1 said:


> I’m a little confused by what you mean, If a tank is a baseline Type 59 or 69, then it is not an Al-Zarrar. It is a Type 59 or 69. Apart from the earlier models, All Al-zarrars in service are the same.
> 
> interestingly many people thought this was some sort of spaced armor or that it just had fake thin metal over the turret, when in actuality This particular example took an RPG round to the turret and 7 further VBIEDS on motorbikes and was not penetrated. The composite block from the turret has been removed, probably by the army itself after they found the tank in this condition, or it was blown off by the explosions. The metal plate which would cover it can be seen on the right side of the tank, and you can see it’s not penetrated, but rather removed. There is also no impact marks on the actual turret below, which suggests composite layer was not penetrated either. If it had just been sheet metal we would see impact marks on the turret below as that could never stop an RPG.





Tipu7 said:


> This is Al Zarrar.
> One in Bajaur was Type-59.
> There is a generation gap between both types.


I was talking about the one destroyed in Bajaur

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> I was talking about the one destroyed in Bajaur


Post pictures so we can see and compare the types !!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Desert Fox 1 said:


> I was talking about the one destroyed in Bajaur


Ah okay, are there any photos of that one? I’m sure they’re posted somewhere on the forum but it would take a while to find them.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> Post pictures so we can see and compare the types !!!





iLION12345_1 said:


> Ah okay, are there any photos of that one? I’m sure they’re posted somewhere on the forum but it would take a while to find them.


Found it with great difficulty in a documentary about Pakistan's war on terror.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Found it with great difficulty in a documentary about Pakistan's war on terror.
> View attachment 734656





Desert Fox 1 said:


> Found it with great difficulty in a documentary about Pakistan's war on terror.
> View attachment 734656






Desert Fox 1 said:


> View attachment 734576
> 
> This Alzarrar is different from the Bajaur one, which was a baseline t59/69( i don't remember correctly)





Desert Fox 1 said:


> View attachment 734576
> 
> This Alzarrar is different from the Bajaur one, which was a baseline t59/69( i don't remember correctly)






Mere dost, my friend, I don’t understand your question ? This are two different Tanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> Mere dost, my friend, I don’t understand your question ? This are two different Tanks.


My question was that if anyone knew where this AZ was destroyed, forgot to put a question mark,sorry. Perhaps manstein can answer it with an interesting story.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Tipu7

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Found it with great difficulty in a documentary about Pakistan's war on terror.
> View attachment 734656


It's Type-59.


Desert Fox 1 said:


> I was talking about the one destroyed in Bajaur


The one destroyed in Bajaur was Type 59. 
Through out entire War on Terror, only one Al Zarrar was lost, and that too during Swat Operation.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## bhola record

Tipu7 said:


> It's Type-59.
> 
> The one destroyed in Bajaur was Type 59.
> Through out entire War on Terror, only one Al Zarrar was lost, and that too during Swat Operation.


It as an rpg hit?


----------



## PanzerKiel

bhola record said:


> It as an rpg hit?


You can include multiple SPG9s as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## bhola record

PanzerKiel said:


> You can include multiple SPG9s as well.


That is a tough SOB then.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

bhola record said:


> That is a tough SOB then.


From the account of that attack (the Al-zarrar one) it took an RPG hit and 7 VBIEDS on motorbikes (suicide attacks). Hadn’t heard of the SPG-9s but if it took that too then it just further goes to show how tough that armor upgrade was, no wonder the composite block is gone, but it did its job just fine.


Desert Fox 1 said:


> My question was that if anyone knew where this AZ was destroyed, forgot to put a question mark,sorry. Perhaps manstein can answer it with an interesting story.


The Al Zarrar was lost in Swat, the story of how it happened is in this thread on both the first page from a media documentary and then on the second page from a member who claims to have been there (though I do not know wether he was actually there and there’s no way to prove it, so I would take that with a grain of salt). The most believable and likely the true one is from the Aaj TV doc in the first post, which describes the Suicide and RPG attacks on it. 
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/how-al-zarrar-mbt-was-destroyed.27211/page-2

There are also people in that thread saying that the tank was abandoned by the crew and then later blown up by one of our own Cobras so it wouldn’t be used by the Taliban, but judging by the type of damage done to it, that is highly unlikely and it doesn’t make sense either.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## bhola record

iLION12345_1 said:


> From the account of that attack (the Al-zarrar one) it took an RPG hit and 7 VBIEDS on motorbikes (suicide attacks). Hadn’t heard of the SPG-9s but if it took that too then it just further goes to show how tough that armor upgrade was, no wonder the composite block is gone, but it did its job just fine.


What about the crew anyone know?


----------



## iLION12345_1

bhola record said:


> What about the crew anyone know?


The crew in this particular case survived, all 4 of them, without major injuries (according to the news documentary.)
I have heard that in the other case, the Type 59, two or the crew succumbed to their injuries after being rescued from the destroyed tank, but I’m not 100% sure of that since I’ve only heard it from other people.

Pakistan lost either 2 or 3 tanks in total in the War on terror, 1 AZ, 1Type 59, and the third was apparently a Type 69 that drove over an IED and was disabled, but that is also unconfirmed.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> You can include multiple SPG9s as well.


From this following hypothesis (and hence questions) can be deduced:
*Infantry support:*
It is the job of infantry to protect the tanks from such threats especially in urban warfare/LICs. After the the first shot the Infantry should have neutralised the AT team or atleast should have suppressed it considering the fact that SPG-9 has a max effective range of just 600-800m. But in this case the enemy was able to fire multiple shots at the tank and infantry was unable to provide timely response. It can be said that the Infantry was of SIB but still cooperation with tanks is one of the basic necessities in modern warfare andour soldiers are given training on it.
*Air support by Cobras:*
An AT team would've made an important target for our cobras but they were unable to neutralise it especially if the AT team had fired multiple times. It can be said the they had RTB but it is highly unlikely as the Cobras gave all round protection especially when the enemy was present in enough force to attack tanks with spg. Another point may be that infantry was unable to guide the pilots,another fatal mistake.
*Artillery Support:*
Our ops in Bajaur and Swat were supported with field and even medium artillery. One of the main objectives of arty in modern warfare along with the softening up of enemy is the suppression of enemy AT teams and ambushes but in this case arty was alao unable to provide timely fire and again the blame can be put on the Infantry for not being able to provide timely coordinates to them. Same can be said of the inf mortars if there were any.
* Accompanying Tanks:*
If the crew of the tank after being hit was badly hurt and unable to respond,the supporting tanks should have deployed smoke screens and suppressed/neutralised the AT teams but they were unable to do so.
All of these elements are necessary for combined arms warfare and if anyone of these are missing then it could lead to mission failure which may have strategic implications. Also our enemy in the east will have better atgms(incl fnf), the air will be contested, enemy inf will be using better tactics and our arty will also be facing counter battery fire.
P.S, I know I'm comparing LIC with conventional warfare and that changes/improvements must have been brought.
@PanzerKiel @Signalian @iLION12345_1 @Tipu7 @HRK
@Inception-06

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Iceman said:


> Both Al-Zs were lost to enemy fire on two different ocassions. Out of the eight crew members, 4 were lost. Out of the four, one was lost to the direct effect of tank being destroyed. Remaining three were lost to allied incidents, such as being shot while evacuating from the burning tanks.
> I can't divulge technical details here. My limitations. Only i can assure you is that I know. I was there.
> A total of 3 three tanks have been lost to enemy fire in these years. 1 x T-69IIMP and 2 x Al-Zs. There have been a certain no of them disabled due to heavy potency IED blasts but all the tanks / crew were recovered safely and those tanks are all back in combat again.





Iceman said:


> hi everyone .. its almost a year since this incident took place..... and well we have taken a year to come to terms with this loss .... there are of course many versions to what had happened that day, not any of them is entirely accurate. I will not go in details of what and how things happened there. All i can tell you is that we actually lost three AZ tanks in this particular conflict. One was disabled due to a massive IED blast, but luckily the crew survived. The tank took the brunt of the blast. Its track was broken, lost the idler wheel, the diesel tanks ruptured due to the shock wave and the belly was practically bent front side.
> remaining two tanks were lost to direct anti-tank rocket attack. In all speculations they were RPG-7s fired at a very close rage (range does not effect penetration but accuracy for sure!!!). In both the cases, the crew managed to come out alive, but (in both the cases), but the gunner and loader were lost due to subsequent reasons (burn wounds, gun fire)....
> 
> Tanks are very powerful machines, but at the same time, they are very vulnerable to close range attacks. therefore the dependence on infantry to protect them from close range attacks. If in any eventuality, the infantry leaves a gap in this protection, specially during a gun battle, that gap is exploited by the miscreants to attack the tank. That is exactly what had happened in the later two occasions when the tanks were fired upon by rockets from a very close range.


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> From this following hypothesis (and hence questions) can be deduced:
> *Infantry support:*
> It is the job of infantry to protect the tanks from such threats especially in urban warfare/LICs. After the the first shot the Infantry should have neutralised the AT team or atleast should have suppressed it considering the fact that SPG-9 has a max effective range of just 600-800m. But in this case the enemy was able to fire multiple shots at the tank and infantry was unable to provide timely response. It can be said that the Infantry was of SIB but still cooperation with tanks is one of the basic necessities in modern warfare andour soldiers are given training on it.


Kitaabi baatein....you are mixing everything.....would like you to experience one of these situations...anywayz...

In this case enemy is not that much visible, enemy is also in large numbers, you cannot sufficiently elevate your tank gun in order to take out an AT team perched on top.....enemy perched on top is otherwise harder to take out....



Desert Fox 1 said:


> *Air support by Cobras:*
> An AT team would've made an important target for our cobras but they were unable to neutralise it especially if the AT team had fired multiple times. It can be said the they had RTB but it is highly unlikely as the Cobras gave all round protection especially when the enemy was present in enough force to attack tanks with spg. Another point may be that infantry was unable to guide the pilots,another fatal mistake.


Such AT teams are not visible from a high flying cobra, cobra cant risk coming low since it will be engaged with RPGs, and then you will have a separate BLACK HAWK DOWN op on your hands.....as far as infantry guiding pilots are concerned, when both friendly and enemy forces are hugging each other, nothing much can be done about it.



Desert Fox 1 said:


> *Artillery Support:*
> Our ops in Bajaur and Swat were supported with field and even medium artillery. One of the main objectives of arty in modern warfare along with the softening up of enemy is the suppression of enemy AT teams and ambushes but in this case arty was alao unable to provide timely fire and again the blame can be put on the Infantry for not being able to provide timely coordinates to them. Same can be said of the inf mortars if there were any.


Artillery cant do much in mountains, try reading up what happened to Indian Army in Kargil...one wrong shot and you risk own troops being hit.....


Desert Fox 1 said:


> * Accompanying Tanks:*
> If the crew of the tank after being hit was badly hurt and unable to respond,the supporting tanks should have deployed smoke screens and suppressed/neutralised the AT teams but they were unable to do so.
> All of these elements are necessary for combined arms warfare and if anyone of these are missing then it could lead to mission failure which may have strategic implications. Also our enemy in the east will have better atgms(incl fnf), the air will be contested, enemy inf will be using better tactics and our arty will also be facing counter battery fire.


There are no supporting tanks, these roads hardly support a single tank...that tank cant move around to avoid fire.....mountains are not made for tanks.....its not a whole armor regiment in action that supporting tanks would be covering each other....

Enemy in the east you are referring to will be fighting in much open spaces with good fields of fire, unlike the scenario you have painted.....

you must experience a real ambush in FATA region and then must let me know what all you were able to achieve out of all the things you pointed out....

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> its not a whole armor regiment in action that supporting tanks would be covering each other....


But I've usually seen and heard of squadron being deployed.


PanzerKiel said:


> you must experience a real ambush in FATA region and then must let me know what all you were able to achieve out of all the things you pointed out....


I should have added that there is no negativity in my criticism.


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> But I've usually seen and heard of squadron being deployed.


Squadron deployment doesnt mean all fourteen tanks together, you simply dont have space to deploy all of them....you may have one tank supporting op of a complete infantry unit, three to four tanks for a whole brigade, thats how you fight in mountains......you try squeezing in all fourteen tanks, then be ready to find fourteen burning hulls instead of one which you have seen in pic...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> Squadron deployment doesnt mean all fourteen tanks together, you simply dont have space to deploy all of them....you may have one tank supporting op of a complete infantry unit, three to four tanks for a whole brigade, thats how you fight in mountains......you try squeezing in all fourteen tanks, then be ready to find fourteen burning hulls instead of one which you have seen in pic...


Sorry i meant to write a troop, got confused.
Thanks anyways.


----------



## iLION12345_1

Desert Fox 1 said:


> From this following hypothesis (and hence questions) can be deduced:
> *Infantry support:*
> It is the job of infantry to protect the tanks from such threats especially in urban warfare/LICs. After the the first shot the Infantry should have neutralised the AT team or atleast should have suppressed it considering the fact that SPG-9 has a max effective range of just 600-800m. But in this case the enemy was able to fire multiple shots at the tank and infantry was unable to provide timely response. It can be said that the Infantry was of SIB but still cooperation with tanks is one of the basic necessities in modern warfare andour soldiers are given training on it.
> *Air support by Cobras:*
> An AT team would've made an important target for our cobras but they were unable to neutralise it especially if the AT team had fired multiple times. It can be said the they had RTB but it is highly unlikely as the Cobras gave all round protection especially when the enemy was present in enough force to attack tanks with spg. Another point may be that infantry was unable to guide the pilots,another fatal mistake.
> *Artillery Support:*
> Our ops in Bajaur and Swat were supported with field and even medium artillery. One of the main objectives of arty in modern warfare along with the softening up of enemy is the suppression of enemy AT teams and ambushes but in this case arty was alao unable to provide timely fire and again the blame can be put on the Infantry for not being able to provide timely coordinates to them. Same can be said of the inf mortars if there were any.
> * Accompanying Tanks:*
> If the crew of the tank after being hit was badly hurt and unable to respond,the supporting tanks should have deployed smoke screens and suppressed/neutralised the AT teams but they were unable to do so.
> All of these elements are necessary for combined arms warfare and if anyone of these are missing then it could lead to mission failure which may have strategic implications. Also our enemy in the east will have better atgms(incl fnf), the air will be contested, enemy inf will be using better tactics and our arty will also be facing counter battery fire.
> P.S, I know I'm comparing LIC with conventional warfare and that changes/improvements must have been brought.
> @PanzerKiel @Signalian @iLION12345_1 @Tipu7 @HRK
> @Inception-06


Although Sir PanzerKiel already answered all that needed to be answered, I’ll just add some context so maybe the situation makes more sense.
“*It was part of small force at the front to make first contact with the militants along with force of around 35 personals of Pakistani army. It was ambushed from three sides of the mountainous road and has to face at least six suicide attack attempts within span of 15 minutes along with attacks through improvised explosive devices that were buried in their way. Crew of the destroyed Al-Zarrar MBT survived without injuries and tank was recovered as neither turret of chassis of Al-Zarrar MBT was penetrated which also proved the recent upgrade was successful”

Also: “they were attacked from three sides by different militant groups that have divided themselves into smaller groups of four to five. First attack was through improvise explosive devices which resulted in destruction of the tank (here we can assume an IED is what disabled the tank by breaking its tracks and rupturing the outer fuel tanks, as the Iceman guy said) and afterwards Taliban started firing at them, they say that it was very difficult for them to access the direction of the fire and strength of the enemy. Soldiers involved in this fight say that it took us some time to estimate their positions and after that we started counter attack by sending our troops to surround them. Taliban felt the heat and started second part of the attack to scatter and destroy the advance party of Pakistan army, they launched one of their front end weapon against this small advance party; suicide bombers. Because of the magnitude of this attack, one can easily describe it as the largest suicide attack in Pakistan if not the largest in the world, mounted against a small force in shuch a limited time. This attack involved at least six different vehicles and three motor bikes filled with explosives and driven by suicide bombers within short span of time of only fifteen minutes. Pakistani soldiers first gave them warnings to stop as they thought these were civilian vehicles, but later on they recognized the threat in time and started firing at them, most of these vehicles were destroyed but due to high speed some made it to the front line vehicles of this small military force. (The tank) According to the commanding officer of this advance force, they were very fortunate that none of their troop involved in this operation was killed and all thirty five of them were able to survive this attack.”*

PS: on further digging it seems the person named “ice man” that was recounting the attack may have been present there judging by his other posts on the forum and that his brother to backed him up, not concrete proof but it’s something.
His account says that of the three tanks lost in total. One was an AZ and two were type 59s. One in 2008 and the other in 2009.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
2


----------



## CriticalThought

PanzerKiel said:


> Kitaabi baatein....you are mixing everything.....would like you to experience one of these situations...anywayz...
> 
> In this case enemy is not that much visible, enemy is also in large numbers, you cannot sufficiently elevate your tank gun in order to take out an AT team perched on top.....enemy perched on top is otherwise harder to take out....
> 
> 
> Such AT teams are not visible from a high flying cobra, cobra cant risk coming low since it will be engaged with RPGs, and then you will have a separate BLACK HAWK DOWN op on your hands.....as far as infantry guiding pilots are concerned, when both friendly and enemy forces are hugging each other, nothing much can be done about it.
> 
> 
> Artillery cant do much in mountains, try reading up what happened to Indian Army in Kargil...one wrong shot and you risk own troops being hit.....
> 
> There are no supporting tanks, these roads hardly support a single tank...that tank cant move around to avoid fire.....mountains are not made for tanks.....its not a whole armor regiment in action that supporting tanks would be covering each other....
> 
> Enemy in the east you are referring to will be fighting in much open spaces with good fields of fire, unlike the scenario you have painted.....
> 
> you must experience a real ambush in FATA region and then must let me know what all you were able to achieve out of all the things you pointed out....



For starters, you need technology such as this to be able to see where your enemy is:

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

At the end of the day, I don’t think too much thought should be given to these incidents. It was over 12 years ago now, things have changed, improved and a lot of information about how things happened has been lost, so assuming may just lead to false conclusions. Losing a tank or two for peace was not a bad trade

Reactions: Love Love:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

iLION12345_1 said:


> According to the commanding officer of this advance force, they were very fortunate that none of their troop involved in this operation was killed and all thirty five of them were able to survive this attack.”


A miracle indeed.


----------



## arjunk

iLION12345_1 said:


> At the end of the day, I don’t think too much thought should be given to these incidents. It was over 12 years ago now, things have changed, improved and a lot of information about how things happened has been lost, so assuming may just lead to false conclusions. Losing a tank or two for peace was not a bad trade


Yes, you constantly see videos of tanks being blown by IEDs or ATGMs in Syria etc and wonder how Pakistan managed to lose only 3.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

arjunk said:


> Yes, you constantly see videos of tanks being blown by IEDs or ATGMs in Syria etc and wonder how Pakistan managed to lose only 3.


Tanks were not used on that large scale in Pakistan. Also coin ops are different from civil wars.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## CriticalThought

Desert Fox 1 said:


> From this following hypothesis (and hence questions) can be deduced:
> *Infantry support:*
> It is the job of infantry to protect the tanks from such threats especially in urban warfare/LICs. After the the first shot the Infantry should have neutralised the AT team or atleast should have suppressed it considering the fact that SPG-9 has a max effective range of just 600-800m. But in this case the enemy was able to fire multiple shots at the tank and infantry was unable to provide timely response. It can be said that the Infantry was of SIB but still cooperation with tanks is one of the basic necessities in modern warfare andour soldiers are given training on it.
> *Air support by Cobras:*
> An AT team would've made an important target for our cobras but they were unable to neutralise it especially if the AT team had fired multiple times. It can be said the they had RTB but it is highly unlikely as the Cobras gave all round protection especially when the enemy was present in enough force to attack tanks with spg. Another point may be that infantry was unable to guide the pilots,another fatal mistake.
> *Artillery Support:*
> Our ops in Bajaur and Swat were supported with field and even medium artillery. One of the main objectives of arty in modern warfare along with the softening up of enemy is the suppression of enemy AT teams and ambushes but in this case arty was alao unable to provide timely fire and again the blame can be put on the Infantry for not being able to provide timely coordinates to them. Same can be said of the inf mortars if there were any.
> * Accompanying Tanks:*
> If the crew of the tank after being hit was badly hurt and unable to respond,the supporting tanks should have deployed smoke screens and suppressed/neutralised the AT teams but they were unable to do so.
> All of these elements are necessary for combined arms warfare and if anyone of these are missing then it could lead to mission failure which may have strategic implications. Also our enemy in the east will have better atgms(incl fnf), the air will be contested, enemy inf will be using better tactics and our arty will also be facing counter battery fire.
> P.S, I know I'm comparing LIC with conventional warfare and that changes/improvements must have been brought.
> @PanzerKiel @Signalian @iLION12345_1 @Tipu7 @HRK
> @Inception-06



I think you have some very good thoughts. They might not be informed through experience, but it shows you have the ability to take a deeper look at things, try to identify problems, and come up with solutions. I really want to encourage you to continue doing that. Don't be demotivated by the usual low IQ Pakistani nay sayers.


iLION12345_1 said:


> At the end of the day, I don’t think too much thought should be given to these incidents. It was over 12 years ago now, things have changed, improved and a lot of information about how things happened has been lost, so assuming may just lead to false conclusions. Losing a tank or two for peace was not a bad trade



Wrong. We should revisit these situations, analyze them, and try to derive lessons for the future. They serve as excellent test cases that can be discussed at PMA Kakul and other institutions.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## CriticalThought

Desert Fox 1 said:


> I'm humbled sir. What I've written is not that bad for a 17 year old.



Sounds so cliched, but Muhammad Bin Qasim was 17 when he conquered Sind. An intelligent, analytical mind can achieve superiority over age by constantly re-evaluating assumptions and making corrections.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

CriticalThought said:


> Wrong. We should revisit these situations, analyze them, and try to derive lessons for the future. They serve as excellent test cases that can be discussed at PMA Kakul and other institutions


Exactly that was my point.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## CriticalThought

....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

CriticalThought said:


> Hey @Desert Fox 1 while we are on the topic of millimetre wave radars, that is the technology we were supposed to get with the AH1Zs. It would have made finding those AT teams so much easier from the air. Unfortunately, the traitor Bajwa wanted to 'reset' ties with America, and as part of that, gave them full access to Pakistani land and air routes without charging them a single penny. Think about it. America wants to keep you engrossed in these sort of problems and will never give you technology that gives you the definite upper hand. American puppets make decisions that forward this American agenda.


I suppose the way Pakistan is being made the scapegoat ( rightly though) of the US defeat in Afghanistan is to prevent Pakistan from capitalising on their retreat. I hope we play that withdrawal from Afghanistan card to the best, which, honestly, we have been waiting to play for quite some time.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## iLION12345_1

CriticalThought said:


> I think you have some very good thoughts. They might not be informed through experience, but it shows you have the ability to take a deeper look at things, try to identify problems, and come up with solutions. I really want to encourage you to continue doing that. Don't be demotivated by the usual low IQ Pakistani nay sayers.
> 
> 
> Wrong. We should revisit these situations, analyze them, and try to derive lessons for the future. They serve as excellent test cases that can be discussed at PMA Kakul and other institutions.


Well that should be left for PMA Kakul to do, that’s kind of what I meant. People on PDF have a habit of making stories, as is clear with the original thread about that incident. I’m sure it’s been analyzed enough where needed.
I don’t see this example applying too well to Conventional ops in desert warfare and plains. Which is what would actually be use scenario of Pakistani tanks, I get what you mean though.


arjunk said:


> Yes, you constantly see videos of tanks being blown by IEDs or ATGMs in Syria etc and wonder how Pakistan managed to lose only 3.





Desert Fox 1 said:


> Tanks were not used on that large scale in Pakistan. Also coin ops are different from civil wars.


Yes, Pakistan used much fewer tanks, apart from Swat there was really no place to use them as the mountains of FATA without any roads or plains are not really suitable for tank usage. At the same time whatever our military was doing was much better planned than whatever goes on in Syria, thankfully.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

iLION12345_1 said:


> I don’t see this example applying too well to Conventional ops in desert warfare


Pakistan army's 6th amoured division ( and hence 1corps) has no desert area in its area of responsibility i.e Northern Punjab, which is quite suitable for ambushes not only by infantry but even by tanks.
Remember what Indian centurions did to our pattons of 1st armd div in khem kharan.
Similarly, our 13FF's ambushes in Sialkot were one of the key factors in that battle...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## iLION12345_1

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Pakistan army's 6th amoured division ( and hence 1corps) has no desert area in its area of responsibility i.e Northern Punjab, which is quite suitable for ambushes not only by infantry but even by tanks.
> Remember what Indian centurions did to our pattons of 1st armd div in khem kharan.
> Similarly, our 23FF's ambushes in Sialkot were one of the key factors in that battle...


Yes, I meant conventional ops in deserts as an example, similarly in plains or hilly areas of Punjab, Emphasis on the conventional ops, in those cases a single tank like this with a small party of soldiers is a very unlikely sight, especially without prior recon and cover from other arms. I guess that’s where we have learned from such incidents, the improvement of combined arms, especially with other forces like AF.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## CriticalThought

iLION12345_1 said:


> Well that should be left for PMA Kakul to do, that’s kind of what I meant. People on PDF have a habit of making stories, as is clear with the original thread about that incident. I’m sure it’s been analyzed enough where needed.
> I don’t see this example applying too well to Conventional ops in desert warfare and plains. Which is what would actually be use scenario of Pakistani tanks, I get what you mean though.



Combine shifting sand dunes, low visibility during sand storm, and pure bad luck, and you can find yourself surrounded on three sides by the enemy. Or consider an enemy raiding party using sand dunes as cover to give you a surprise. Or even the use of camouflage to gain advantage. You can find yourself in an ambush situation anywhere.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Pakstallion

As a non military person curious about the utility of drones in this scenario? 2008 was a very different time but thinking more to the future. Credit to the 35 that were able to survive such a scenario. If it was the US there would be a blockbuster movie about it.


----------



## iLION12345_1

Pakstallion said:


> As a non military person curious about the utility of drones in this scenario? 2008 was a very different time but thinking more to the future. Credit to the 35 that were able to survive such a scenario. If it was the US there would be a blockbuster movie about it.


In such a scenario an armed drone would have been extremely useful, or really even an unarmed one. The soldiers could have seen the enemy positions from it and even engaged them without leaving their covered positions and the Taliban would have no way to counter it. 
Pakistan has used Drones in combat since 2014 to great success and with current procurements of CH4B, WL2 (apparently) plus our own Burraq and upcoming MALE UCAVs, Pakistan is investing plenty in this sector. Each military arm is getting its own UCAVs and UAVs.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> But I've usually seen and heard of squadron being deployed.
> 
> I should have added that there is no negativity in my criticism.



You should download and play two games. One is called Middle East campaign by John Tiller:









Flashpoint Campaigns Red Storm:





Both are realistic and authentic Military scenario games. In this Game you learn so much as you are learning from Field Sand Box exercises.

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Pakistan army's 6th amoured division ( and hence 1corps) has no desert area in its area of responsibility i.e Northern Punjab, which is quite suitable for ambushes not only by infantry but even by tanks.
> Remember what Indian centurions did to our pattons of 1st armd div in khem kharan.
> Similarly, our 13FF's ambushes in Sialkot were one of the key factors in that battle...



A authentic scenario-strategy war game is also called Panzermarshal, it’s for FREE available in App Store or on PC.

Reactions: Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## truthfollower

@PanzerKiel not much changed in tanks design other than incremental improvements?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Signalian

Inception-06 said:


> You should download and play two games. One is called Middle East campaign by John Tiller:
> View attachment 735200
> View attachment 735201
> 
> 
> Flashpoint Campaigns Red Storm:
> 
> View attachment 735202
> 
> Both are realistic and authentic Military scenario games. In this Game you learn so much as you are learning from Field Sand Box exercises.


Played the first game in 2000 as ww2 western campaign. Loved the desert scenarios. Was always trying to save the HQs. 88mm gun was a killer.

Reactions: Love Love:
2


----------



## Inception-06

Signalian said:


> Played the first game in 2000 as ww2 western campaign. Loved the desert scenarios. Was always trying to save the HQs. 88mm gun was a killer.



Very difficult games, you have sacrifice a lot of unit’s to accomplish your mission.
@PanzerKiel you played one of this 3 at-least try the last one (takes not much MB -free download in App Store..)

Reactions: Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

truthfollower said:


> View attachment 736053
> 
> 
> @PanzerKiel not much changed in tanks design other than incremental improvements?


Actually we have reached a plateau in terms of military hardware, especially in tanks and rifles. Yet the US invasion of Iraq showed that these incremental improvements actually mean the difference. Modern fcs,TI, NVDs, comms,data links, EW are more important and more useful and op swift retort is a testament to that.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## truthfollower

Inception-06 said:


> You should download and play two games. One is called Middle East campaign by John Tiller:
> View attachment 735200
> View attachment 735201
> 
> 
> Flashpoint Campaigns Red Storm:
> 
> View attachment 735202
> 
> Both are realistic and authentic Military scenario games. In this Game you learn so much as you are learning from Field Sand Box exercises.


 any modern good games like these?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## bhola record

truthfollower said:


> any modern good games like these?


I would say world of tanks great game but in the game you only have control of one tank and you cannot control other units.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Inception-06

truthfollower said:


> any modern good games like these?


„Flashpoint campaigned red storm „ is absolutely modern, all units are modern. I have ca.50 games in my inventory and playing history. But this ones was the most realistic, without thinking and respecting military theory you can’t play or even win it.


bhola record said:


> I would say world of tanks great game but in the game you only have control of one tank and you cannot control other units.


World of tanks is just for fun, not to prepare for real war.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Primus

truthfollower said:


> any modern good games like these?


Wargame red dragon

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JPMM

I propose WINSPMBT (free download)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tipu7

REMINDER:

This thread is about Mechanized Divisions of Pakistan.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

Alkahlid


----------



## Raja Porus

Rommels of PA. Looks like a LAT( before being re-equipped with APCs).




Fun Fact:
Rommel got his famous goggles from a British POW, Major General Michael Gambier-Parry. After having dinner with the POW, the British general complained that his hat had been taken by a German soldier and Rommel took it upon himself to retrieve the hat. Later, he found those goggles in the Britisher's staff car and asked if he could keep them. The British general agreed and they became a part of the legendary general's attire.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Mrc

arjunk said:


> Yes, you constantly see videos of tanks being blown by IEDs or ATGMs in Syria etc and wonder how Pakistan managed to lose only 3.




The way tanks are used in Libya and Syria is wrong even to layman... 

Your infantry needs to b sweeping areas in front of tank and tank shud supply fire support... 

In Middle East infantry is hiding behind the tank which leaves tank exposed to attack


U can have alien tach but without proper insight of how to use it will still b blown away

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Mrc said:


> The way tanks are used in Libya and Syria is wrong even to layman...
> 
> Your infantry needs to b sweeping areas in front of tank and tank shud supply fire support...
> 
> In Middle East infantry is hiding behind the tank which leaves tank exposed to attack
> 
> 
> U can have alien tach but without proper insight of how to use it will still b blown away


I doubt if TTP and other other factions had access to ATGM and for that matter even SAMs to shoot down helis. They had RPGs, similar caliber weapons, IEDs etc. 
In case of infantry, it was FC which took a lot of casualties going in first. PA's regular infantry was converted for COIN Ops while paramilitary like FC were given tools of the trade to gain edge in COIN/AT ops against terrorists. FC in early 2000s is very different from FC of now.

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Primus

Signalian said:


> I doubt if TTP and other other factions had access to ATGM and for that matter even SAMs to shoot down helis. They had RPGs, similar caliber weapons, IEDs etc.
> In case of infantry, it was FC which took a lot of casualties going in first. PA's regular infantry was converted for COIN Ops while paramilitary like FC were given tools of the trade to gain edge in COIN/AT ops against terrorists. FC in early 2000s is very different from FC of now.


I read somewhere that TTP had atgms but they mostly used it for IEDs.

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Hakikat ve Hikmet

The recent Turkish ops in Syria and Karabag have shown how ineffective the enemy armored and the associated AD are if you win the EM spectrum via EW, and then employ cost-effective UAVs _en masse_, which makes your armored, AD, infantry etc. even more effective....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Huffal said:


> I read somewhere that TTP had atgms but they mostly used it for IEDs.


Too bad.
Had they used the ATGMs, we would be seeing an Urban-Kit modernized version of Al Zarrar today.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Primus

Signalian said:


> Too bad.
> Had they used the ATGMs, we would be seeing an Urban-Kit modernized version of Al Zarrar today.


Had they used ATGMs against our armour and/or infantry, then our tactics would've evolved to counter the threat, which would mean the threat of atgms posed to our tanks would be negligible.

India could not have that. Hence why they told their puppets to make IEDs with them and also why they didn't give any actual atgm launchers to them.


if they did give the launchers regardless, then we effectively neutralised them before they could use them alhamdulillah.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus



Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## HRK

Huffal said:


> I read somewhere that TTP had atgms but they mostly used it for IEDs.


not the ATGMs but anti-tank mines ....

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Primus

HRK said:


> not the ATGMs but anti-tank mines ....


Perhaps. But I remember seeing a picture from an IBO in NW against a TTP arms cache. They recovered a couple of antique ATGMs that looked like they would be used in IEDs.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1351904715811020800

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Our Armoured regts have the following composition:
3×squadrons= *14*×3= 42 tanks
Plus there are 2 tanks in the BN HQs aswell. Thus,
total number of Tanks in a regt= 44
Why not have:
4× squadrons of *12* tanks each,thus;
4×squadrons= 12×4 = 48 tanks.
Thus in this new arrangement there will be four companies instead of three.
I know if this change is implemented then the training manuals and company level tactics etc will have to be a bit modified but the pros overshadow the cons. The CO will have a D company which will act as a reserve. This reserve company can be used for supporting other companies, replacing depleted ones, conduct wide flanking manoeuvres, conducting aggressive raids, feints, filling in gaps or preventing breakthroughs if the unit is on the defensive. This all with only an addition of 4 tanks.
P.S, our neighbour has 60 tanks in a regt or 45?


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Our Armoured regts have the following composition:
> 3×squadrons= *14*×3= 42 tanks
> Plus there are 2 tanks in the BN HQs aswell. Thus,
> total number of Tanks in a regt= 44
> Why not have:
> 4× squadrons of *12* tanks each,thus;
> 4×squadrons= 12×4 = 48 tanks.
> Thus in this new arrangement there will be four companies instead of three.
> I know if this change is implemented then the training manuals and company level tactics etc will have to be a bit modified but the pros overshadow the cons. The CO will have a D company which will act as a reserve. This reserve company can be used for supporting other companies, replacing depleted ones, conduct wide flanking manoeuvres, conducting aggressive raids, feints, filling in gaps or preventing breakthroughs if the unit is on the defensive. This all with only an addition of 4 tanks.
> P.S, our neighbour has 60 tanks in a regt.


First, whatever you proposed is already being done without having the fourth squadron..... Moreover, the frontage which a tank regiment covers is too large, a fourth squadron will add to difficulties of the commanding officer regarding to command and control of his regiment..... 

Moreover, our neighbor has 45 tanks in its regiment, not 60.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> First, whatever you proposed is already being done without having the fourth squadron..... Moreover, the frontage which a tank regiment covers is too large, a fourth squadron will add to difficulties of the commanding officer regarding to command and control of his regiment.....
> 
> Moreover, our neighbor has 45 tanks in its regiment, not 60.


Agreed sir.


PanzerKiel said:


> Moreover, our neighbor has 45 tanks in its regiment, not 60


Yep, I dug up one of your old posts and edited that. Thanks

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Tipu7

PanzerKiel said:


> First, whatever you proposed is already being done without having the fourth squadron..... Moreover, the frontage which a tank regiment covers is too large, a fourth squadron will add to difficulties of the commanding officer regarding to command and control of his regiment.....
> 
> Moreover, our neighbor has 45 tanks in its regiment, not 60.


However, Their Arjun Regiments have 56+ tanks in each regiment.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Tipu7 said:


> However, Their Arjun Regiments have 56+ tanks in each regiment.


It goes up by 4 every time it’s mentioned. Now it’s 60.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## ghazi52



Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## ghazi52

Whatever the odds, Pakistan Army will always live up to the expectations of our great nation in the defence of motherland.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ghazi52

Heroes don't drive super cars,
They drive battle tanks!

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

ghazi52 said:


> Heroes don't drive super cars,
> They drive battle tanks!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 744970


This means that 18 inf div might still have these or this might be an old pic

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## ghazi52

Desert Fox 1 said:


> This means that 18 inf div might still have these or this might be an old pic


 Old picture.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blacklight

ghazi52 said:


> Whatever the odds, Pakistan Army will always live up to the expectations of our great nation in the defence of motherland.
> 
> 
> View attachment 744968



Rado Ceramic, Interesting!!

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> This means that 18 inf div might still have these or this might be an old pic


That's the new army uniform pattern.... Moreover, the tank serial number shows that it has been very recently overhauled.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Raja Porus

Blacklight said:


> Rado Ceramic, Interesting!!


He is an armour boy after all 


PanzerKiel said:


> That's the new army uniform pattern.... Moreover, the tank serial number shows that it has been very recently overhauled.


Sir but it is also 7-8 years old.


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> He is an armour boy after all.
> 
> Sir but it is also 7-8 years old.


Yep, but the tank serial number is more recent... Max 4 years.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## khanasifm

ghazi52 said:


> Heroes don't drive super cars,
> They drive battle tanks!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 744970



Back in 70s the only tank unit of the div at the time I think all infantry div has one tank regiment of 44 tanks and three or four sqns 

Visited it multiple times use it o play in the MT [emoji6]

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

khanasifm said:


> Visited it multiple times use it o play in the MT


What great time it was..
Have myself done it too


khanasifm said:


> I think all infantry div has one tank regiment of 44 tanks and three or four sqns


Yep.


----------



## PanzerKiel

khanasifm said:


> Back in 70s the only tank unit of the div at the time I think all infantry div has one tank regiment of 44 tanks and three or four sqns


Nowadays, every infantry Division on the eastern front has ATLEAST one whole armored or mechanised brigade.

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> Nowadays, every infantry Division on the eastern front has ATLEAST one whole armored or mechanised brigade.


Ustaad jee dil khush kar dita ay. Meray pas positive rating ki option ni ha isliye baiy bass hon.
Are they 1+1, 2+1 ,2+1 or 2+2 or variable.
By the way it must be raining tanks in Pakistan. And with only 3 regts of type69 they all nust be AZs and AKs. Perhaps the AZs being replaced by VT4s are also being used to raise these 
Also are these completely attached to the inf divs or may be Indp?

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Are they 1+1, 2+1 ,2+1 or 2+2 or variable.
> 
> Also are these completely attached to the inf divs or may be Indp?


They are variable as per their requirements.... 

They are completely under the infantry divisions, not independent.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> They are variable as per their requirements....
> 
> They are completely under the infantry divisions, not independent.


PA armd divs:
1st Bde = 2× AR +( 1× MIB?)=88 tanks
2nd Bde = 2× AR +( 1× MIB?)=88 tanks
3rd Bde = 2× AR + (1× MIB?)=88 tanks
4×indp sqns( three of bde hqs and one of div hq)= 56 tanks
1× div recce regt= 37 tanks
Plus there will be an indp armd bde at corps level? =88 tanks.
Thus the total number of Tanks in a strike corps (excluding those in in inf divs) =441 tanks
If we add some of tanks i fro training purposes etc then the number will be almost: 450

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Desert Fox 1 said:


> PA armd divs:
> 1st Bde = 2× AR +( 1× MIB?)=88 tanks
> 2nd Bde = 2× AR +( 1× MIB?)=88 tanks
> 3rd Bde = 2× AR + (1× MIB?)=88 tanks
> 4×indp sqns( three of bde hqs and one of div hq)= 56 tanks
> 1× div recce regt= 37 tanks
> Plus there will be an indp armd bde at corps level? =88 tanks.
> Thus the total number of Tanks in a strike corps (excluding those in in inf divs) =441 tanks
> If we add some of tanks i fro training purposes etc then the number will be almost: 450


-PA armd divs plus indp armd bdes of 1 and 2 corps= 2×450=900 tanks.
-2× mech divs(25 and 26)= 2×250=250 tanks.
- Armd bdes with inf divs (15, 10, 17, 16, 18, 14, 8, 11, 23, 40, 8, 37and 35)=13×88= 1144 tanks.
- Indp Armd bdes with IV, V, 30, 31=4×88= 352 tanks.
- IABGs= 4( I'm writing 4 as not all have thw regts) ×88= 352 tanks.
- Atleast 1× armd regt in Balochistan=44 tanks.
plus there might be one indp armd bde/regt either with 19div or 10corps.
Thus, total number of tanks (theoretically)= 900 + 500 + 1144 + 352 + 616 = *3512 tanks (atleast)*
But according to most sources there are more then 60 regts = 64 (estimated)×44 = *2816 tanks.*
That means a defecit of *696 tanks atleast!*
And our published tank numbers are:
Alkhalids/ AK1s= 500
T80UD= 320
AlZarrars=800
Type-85s=300
Type-69s= 176
( Not including VT4s as these numbers are before its induction)
Also these numbers may not be accurate but I've increased them in order to match most sources especially that of AKs.
Thus total tanks according to type≈*2200 tanks.
Such a great defecit!*
@PanzerKiel @Dazzler
@Ark_Angel @Tipu7 @Signalian @HRK

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Signalian

Desert Fox 1 said:


> PA armd divs:
> 1st Bde = 2× AR +( 1× MIB?)=88 tanks
> 2nd Bde = 2× AR +( 1× MIB?)=88 tanks
> 3rd Bde = 2× AR + (1× MIB?)=88 tanks
> 4×indp sqns( three of bde hqs and one of div hq)= 56 tanks
> 1× div recce regt= 37 tanks
> Plus there will be an indp armd bde at corps level? =88 tanks.
> Thus the total number of Tanks in a strike corps (excluding those in in inf divs) =441 tanks
> If we add some of tanks i fro training purposes etc then the number will be almost: 450


Gryphon may or may not agree with you


Desert Fox 1 said:


> -PA armd divs plus indp armd bdes of 1 and 2 corps= 2×450=900 tanks.
> -2× mech divs(25 and 26)= 2×250=250 tanks.
> - Armd bdes with inf divs (15, 10, 17, 16, 18, 14, 8, 11, 23, 40, 8, 37and 35)=13×88= 1144 tanks.
> - Indp Armd bdes with IV, V, 30, 31=4×88= 352 tanks.
> - IABGs= 4( I'm writing 4 as not all have thw regts) ×88= 352 tanks.
> - Atleast 1× armd regt in Balochistan=44 tanks.
> plus there might be one indp armd bde/regt either with 19div or 10corps.
> Thus, total number of tanks (theoretically)= 900 + 500 + 1144 + 352 + 616 = *3512 tanks (atleast)*
> But according to most sources there are more then 60 regts = 64 (estimated)×44 = *2816 tanks.*
> That means a defecit of *696 tanks atleast!*
> And our published tank numbers are:
> Alkhalids/ AK1s= 500
> T80UD= 320
> AlZarrars=800
> Type-85s=300
> Type-69s= 176
> ( Not including VT4s as these numbers are before its induction)
> Also these numbers may not be accurate but I've increased them in order to match most sources especially that of AKs.
> Thus total tanks according to type≈*2200 tanks.
> Such a great defecit!*
> @PanzerKiel @Dazzler
> @Ark_Angel @Tipu7 @Signalian @HRK


PK knows these figures are somewhat off, but he will give a rating thru an emoji and vanish

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Signalian said:


> Gryphon may or may not agree with you
> 
> PK knows these figures are somewhat off, but he will give a rating thru an emoji and vanish


Actually most of these figures are from his posts.
Gryphon would have been a great contributor in this regard and again some of my data is from his posts. His leaving was a great loss to PDF. Also I suppose he would have agreed with my data. The data of number of tanks by type may be off but not by that if formations.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Actually most of these figures are from his posts.
> Gryphon would have been a great contributor in this regard and again some of my data is from his posts. His leaving was a great loss to PDF. Also I suppose he would have agreed with my data. The data of number of tanks by type may be off but not by that if formations.


Why you want official information to made public, do we have such details from India ?

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> Why you want official information to made public, do we have such details from India ?


Yep

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Yep


 Would you summarize, what the Pakistani armored Corps has to face when it will be challenged, by the Indian Army, don’t worry it is not off topic, just a wake up call for everyone to see the reality !

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> Would you summarize, what the Pakistani armored Corps has to face when it will be challenged, by the Indian Army, don’t worry it is not off topic, just a wake up call for everyone to see the reality !


I will be a bit busy in the coming week or two but hopefully I'll be able to do it afterwards.
Btw signalian is the best man for ORBATs and stuff.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

Inception-06 said:


> Would you summarize, what the Pakistani armored Corps has to face when it will be challenged, by the Indian Army, don’t worry it is not off topic, just a wake up call for everyone to see the reality !


hyedrabad tey gwalior tu atey atey tankan nu saal lag jaa si , dont worry we will have the upper in case of a pre-emptive armour strike by us ,

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

farooqbhai007 said:


> hyedrabad tey gwalior tu atey atey tankan nu saal lag jaa si , dont worry we will have the upper in case of a pre-emptive armour strike by us ,


Apart from Brig Nisar, any other PA armor commander comes in your mind who comes close to or is better than Nisar ?


Inception-06 said:


> Would you summarize, what the Pakistani armored Corps has to face when it will be challenged, by the Indian Army, don’t worry it is not off topic, just a wake up call for everyone to see the reality !


Even if its 2000 Vs 5000, it depends how you deploy them.


PanzerKiel said:


> Nowadays, every infantry Division on the eastern front has ATLEAST one whole armored or mechanised brigade.


Would want to hear heroics of Armor and mechanised crews in WOT (2002 till now) from you. Not the AZ story please but stuff that isnt discussed here before. 

How well was M113 deployed and utilised in WOT.

Also, when are you planning to write for Hilal Mag.

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
3


----------



## Raja Porus

Signalian said:


> Brig Nisar


Unfortunately none. What is more depressing is that even a man like him after proving himself in the battle where it mattered more than ACRs and other courses he made to brigadier rank with great difficulty.
Similarly the GOC of 6th armd div( also nisar's) was even promoted to lt gen!! He also retired as a Maj Gen which was his rank in 65! While men like Yahya Khan got promotion for nothing. There are many similar instances in the army. Alas...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Unfortunately none. What is more depressing is that even a man like him after proving himself in the battle where it mattered more than ACRs and other courses he made to brigadier rank with great difficulty.
> Similarly the GOC of 6th armd div( also nisar's) was even promoted to lt gen!! He also retired as a Maj Gen which was his rank in 65! While men like Yahya Khan got promotion for nothing. There are many similar instances in the army. Alas...


This is why i asked PK about current heroics in real war scenarios.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Signalian said:


> Apart from Brig Nisar, any other PA armor commander comes in your mind who comes close to or is better than Nisar ?


Col Sahibzad Gul, 6 Lancers, Khem Karan 
Then Maj Shamim Alam Khan 
Then Maj Shah Rafi Alam 
Then Col Wajahat, commanding all armor elements of 6 armored division at Chawinda 
Maj Z U Abbasi 

Commander 2 Armored Brigade in 1971, at Chamb 

.... And then some others as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> Col Sahibzad Gul, 6 Lancers, Khem Karan
> Then Maj Shamim Alam Khan
> Then Maj Shah Rafi Alam
> Then Col Wajahat, commanding all armor elements of 6 armored division at Chawinda
> Maj Z U Abbasi
> 
> Commander 2 Armored Brigade in 1971, at Chamb
> 
> .... And then some others as well.


I thought he was talking about those who led their regts/formations with tactical brilliance and not just boldness and bravery.
However, in the words of Major General Agha Humayaun Khan*" It is ironic that Third World countries study Napoleon and Slim when they have great military commanders like Eftikhar, Akhtar and Abrar"*


PanzerKiel said:


> Commander 2 Armored Brigade in 1971, at Chamb


I Can't remember his name.


PanzerKiel said:


> Col Sahibzad Gul, 6 Lancers, Khem


The only notable person in the 1st armd div's and 11th inf div's debacle.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> I thought he was talking about those who led their regts/formations with tactical brilliance and not just boldness and bravery.


These officers did. Not many know about them.


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> Then Col Wajahat, commanding all armor elements of 6 armored division at Chawinda


6th armd div had a greater ratio of brilliant commanders as compared to the 1st.
I suppose Tariq khan and Yaqub Khan could also be added in the list had they been given a chance in a full blown conflict.


PanzerKiel said:


> These officers did. Not many know about them.


The majors you mentioned are well known mostly due to their boldness.


----------



## Signalian

PanzerKiel said:


> These officers did. Not many know about them.


any armor occurrences in current times ?

Reactions: Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Signalian said:


> any armor occurrences in current times ?


I suppose that the Ops in Bajaur/sawat were the last ones. PK might know of something new.
Captain Meraj Shaheed was also of AC, 12 cav

Reactions: Sad Sad:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

... No one in knowledge of our role in Srilankan civil war... In all arms?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Signalian

PanzerKiel said:


> ... No one in knowledge of our role in Srilankan civil war... In all arms?


mic and die are all yours.
draftman ready with your .ppt and projector is set.

start off....

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> I will be a bit busy in the coming week or two but hopefully I'll be able to do it afterwards.
> Btw signalian is the best man for ORBATs and stuff.



I don't think that any of us has more time than, you and @Signalian, I, and @Panzerkeil have contributed more than enough, it's time that you run the show!

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> ... No one in knowledge of our role in Srilankan civil war... In all arms?


Wasn't it only related to providing technical support, Training and some equipment

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Panzerkiel after reacting to a post nowadays

Reactions: Haha Haha:
7


----------



## Neurath

@PanzerKiel 
How much truth is there to the claim that the AZs of the 6AD have been replaced with VT-4s?

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Neurath said:


> @PanzerKiel
> How much truth is there to the claim that the AZs of the 6AD have been replaced with VT-4s?


It’s confirmed, not the entire 6AD just yet though. We can say so by looking at the regimental markings of the tanks. 47 Cavalry and 6 lancers. Both have been equipped with VT-4s. Both had AZs in the past.

This doesn’t mean AZs are being retired, simply relocated. You want your best tanks at the frontline. AZ is a second line tank at this stage with So many AK-1s and VT-4s being inducted.

Interestingly this should go to show that the claims certain people make about Type 59s and 69s still being the Majority of our armor are baseless. No Type 59s In active service and so few Type 69s (3 regiments I believe) that replacing them is no longer priority.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

I noticed one thing that as of 2016 19inf div was was with 1 corps (along with 37 and 17). Here is the picture:
Observe the divisional flags.




Perhaps it serves as a reserve for central command.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Inception-06



Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> View attachment 754922
> View attachment 754923


Most of the credit for the success of Chammb ops should be given to the 2nd armd bde and it's proper handling both by GOC and its bde commander.
Btw 26th cav and PAVOs were separate from the 2nd bde right?
Also does anyone know the name of the 2nd armd bde commander?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## truthseeker2010

Desert Fox 1 said:


> I noticed one thing that as of 2016 19inf div was was with 1 corps (along with 37 and 17). Here is the picture:
> Observe the divisional flags.
> View attachment 752703
> 
> Perhaps it serves as a reserve for central command.



That's logical as well, the X corps should be solely mountain corps, with 12,23 And FCNA for Siachen till LOC north of sialkot as an AOR. 

19 should be with either 1 corps although there both infantry divs are mechanised or with 30 corps Gujranwala to reinforce 8 and 15 IDs to defend IB south of LOC.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

truthseeker2010 said:


> the X corps should be solely mountain corps, with 12,23 And FCNA for Siachen till LOC north of sialkot as an AOR


I think it extends till Jhelum. After that its central command's AOR.


truthseeker2010 said:


> 19 should be with either 1 corps although there both infantry divs are mechanised or with 30 corps Gujranwala to reinforce 8 and 15 IDs to defend IB south of LOC.


I think that it should be left uncommitted to be used only in case of a breakthrough by enemy or reinforcing a hard press div or incase 6th armd div is able to make deep enough inroads that it requires more SIBs to hold it or secure its communication lines.( All of these situations are possible only if 19 div doesn't have a pre-designated AOR)
Also, no Commander can fight a battle without reserves. Thus 19 div( if its really a reserve) should not be used until required.
Plus the Gujranwala corps is already strong enough with two inf divs(each with an integrated armd bde), one indp inf bde group and one indp armd bde grp. Also it is impossible to defend a bulge unless one retreats to a formidable defensive line or uses it to attack. Thus PA will have to use the Gujranwala bulge through the Sialkot axis (most probably) to take the battle into the Indian Territory. This will bring relief to the 30th corps and if the attack is successful then it might only be used to defend against possible counterattacks from north of Lahore corps AOR till Narowal.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Zoomed image:




I noticed that to the south of Rahim Yar khan there are number of puddles or pools which extend upto Pano Aqil,this would make the terrain soft and marshy hence preventing any approach from this direction. Thus the inly way to easily attack RYK is from the North. This means that due to terrain being impassable for mech forces without large engineer support the defence of RYK may prove to be easier. Also as this type of terrain extends upto 160km southwards,it would be difficult to conduct even a wide flanking manoeuvre from the south. So only a single inf div i.e 33 ind div(from 12 corps, Balochistan) can be used to defend this sector with some armoured support. Two bdes with the armoured component( plus LAT) towards the central and northern approaches and the third one( minus a few companies) to defend against any possible incursion from the south.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> View attachment 755543
> 
> Zoomed image:
> View attachment 755546
> 
> I noticed that to the south of Rahim Yar khan there are number of puddles or pools which extend upto Pano Aqil,this would make the terrain soft and marshy hence preventing any approach from this direction. Thus the inly way to easily attack RYK is from the North. This means that due to terrain being impassable for mech forces without large engineer support the defence of RYK may prove to be easier. Also as this type of terrain extends upto 160km southwards,it would be difficult to conduct even a wide flanking manoeuvre from the south. So only a single inf div i.e 33 ind div(from 12 corps, Balochistan) can be used to defend this sector with some armoured support. Two bdes with the armoured component( plus LAT) towards the central and northern approaches and the third one( minus a few companies) to defend against any possible incursion from the south.


Read about SCARP and Nara desert.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

I was pondering over the issue of logistics in our desert sectors which inhibits actions in these region for both the armies. Whenever we discuss these regions the first and foremost issue that arises is of logistical support; that is how will either army (especially the one who attacks first and has deeper objectives) sustain its mech forces because when any force, no matter how successful it has been, out runs its logistics, will ultimately have to withdraw leaving all of its initial successes behind or will suffer severe loses if not utter destruction. In deserts, especially ours which are deep and soft, there are few roads through which wheeled logistics can move,thus hampering any broad manoeuvres.
What I want to propose is that we induct some sort of mechanised (not armoured) logistics vehicles which can move in all types of terrains as the tanks and APCs, hence ensuring basic supplies. Although economy of our scale might not be able to sustain this mechanisation on a larger scale however, limited number of these vehicles for our two mech divs(26,25) can be inducted which can atleast carry basic supplies such as ammunition and food etc. These mech supply vehs will sustain the frontline troops until a stable supply line has been established. Also, if and when we tend to retire our M113s we can take the armour out of them(except for the crew compartment) and convert them in such vehicles. Again this will be small in numbers but alteast they will provide the bare minimum. If we implement this, we can increase our axis of advance, avenues of approach and will increase the flexibility for our command.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Desert Fox 1 said:


> I was pondering over the issue of logistics in our desert sectors which inhibits actions in these region for both the armies. Whenever we discuss these regions the first and foremost issue that arises is of logistical support; that is how will either army (especially the one who attacks first and has deeper objectives) sustain its mech forces because when any force, no matter how successful it has been, out runs its logistics, will ultimately have to withdraw leaving all of its initial successes behind or will suffer severe loses if not utter destruction. In deserts, especially ours which are deep and soft, there are few roads through which wheeled logistics can move,thus hampering any broad manoeuvres.
> What I want to propose is that we induct some sort of mechanised (not armoured) logistics vehicles which can move in all types of terrains as the tanks and APCs, hence ensuring basic supplies. Although economy of our scale might not be able to sustain this mechanisation on a larger scale however, limited number of these vehicles for our two mech divs(26,25) can be inducted which can atleast carry basic supplies such as ammunition and food etc. These mech supply vehs will sustain the frontline troops until a stable supply line has been established. Also, if and when we tend to retire our M113s we can take the armour out of them(except for the crew compartment) and convert them in such vehicles. Again this will be small in numbers but alteast they will provide the bare minimum. If we implement this, we can increase our axis of advance, avenues of approach and will increase the flexibility for our command.



Tracked logistics vehicles are well suited to movement in the deserts due to how tracks tend to spread the weight of vehicles, it’s not impossible for them to maintain logistics in such regions. PA already employs such vehicles. Wheeled vehicles can also be used in this region, ones meant specifically for desert-use with Low-air pressure tires.
Add to that the meticulous scouting and planning to make sure the force doesn’t run into any impossible to cross terrain and you’ve basically got decent logistics already.
Then There’s also air logistics using PAAs and PAFs transport fleet.

Now the actual solution to all of this that is already in extensive use by the military…road layers. You lay a portable road within a few minutes and now you can cross any sort of terrain without getting bogged down, tanks, APCs, logistics vehicles, everything will be using those roads to cross any uncrossable terrain.

The PA has been planning and training for operations in these deserts for decades, they’ve planed this all out.





Sir @PanzerKiel can maybe explain better.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

iLION12345_1 said:


> Tracked logistics vehicles are well suited to movement in the deserts due to how tracks tend to spread the weight of vehicles, it’s not impossible for them to maintain logistics in such regions. PA already employs such vehicles. Wheeled vehicles can also be used in this region, ones meant specifically for desert-use with Low-air pressure tires.
> Add to that the meticulous scouting and planning to make sure the force doesn’t run into any impossible to cross terrain and you’ve basically got decent logistics already.
> Then There’s also air logistics using PAAs and PAFs transport fleet.
> 
> Now the actual solution to all of this that is already in extensive use by the military…road layers. You lay a portable road within a few minutes and now you can cross any sort of terrain without getting bogged down, tanks, APCs, logistics vehicles, everything will be using those roads to cross any uncrossable terrain.
> 
> The PA has been planning and training for operations in these deserts for decades, they’ve planed this all out.
> View attachment 758753
> 
> 
> Sir @PanzerKiel can maybe explain better.


Steyr 4x4 truck

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

I know about the road layers, but dear there is a difference between laying a temporary road that will be used to cross small part of unfavorable terrain and moving logistics of an entire mech div.The temporary aluminium pathways are laid at a pace of about 2-3 kilometers an hour.But again,There is a difference, however, in laying a few kilometers to help a division across sand.
If the matting stayed laid, there might still be some reasonable prospects of supporting more than two divs provided a large engineer contingent is available. But because the sand is so deep, it shifts easily under the movement of heavy vehicles and wind. This means the roads have to be constantly maintained and re-laid.
And as far as scouting is concerned, enemy will have done similar recce of the terrain via sats etc. and henc can easily guess the avenues of approach thus reducing the feasibility of mech forces.


iLION12345_1 said:


> Tracked logistics vehicles are well suited to movement in the deserts due to how tracks tend to spread the weight of vehicles, it’s not impossible for them to maintain logistics in such regions. PA already employs such vehicles. Wheeled vehicles can also be used in this region, ones meant specifically for desert-use with Low-air pressure tires.
> Add to that the meticulous scouting and planning to make sure the force doesn’t run into any impossible to cross terrain and you’ve basically got decent logistics already.
> Then There’s also air logistics using PAAs and PAFs transport fleet.
> 
> Now the actual solution to all of this that is already in extensive use by the military…road layers. You lay a portable road within a few minutes and now you can cross any sort of terrain without getting bogged down, tanks, APCs, logistics vehicles, everything will be using those roads to cross any uncrossable terrain.
> 
> The PA has been planning and training for operations in these deserts for decades, they’ve planed this all out.
> View attachment 758753
> 
> 
> Sir @PanzerKiel can maybe explain better.





iLION12345_1 said:


> Sir @PanzerKiel can maybe explain better


Looking forward to it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

iLION12345_1 said:


> Tracked logistics vehicles are well suited to movement in the deserts due to how tracks tend to spread the weight of vehicles, it’s not impossible for them to maintain logistics in such regions. PA already employs such vehicles. Wheeled vehicles can also be used in this region, ones meant specifically for desert-use with Low-air pressure tires.
> Add to that the meticulous scouting and planning to make sure the force doesn’t run into any impossible to cross terrain and you’ve basically got decent logistics already.
> Then There’s also air logistics using PAAs and PAFs transport fleet.
> 
> Now the actual solution to all of this that is already in extensive use by the military…road layers. You lay a portable road within a few minutes and now you can cross any sort of terrain without getting bogged down, tanks, APCs, logistics vehicles, everything will be using those roads to cross any uncrossable terrain.
> 
> The PA has been planning and training for operations in these deserts for decades, they’ve planed this all out.
> View attachment 758753
> 
> 
> Sir @PanzerKiel can maybe explain better.


Just to quote one of my posts from another thread.... 

Problems of supplying Indian Strike Forces in Desert

Can 13 divisions (1 and 21 Strike Corps, along with supporting attacks by 10 and 12 Corps, plus reserves standing by) be supported in the desert sector? This does not appear likely. Lets see a possible scenario.


· The northern end is anchored by X Corps with two large divisions, an (I) armored brigade and an (I) brigade a total of ten brigades.

· The middle is I and II Strike Corps with may be three armored, one mechanized, one RAMFOR, two RAPID and two infantry divisions plus one or two ( I ) brigades.

· The southern end is XII Corps with two divisions plus at least one (I) brigade.

· The naval component is an amphibious brigade to the west.


The amphibious brigade will be supported by the Navy by sea, so the army does not have to support it .


There should be no difficulty in supplying and supporting X Corps, as it will advance only a short distance from its bases, which are all located on rail heads.

The initial supply of XII Corps is not as simple, because there is only the rail head at Bhuj and the road network is minimal. Still, cross- country movement through the Kutch in winter should be possible along carefully reconnoitered routes, as the marshes would have dried up to a considerable extent.

It is the nine divisions with I and II Corps that are worrying. The supplies required for the war would have been laboriously assembled over the past four months through the rail heads at Barmer, Jaisalmer, and Jodhpur. But this is a huge force, and that too over the worst terrain in any of the plains sectors. Moving the supplies forward and into Pakistan to support the advancing troops will prove almost impossible only some fraction of the troops can be supported, and this reduces the odds that Pakistan faces.

While the armored spearhead has full trans desert mobility, all the wheeled supply vehicles used for support and for the infantry divisions are limited in this respect. It is unclear if the supplies required for an entire corps can be moved along one or two temporary desert roads since normally, a railhead is required to support a corps.

We can estimate that each division will require for each day’s combat consumption a thousand tons a day for an armored/mechanized division and about half that for an infantry division. The usage of the divisions themselves may well be less, but when all the supporting troops are added, and as the distance from the forward dumps to the front increases with the advance, the logistical requirements increase.


It can be argued that a rapid advance reduces the supply requirement because fixed battles, so greedily demanding of artillery ammunition, are avoided. Against this, the lack of proper roads of any sort multiplies wastages in transport. For example, we know from the World War 2 North Africa experience that three times as much fuel is required as might be thought.

In the desert, limited off road mobility creates another problem. Any blockade of the road leads to blocking of all movement behind the block because possibilities of going around the obstruction are limited. On a road where supplies are competing with the infantry moving up behind the armored spearhead, the possibilities for confusion and a breakdown of all movement are only too obvious. And it is not as if the movement is one way: empty vehicles, evacuated equipment and units, and redeploying units will all be fighting for space.

And as yet no account has been taken of enemy resistance and interdiction which will compound the difficulties by a factor of ten.

It may safely be concluded that the possibilities for supporting nine divisions, including four fully armored and mechanized, and two partially so, are dim. It will not just be the lower priority infantry that will be limited by supply constraints, it will be the spearhead itself. This will reduce Indian margin of superiority against Pakistan. 

The operational problem in the Great Indian Desert is, simply, the sand that lies upto 7 meters deep. In the Mideast and North African Deserts the sand cover is shallow. Bulldozers can quickly sweep paths for advancing troops. Wide ranging maneuver is possible, to the extent that the desert actions of World War 2 have been compared to naval battles finding a flank was always troublesome, because both sides would keep going south of each other.

Tracked vehicles have a low footprint - the weight of a 40-ton T-72 tank is distributed along several square meters of tracks, thus reducing pressure on sand to less than that of a two-ton jeep. The jeep will sink into the sand, the tank will float.

Tracked vehicles can move freely in the desert, but not so their wheeled support and the un-mechanized infantry. Some mobility is provided by low-pressure tired vehicle and by aluminum track-ways. The latter is laid at a pace of about 2-3 kilometers an hour by specially equipped vehicles.

There is a difference, however, in laying a few kilometers of matting to help a division across sandy stretches, and laying matting to allow two corps to advance, and two more to operate on their flanks, to distances of hundreds of kilometers.

If the matting stayed laid, there might still be some reasonable prospects of supporting a quarter of a million troops in the desert, provided a very large engineer contingent is available. But because the sand is so deep, it shifts easily under the movement of heavy vehicles, wind and its own internal dynamics. This means the roadways have to be constantly maintained and re-laid.

Once Bikaner-Suratgarh railway line was being re-laid, an Indian newspaper article mentioned a 15-day sandstorm that halted all work. One hates to think what that would do to 40,000 vehicles in the desert.

During the early days of the 1971 War, Mr. K. Subhramanyam suggested that the success in the desert should be reinforced. As advances in other sectors were non-existent or slow, a third division should be committed to the desert. He was told that this was impossible, because our desert terrain required specialized equipment and training: forces from other sectors would not be able to function in this environment at such short notice.

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Love Love:
3


----------



## Sifar zero

PanzerKiel said:


> View attachment 728822
> 
> 
> 
> ... Which doesn't mean the you tell here everyone on this online forum... that which equipment is standing in front of 502 gate....
> 
> ... or are you comfortable telling people from other countries and our eastern neighbor as well that three SP Guns of a specific type from one of our armored divisions are in Rawalpindi at a specific place.... Such type of Intel otherwise costs alot of money and resources which you just divulged off the cuff...


Where one can sell the info??Or rate kitna hai?

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

PanzerKiel said:


> Just to quote one of my posts from another thread....
> 
> Problems of supplying Indian Strike Forces in Desert
> 
> Can 13 divisions (1 and 21 Strike Corps, along with supporting attacks by 10 and 12 Corps, plus reserves standing by) be supported in the desert sector? This does not appear likely. Lets see a possible scenario.
> 
> 
> · The northern end is anchored by X Corps with two large divisions, an (I) armored brigade and an (I) brigade a total of ten brigades.
> 
> · The middle is I and II Strike Corps with may be three armored, one mechanized, one RAMFOR, two RAPID and two infantry divisions plus one or two ( I ) brigades.
> 
> · The southern end is XII Corps with two divisions plus at least one (I) brigade.
> 
> · The naval component is an amphibious brigade to the west.
> 
> 
> The amphibious brigade will be supported by the Navy by sea, so the army does not have to support it .
> 
> 
> There should be no difficulty in supplying and supporting X Corps, as it will advance only a short distance from its bases, which are all located on rail heads.
> 
> The initial supply of XII Corps is not as simple, because there is only the rail head at Bhuj and the road network is minimal. Still, cross- country movement through the Kutch in winter should be possible along carefully reconnoitered routes, as the marshes would have dried up to a considerable extent.
> 
> It is the nine divisions with I and II Corps that are worrying. The supplies required for the war would have been laboriously assembled over the past four months through the rail heads at Barmer, Jaisalmer, and Jodhpur. But this is a huge force, and that too over the worst terrain in any of the plains sectors. Moving the supplies forward and into Pakistan to support the advancing troops will prove almost impossible only some fraction of the troops can be supported, and this reduces the odds that Pakistan faces.
> 
> While the armored spearhead has full trans desert mobility, all the wheeled supply vehicles used for support and for the infantry divisions are limited in this respect. It is unclear if the supplies required for an entire corps can be moved along one or two temporary desert roads since normally, a railhead is required to support a corps.
> 
> We can estimate that each division will require for each day’s combat consumption a thousand tons a day for an armored/mechanized division and about half that for an infantry division. The usage of the divisions themselves may well be less, but when all the supporting troops are added, and as the distance from the forward dumps to the front increases with the advance, the logistical requirements increase.
> 
> 
> It can be argued that a rapid advance reduces the supply requirement because fixed battles, so greedily demanding of artillery ammunition, are avoided. Against this, the lack of proper roads of any sort multiplies wastages in transport. For example, we know from the World War 2 North Africa experience that three times as much fuel is required as might be thought.
> 
> In the desert, limited off road mobility creates another problem. Any blockade of the road leads to blocking of all movement behind the block because possibilities of going around the obstruction are limited. On a road where supplies are competing with the infantry moving up behind the armored spearhead, the possibilities for confusion and a breakdown of all movement are only too obvious. And it is not as if the movement is one way: empty vehicles, evacuated equipment and units, and redeploying units will all be fighting for space.
> 
> And as yet no account has been taken of enemy resistance and interdiction which will compound the difficulties by a factor of ten.
> 
> It may safely be concluded that the possibilities for supporting nine divisions, including four fully armored and mechanized, and two partially so, are dim. It will not just be the lower priority infantry that will be limited by supply constraints, it will be the spearhead itself. This will reduce Indian margin of superiority against Pakistan.
> 
> The operational problem in the Great Indian Desert is, simply, the sand that lies upto 7 meters deep. In the Mideast and North African Deserts the sand cover is shallow. Bulldozers can quickly sweep paths for advancing troops. Wide ranging maneuver is possible, to the extent that the desert actions of World War 2 have been compared to naval battles finding a flank was always troublesome, because both sides would keep going south of each other.
> 
> Tracked vehicles have a low footprint - the weight of a 40-ton T-72 tank is distributed along several square meters of tracks, thus reducing pressure on sand to less than that of a two-ton jeep. The jeep will sink into the sand, the tank will float.
> 
> Tracked vehicles can move freely in the desert, but not so their wheeled support and the un-mechanized infantry. Some mobility is provided by low-pressure tired vehicle and by aluminum track-ways. The latter is laid at a pace of about 2-3 kilometers an hour by specially equipped vehicles.
> 
> There is a difference, however, in laying a few kilometers of matting to help a division across sandy stretches, and laying matting to allow two corps to advance, and two more to operate on their flanks, to distances of hundreds of kilometers.
> 
> If the matting stayed laid, there might still be some reasonable prospects of supporting a quarter of a million troops in the desert, provided a very large engineer contingent is available. But because the sand is so deep, it shifts easily under the movement of heavy vehicles, wind and its own internal dynamics. This means the roadways have to be constantly maintained and re-laid.
> 
> Once Bikaner-Suratgarh railway line was being re-laid, an Indian newspaper article mentioned a 15-day sandstorm that halted all work. One hates to think what that would do to 40,000 vehicles in the desert.
> 
> During the early days of the 1971 War, Mr. K. Subhramanyam suggested that the success in the desert should be reinforced. As advances in other sectors were non-existent or slow, a third division should be committed to the desert. He was told that this was impossible, because our desert terrain required specialized equipment and training: forces from other sectors would not be able to function in this environment at such short notice.


Given that the assets of XII corps in Gujarat are purely defensive , the XII assets at Jodhapur and Nasirabad would be better suited at supporting the other units at Jaislamer and Bikaner no ? 
Since Bikaner and Jaislamer lack rocket artillery which would be provided by XII corps Nasirabad Units , and some specialized desert warfare units are present at Nasirabad as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

farooqbhai007 said:


> Given that the assets of XII corps in Gujarat are purely defensive , the XII assets at Jodhapur and Nasirabad would be better suited at supporting the other units at Jaislamer and Bikaner no ?
> Since Bikaner and Jaislamer lack rocket artillery which would be provided by XII corps Nasirabad Units , and some specialized desert warfare units are present at Nasirabad as well.


There are three independent Artillery divisions specific for that purpose.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> There are three independent Artillery divisions specific for that purpose.





farooqbhai007 said:


> Given that the assets of XII corps in Gujarat are purely defensive , the XII assets at Jodhapur and Nasirabad would be better suited at supporting the other units at Jaislamer and Bikaner no ?
> Since Bikaner and Jaislamer lack rocket artillery which would be provided by XII corps Nasirabad Units , and some specialized desert warfare units are present at Nasirabad as well.


-42 arty div (Jaipur/Alwar?) with 1strike corps(Bhatinda).
-41 arty div (Pune) with 21 strike corps (Jodhpur).
-40 arty div with 2 strike corps (Ambala).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> -42 arty div (Jaipur/Alwar?) with 1strike corps(Bhatinda).
> -43 arty div (Pune) with 21 strike corps (Jodhpur).
> -40 arty div with 2 strike corps (Ambala).


40, 41, and 42.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> 40, 41, and 42.


Oh yes 41 is 21 corps, accidentally wrote 43,edited.


----------



## farooqbhai007

Desert Fox 1 said:


> -42 arty div (Jaipur/Alwar?) with 1strike corps(Bhatinda).
> -41 arty div (Pune) with 21 strike corps (Jodhpur).
> -40 arty div with 2 strike corps (Ambala).


41 is based at Nasirabad , ( Smerch & Pinaka )
40 is based at Ambala , ( Smerch & Pinaka )
42 has had its Smerch shifted to Eastern command , where abouts of where the Pinaka are unkown since thats not at Alwar or Jaipur

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Sal12

Why Pak don't raise another corps for northern sindh. Are there other reasons except money.

Reactions: Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Sal12 said:


> Why Pak don't raise another corps for northern sindh. Are there other reasons except money.


Better to have another div, though neither is needed. One inf div(33) will move to that region if required with 41 as reserve
However an IMBG would be great.

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1


----------



## khanasifm

Sal12 said:


> Why Pak don't raise another corps for northern sindh. Are there other reasons except money.



In case of need or war Quetta corps move east to cover gaps in sindh 

[emoji6]


----------



## Titanium100

Signalian said:


> Some time back a member asked me if there are any armour regiments in Pakistan Army's mechanised divisions so i have some info to share.
> 
> Pakistan Army has 2 Mechanised Divisions, 25th Mechanised Division and 26th Mechanised Divisions. The 17th and 14th still carry the designation of Infantry Divisions.
> 
> Theoretically the 25th and 26th are mechanised divisions but in fact these 2 divisions are heavily armoured and have more strength (in infantry) than even 1st Armoured and 6th Armoured Divisions of Pakistan Army. The reason the 25th and 26th Mechanised Divisions are called Mechanised because naming them Armoured Divisions will cause concern to India as well as to USA that:
> 
> 1. PA has stationed an Armoured Division (26th Mechanised Div) near to border in Bahawalpur, Southern Punjab. Placing an armoured division next to border is the intent of attacking an enemy otherwise armoured assets considered as offensive forces are not kept next to borders. This is another reason why the 6th Armoured Division is placed in Gujranwala and not in Sialkot, whereas its main area of action is considered to be Sialkot region.
> 
> 2. PA will have 4 Armoured Divisions (1st and 6th, 25th and 26th) while IA has 3 Armoured Divisions and this will cause further alarm in India and bring pressure from USA to downsize strength. This is why the V-Corps has a few Independent Armoured Brigades and it is considered that V-Corps Armoured assets will be used under one HQ in war as an Armoured Division.
> 
> PA's Mechanised Division:
> 
> A Brigade: Armoured Regiment + Armoured Regiment + Mechanised Infantry Battalion.
> 
> B Brigade: Armoured Regiment + Armoured Regiment + Mechanised Infantry Battalion.
> 
> C Brigade: Armoured Regiment + Mechanised Infantry Battalion + Mechanised Infantry Battalion.
> 
> Thats 5 X Armoured Regiments and 4 X Mechanised Infantry Battalions in one Mechanised Division. I havent included Support Brigades and Divisional troops. Each Mechanised Infantry Battalion has 50 APC.
> 
> Those who consider that Rahim yar Khan is an area where IA CSD can succeed should keep in mind that the whole stretch is protected by a Division which has 220 MBT at its disposal. plus an Independent Armoured Brigade having 88 MBT.
> 
> @Ulla @Northern @django @Mentee @Khafee @tps77 @CriticalThought @Baloch Pakistani



When you actully look at the geography it gives Pakistan option because it is so long that the it becomes offensive by default which is the best defensive is offensive. It is advantageous for offensive purposes due to being so many entry point and longish in geography best defensive becomes offensive


----------



## Raja Porus

Titanium100 said:


> When you actully look at the geography it gives Pakistan option because it is so long that the it becomes offensive by default which is the best defensive is offensive. It is advantageous for offensive purpose due to being so many entry point and longish in geography best defensive becomes offensive


With an immediate and smooth transition to defence once the objectives have been sustained, however if the opportunity arises then it should be exploited and offensive be continued.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Inception-06

PanzerKiel said:


> Just to quote one of my posts from another thread....
> 
> Problems of supplying Indian Strike Forces in Desert
> 
> Can 13 divisions (1 and 21 Strike Corps, along with supporting attacks by 10 and 12 Corps, plus reserves standing by) be supported in the desert sector? This does not appear likely. Lets see a possible scenario.
> 
> 
> · The northern end is anchored by X Corps with two large divisions, an (I) armored brigade and an (I) brigade a total of ten brigades.
> 
> · The middle is I and II Strike Corps with may be three armored, one mechanized, one RAMFOR, two RAPID and two infantry divisions plus one or two ( I ) brigades.
> 
> · The southern end is XII Corps with two divisions plus at least one (I) brigade.
> 
> · The naval component is an amphibious brigade to the west.
> 
> 
> The amphibious brigade will be supported by the Navy by sea, so the army does not have to support it .
> 
> 
> There should be no difficulty in supplying and supporting X Corps, as it will advance only a short distance from its bases, which are all located on rail heads.
> 
> The initial supply of XII Corps is not as simple, because there is only the rail head at Bhuj and the road network is minimal. Still, cross- country movement through the Kutch in winter should be possible along carefully reconnoitered routes, as the marshes would have dried up to a considerable extent.
> 
> It is the nine divisions with I and II Corps that are worrying. The supplies required for the war would have been laboriously assembled over the past four months through the rail heads at Barmer, Jaisalmer, and Jodhpur. But this is a huge force, and that too over the worst terrain in any of the plains sectors. Moving the supplies forward and into Pakistan to support the advancing troops will prove almost impossible only some fraction of the troops can be supported, and this reduces the odds that Pakistan faces.
> 
> While the armored spearhead has full trans desert mobility, all the wheeled supply vehicles used for support and for the infantry divisions are limited in this respect. It is unclear if the supplies required for an entire corps can be moved along one or two temporary desert roads since normally, a railhead is required to support a corps.
> 
> We can estimate that each division will require for each day’s combat consumption a thousand tons a day for an armored/mechanized division and about half that for an infantry division. The usage of the divisions themselves may well be less, but when all the supporting troops are added, and as the distance from the forward dumps to the front increases with the advance, the logistical requirements increase.
> 
> 
> It can be argued that a rapid advance reduces the supply requirement because fixed battles, so greedily demanding of artillery ammunition, are avoided. Against this, the lack of proper roads of any sort multiplies wastages in transport. For example, we know from the World War 2 North Africa experience that three times as much fuel is required as might be thought.
> 
> In the desert, limited off road mobility creates another problem. Any blockade of the road leads to blocking of all movement behind the block because possibilities of going around the obstruction are limited. On a road where supplies are competing with the infantry moving up behind the armored spearhead, the possibilities for confusion and a breakdown of all movement are only too obvious. And it is not as if the movement is one way: empty vehicles, evacuated equipment and units, and redeploying units will all be fighting for space.
> 
> And as yet no account has been taken of enemy resistance and interdiction which will compound the difficulties by a factor of ten.
> 
> It may safely be concluded that the possibilities for supporting nine divisions, including four fully armored and mechanized, and two partially so, are dim. It will not just be the lower priority infantry that will be limited by supply constraints, it will be the spearhead itself. This will reduce Indian margin of superiority against Pakistan.
> 
> The operational problem in the Great Indian Desert is, simply, the sand that lies upto 7 meters deep. In the Mideast and North African Deserts the sand cover is shallow. Bulldozers can quickly sweep paths for advancing troops. Wide ranging maneuver is possible, to the extent that the desert actions of World War 2 have been compared to naval battles finding a flank was always troublesome, because both sides would keep going south of each other.
> 
> Tracked vehicles have a low footprint - the weight of a 40-ton T-72 tank is distributed along several square meters of tracks, thus reducing pressure on sand to less than that of a two-ton jeep. The jeep will sink into the sand, the tank will float.
> 
> Tracked vehicles can move freely in the desert, but not so their wheeled support and the un-mechanized infantry. Some mobility is provided by low-pressure tired vehicle and by aluminum track-ways. The latter is laid at a pace of about 2-3 kilometers an hour by specially equipped vehicles.
> 
> There is a difference, however, in laying a few kilometers of matting to help a division across sandy stretches, and laying matting to allow two corps to advance, and two more to operate on their flanks, to distances of hundreds of kilometers.
> 
> If the matting stayed laid, there might still be some reasonable prospects of supporting a quarter of a million troops in the desert, provided a very large engineer contingent is available. But because the sand is so deep, it shifts easily under the movement of heavy vehicles, wind and its own internal dynamics. This means the roadways have to be constantly maintained and re-laid.
> 
> Once Bikaner-Suratgarh railway line was being re-laid, an Indian newspaper article mentioned a 15-day sandstorm that halted all work. One hates to think what that would do to 40,000 vehicles in the desert.
> 
> During the early days of the 1971 War, Mr. K. Subhramanyam suggested that the success in the desert should be reinforced. As advances in other sectors were non-existent or slow, a third division should be committed to the desert. He was told that this was impossible, because our desert terrain required specialized equipment and training: forces from other sectors would not be able to function in this environment at such short notice.



But the indians didn’t face any brighter logistical nightmare in 1965 and 1971 war.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> But the indians didn’t face any brighter logistical nightmare in 1965 and 1971 war.


Because no such large scale offensive was launched by either side in 71 on our eastern front.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
2


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Because no such large scale offensive was launched by either side in 71 on our eastern front.


@PanzerKiel who is right he or me ?

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> @PanzerKiel who is right he or me ?


Dear, this is an open forum and there is nothing such as being right or wrong. You share your ideas and they get Corrected or enhanced. Major tank battles were faught in the Northern plains of Punjab where both the sides were close to their home bases and logistics supply was relatively easily apart from some interdiction sorties by the PAF everything as far as *Supplying* is concerned went smooth. Chawinda was faught in the Sialkot sector which was 6th armd div's peace time garrison. Similarly Assal Uttar was near 1st armd div's deployment zone. Same can be said for India's 1st Corps and its 1st armd div.
Thus no side penetrated deep enough to outrun its logistics.
However as far as *ammunition and its availability is concerned * we were in a precarious situation especially in the last days when our daily authorization of Shells to each artillery gun was reduced to just 5 shells,but that is not related to *supply.*

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Dear, this is an open forum and there is nothing such as being right or wrong. You share your ideas and they get Corrected or enhanced. Major tank battles were faught in the Northern plains of Punjab where both the sides were close to their home bases and logistics supply was relatively easily apart from some interdiction sorties by the PAF everything as far as *Supplying* is concerned went smooth. Chawinda was faught in the Sialkot sector which was 6th armd div's peace time garrison. Similarly Assal Uttar was near 1st armd div's deployment zone. Same can be said for India's 1st Corps and its 1st armd div.
> Thus no side penetrated deep enough to outrun its logistics.
> However as far as *ammunition and its availability is concerned * we were in a precarious situation especially in the last days when our daily authorization of Shells to each artillery gun was reduced to just 5 shells,but that is not related to *supply.*



Friend I was joking but enjoyed your reply keep on writing!

Reactions: Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## ghazi52

__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1554817461335028

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Ghost 125

ghazi52 said:


> __ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1554817461335028


bren carriers, not tanks

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Can anyone identify the use of this M17 periscope.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Can anyone identify the use of this M17 periscope.
> View attachment 760963
> View attachment 760964







__





M17


40 Jahre Kompetenz in der Entwicklung und Produktion von Winkelspiegeln und Panzerglas stecken in jedem Produkt aus dem Hause GuS.




www.gus-germany.com

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
2


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Can anyone identify the use of this M17 periscope.
> View attachment 760963
> View attachment 760964


Normally used in driver and commander cupolas of our tanks, ARVs and APCs.... M19 is is the other version for night use.


PanzerKiel said:


> Normally used in driver and commander cupolas of our tanks, ARVs and APCs.... M19 is is the other version for night use.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## spectregunship

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Can anyone identify the use of this M17 periscope.
> View attachment 760963
> View attachment 760964



I am sure you are more interested in the msl on the left side of this M17 placard

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Reichmarshal

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Dear, this is an open forum and there is nothing such as being right or wrong. You share your ideas and they get Corrected or enhanced. Major tank battles were faught in the Northern plains of Punjab where both the sides were close to their home bases and logistics supply was relatively easily apart from some interdiction sorties by the PAF everything as far as *Supplying* is concerned went smooth. Chawinda was faught in the Sialkot sector which was 6th armd div's peace time garrison. Similarly Assal Uttar was near 1st armd div's deployment zone. Same can be said for India's 1st Corps and its 1st armd div.
> Thus no side penetrated deep enough to outrun its logistics.
> However as far as *ammunition and its availability is concerned * we were in a precarious situation especially in the last days when our daily authorization of Shells to each artillery gun was reduced to just 5 shells,but that is not related to *supply.*


I think u ment central Punjab as northern punjab is the pothar region starting from jehlum n going up till attock. The areas bordering India in this region is all mountainous.
Tank opp would be highly difficult and most uncalled for.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ghazi52

What is this?

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Mrc

Mine plow


----------



## Raja Porus

spectregunship said:


> I am sure you are more interested in the msl on the left side of this M17 placard


I suppose it's an Alcotan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## khanasifm

ghazi52 said:


> What is this?
> 
> View attachment 761078


De mining robot

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Sir, do Gujrat, Gujranwala, Sialkot come in Northern Punjab or Central? I think they are in northern. Please correct me if I'm wrong.


ghazi52 said:


> What is this?
> 
> View attachment 761078


Unmanned mine plow

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

ghazi52 said:


> What is this?
> 
> View attachment 761078


Indigenous Mine-flail robot. 


Desert Fox 1 said:


> I suppose it's an Alcotan.


Alcotan 100 M2 with VOSSEL FCS.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## HRK

ghazi52 said:


> What is this?
> 
> View attachment 761078


well its a surprise at least for me .... by the look of it I think it is for anti-personnel mines so it is a good tool for the safety of foot soldiers of PA.

I hope they are working on the same concept of Robotic Mine Plough for anti-Tank mines as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## iLION12345_1

HRK said:


> well its a surprise at least for me .... by the look of it I think it is for anti-personnel mines so it is a good tool for the safety of foot soldiers of PA.
> 
> I hope they are working on the same concept of Robotic Mine Plough for anti-Tank mines as well.


Tanks themselves can carry mine ploughs when needed so it’s usually not an issue for them. However an unmanned one would be a welcome addition, it would just need to be rather large to take the forces. PA does have proper, manned mine ploughs and flails.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## HRK

iLION12345_1 said:


> Tanks themselves can carry mine ploughs when needed so it’s usually not an issue for them. However an unmanned one would be a welcome addition, it would just need to be rather large to take the forces. PA does have proper, manned mine ploughs and flails.


I know both of these basic things .... and was just 'wishing' to have unmanned anti-mine system [yes i know its a very fan-boyish thing] .... I think it would not be required to build all new system including chassis and other hardware but only the control systems would be required to be develop which could get integrate with existing system and could enable it to operate and control remotely.

If I am not wrong I have seen a video of such system sometime back so its not an out of world concept.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Raja Porus

HRK said:


> I know both of these basic things .... and was just 'wishing' to have unmanned anti-mine system [yes i know its a very fan-boyish thing] .... I think it would not be required to build all new system including chassis and other hardware but only the control systems would be required to be develop which could get integrate with existing system and could enable it to operate and control remotely.
> 
> If I am not wrong I have seen a video of such system sometime back so its not an out of world concept.


Germans used the Goliath tracked mine in ww2 which was an unmanned explosive carrier, powered by electricity or petrol. It was detonated by remote control and could be used against tanks and Infantry but was mainly used for blowing up mines, clearing paths for armoured columns. It was the pinnacle of German military engineering.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

@PanzerKiel 


Desert Fox 1 said:


> Sir, do Gujrat, Gujranwala, Sialkot come in Northern Punjab or Central? I think they are in northern. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> @PanzerKiel


Northern.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## farooqbhai007

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1413786697922449412

VCC-1 & interesting zip line concept

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

farooqbhai007 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1413786697922449412
> 
> VCC-1 & interesting zip line concept


The dilemma has been solved,we are still using type 59s.....
@iLION12345_1

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Desert Fox 1 said:


> The dilemma has been solved,we are still using type 59s.....
> @iLION12345_1


Expected, seeing them after quite a while. They’re not stock either. 
Doesn’t matter much though, even excluding them PA has plenty of tanks. These would still be useful In infantry support and against non-tank targets.
The sooner they get replaced the better though, they have really poor protection. Even an RPG would make short work of them in many cases… VT-4, AK-1 and AK-2 are replacing them thankfully.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1415867910044721156

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Najaf A. Changezi

Desert Fox 1 said:


> The dilemma has been solved,we are still using type 59s.....
> @iLION12345_1


AoA

I have seen these type 59/69s myself in city of gardens and I asked my relative (from armed forces) about why these obsolete tanks are present and in one of our most strategically important city, his reply was that we don't need tanks in this city and it made sense as I have seen them being used for training purpose only with dummy rounds filled with 7.62 or 12.7 mm ammunition..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Najaf A. Changezi said:


> AoA
> 
> I have seen these type 59/69s myself in city of gardens and I asked my relative (from armed forces) about why these obsolete tanks are present and in one of our most strategically important city, his reply was that we don't need tanks in this city and it made sense as I have seen them being used for training purpose only with dummy rounds filled with 7.62 or 12.7 mm ammunition..


Yes, it makes sense that they are present in non-critical areas as reserve tanks or training tanks. Also explains why they’re never seen in exercises anymore. 
The Dilemma was that the number of tanks in PA service without including type 59 didn’t add up to the number of regiments. either way these will all be replaced by VT-4, AK-1 and AK-2. PA has more than enough tanks regardless.

These type 59s are upgraded with 105MM guns and basic NV capability. They have DU rounds that could quite Easily punch through a T72, but otherwise they’re very old.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Najaf A. Changezi

Currently AK battalions are being considered the best MIBs

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Najaf A. Changezi said:


> Currently AK battalions are being considered the best MIBs


There are no MIBs in AK regiment, only nine HAT battalions.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Dreamer.

Just wondering if you both mean the same 'AK'.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Dreamer. said:


> Just wondering if you both mean the same 'AK'.


The Klashankov is a timeless and versatile weapon 

(I am aware of the correct spelling, just wanted to add that Pakistani flair)

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
3 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> There are no MIBs in AK regiment, only nine HAT battalions.


Sir jee, I think he meant Alkhalid tanks.
Btw I doubt that all Azad Kashmir regts are HATs because I know some which have been heavily involved in WOT(however their original AORs may mean that they are HATs).
I think it's like" _All HATs are AKs but not all AKs are HATs"?_

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Reichmarshal

iLION12345_1 said:


> Expected, seeing them after quite a while. They’re not stock either.
> Doesn’t matter much though, even excluding them PA has plenty of tanks. These would still be useful In infantry support and against non-tank targets.
> The sooner they get replaced the better though, they have really poor protection. Even an RPG would make short work of them in many cases… VT-4, AK-1 and AK-2 are replacing them thankfully.


AK 2 only exists on paper right now, its not replacing any thing in the forseeable future.
Rpg penetrated Abrams in Iraq and Turkish/russian n syrian tanks in syria, all with advanced or fairly advanced armor.
Under the right conditions rpg would make short work of most tanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## truthseeker2010

PanzerKiel said:


> Just to quote one of my posts from another thread....
> 
> Problems of supplying Indian Strike Forces in Desert
> 
> Can 13 divisions (1 and 21 Strike Corps, along with supporting attacks by 10 and 12 Corps, plus reserves standing by) be supported in the desert sector? This does not appear likely. Lets see a possible scenario.
> 
> 
> · The northern end is anchored by X Corps with two large divisions, an (I) armored brigade and an (I) brigade a total of ten brigades.
> 
> · The middle is I and II Strike Corps with may be three armored, one mechanized, one RAMFOR, two RAPID and two infantry divisions plus one or two ( I ) brigades.
> 
> · The southern end is XII Corps with two divisions plus at least one (I) brigade.
> 
> · The naval component is an amphibious brigade to the west.
> 
> 
> The amphibious brigade will be supported by the Navy by sea, so the army does not have to support it .
> 
> 
> There should be no difficulty in supplying and supporting X Corps, as it will advance only a short distance from its bases, which are all located on rail heads.
> 
> The initial supply of XII Corps is not as simple, because there is only the rail head at Bhuj and the road network is minimal. Still, cross- country movement through the Kutch in winter should be possible along carefully reconnoitered routes, as the marshes would have dried up to a considerable extent.
> 
> It is the nine divisions with I and II Corps that are worrying. The supplies required for the war would have been laboriously assembled over the past four months through the rail heads at Barmer, Jaisalmer, and Jodhpur. But this is a huge force, and that too over the worst terrain in any of the plains sectors. Moving the supplies forward and into Pakistan to support the advancing troops will prove almost impossible only some fraction of the troops can be supported, and this reduces the odds that Pakistan faces.
> 
> While the armored spearhead has full trans desert mobility, all the wheeled supply vehicles used for support and for the infantry divisions are limited in this respect. It is unclear if the supplies required for an entire corps can be moved along one or two temporary desert roads since normally, a railhead is required to support a corps.
> 
> We can estimate that each division will require for each day’s combat consumption a thousand tons a day for an armored/mechanized division and about half that for an infantry division. The usage of the divisions themselves may well be less, but when all the supporting troops are added, and as the distance from the forward dumps to the front increases with the advance, the logistical requirements increase.
> 
> 
> It can be argued that a rapid advance reduces the supply requirement because fixed battles, so greedily demanding of artillery ammunition, are avoided. Against this, the lack of proper roads of any sort multiplies wastages in transport. For example, we know from the World War 2 North Africa experience that three times as much fuel is required as might be thought.
> 
> In the desert, limited off road mobility creates another problem. Any blockade of the road leads to blocking of all movement behind the block because possibilities of going around the obstruction are limited. On a road where supplies are competing with the infantry moving up behind the armored spearhead, the possibilities for confusion and a breakdown of all movement are only too obvious. And it is not as if the movement is one way: empty vehicles, evacuated equipment and units, and redeploying units will all be fighting for space.
> 
> And as yet no account has been taken of enemy resistance and interdiction which will compound the difficulties by a factor of ten.
> 
> It may safely be concluded that the possibilities for supporting nine divisions, including four fully armored and mechanized, and two partially so, are dim. It will not just be the lower priority infantry that will be limited by supply constraints, it will be the spearhead itself. This will reduce Indian margin of superiority against Pakistan.
> 
> The operational problem in the Great Indian Desert is, simply, the sand that lies upto 7 meters deep. In the Mideast and North African Deserts the sand cover is shallow. Bulldozers can quickly sweep paths for advancing troops. Wide ranging maneuver is possible, to the extent that the desert actions of World War 2 have been compared to naval battles finding a flank was always troublesome, because both sides would keep going south of each other.
> 
> Tracked vehicles have a low footprint - the weight of a 40-ton T-72 tank is distributed along several square meters of tracks, thus reducing pressure on sand to less than that of a two-ton jeep. The jeep will sink into the sand, the tank will float.
> 
> Tracked vehicles can move freely in the desert, but not so their wheeled support and the un-mechanized infantry. Some mobility is provided by low-pressure tired vehicle and by aluminum track-ways. The latter is laid at a pace of about 2-3 kilometers an hour by specially equipped vehicles.
> 
> There is a difference, however, in laying a few kilometers of matting to help a division across sandy stretches, and laying matting to allow two corps to advance, and two more to operate on their flanks, to distances of hundreds of kilometers.
> 
> If the matting stayed laid, there might still be some reasonable prospects of supporting a quarter of a million troops in the desert, provided a very large engineer contingent is available. But because the sand is so deep, it shifts easily under the movement of heavy vehicles, wind and its own internal dynamics. This means the roadways have to be constantly maintained and re-laid.
> 
> Once Bikaner-Suratgarh railway line was being re-laid, an Indian newspaper article mentioned a 15-day sandstorm that halted all work. One hates to think what that would do to 40,000 vehicles in the desert.
> 
> During the early days of the 1971 War, Mr. K. Subhramanyam suggested that the success in the desert should be reinforced. As advances in other sectors were non-existent or slow, a third division should be committed to the desert. He was told that this was impossible, because our desert terrain required specialized equipment and training: forces from other sectors would not be able to function in this environment at such short notice.



So, in full scale war pak army would require 25,000 tons of supplies per day to sustain its operations, given 1000 ton per armd/mech div and 500 per ID.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Sir jee, I think he meant Alkhalid tanks.
> Btw I doubt that all Azad Kashmir regts are HATs because I know some which have been heavily involved in WOT(however their original AORs may mean that they are HATs).
> I think it's like" _All HATs are AKs but not all AKs are HATs"?_


Then there are no tank battalions in our army, we have regiments.

You misunderstood me, I meant to say that out of the 45 odd AK units, only some are mechanized and all these are HAT units. There are no MIB or LAT units in AK regiment.

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Najaf A. Changezi

PanzerKiel said:


> There are no MIBs in AK regiment, only nine HAT battalions.


I was talking about HAT battalions as they're MIBs equipped with M113A2 and BGM-71 TOW of AK and they're having good record currently with ongoing exercises and operational efficiency

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Najaf A. Changezi

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Sir jee, I think he meant Alkhalid tanks.
> Btw I doubt that all Azad Kashmir regts are HATs because I know some which have been heavily involved in WOT(however their original AORs may mean that they are HATs).
> I think it's like" _All HATs are AKs but not all AKs are HATs"?_


I was talking about Azad Kashmir (battalions) not Al Khalid since this thread is about mechanized infantry unless someone has already posted something about armoured corps here..

Btw most of the stuff I learned was from you guys as I've been on this forum as guest for past 2 years.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
2 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Najaf A. Changezi

PanzerKiel said:


> Then there are no tank battalions in our army, we have regiments.
> 
> You misunderstood me, I meant to say that out of the 45 odd AK units, only 9 are mechanized and all these are HAT units, numbering from 37 till 45. There are no MIB or LAT units in AK regiment.


HAT are considered MIBs in the army


----------



## iLION12345_1

Reichmarshal said:


> AK 2 only exists on paper right now, its not replacing any thing in the forseeable future.
> Rpg penetrated Abrams in Iraq and Turkish/russian n syrian tanks in syria, all with advanced or fairly advanced armor.
> Under the right conditions rpg would make short work of most tanks.


HIT chairman mentioned AK-2 production starting soon, it means after AK-1 production ends in a couple of years, it’s gonna be similar to VT-4 in some regards, will use its tech.

I am aware RPGs can penetrate tanks, not frontally, but if the side has no added armor (as is the case with all Pakistani and Chinese tanks) then it will go through, it will obviously go through the rear as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Najaf A. Changezi said:


> HAT are considered MIBs in the army


Nopes dear, they are a separate category, not MIB....


PanzerKiel said:


> Nopes dear, they are a separate category, not MIB....


... Apart from MIB, LAT, APC BORNE and an ITV company.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Najaf A. Changezi

PanzerKiel said:


> Nopes dear, they are a separate category, not MIB....
> 
> ... Apart from MIB, LAT, APC BORNE and an ITV company.


HAT is their specialized role after converting into MIBs..one of my friend belongs in such units.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Najaf A. Changezi said:


> HAT is their specialized role after converting into MIBs


Nopes dear, MIB is a separate type of unit, having its own tables of organization and equipment, different mission, different role and different posting stations.... Everything different from HAT .

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## iLION12345_1

Najaf A. Changezi said:


> HAT is their specialized role after converting into MIBs..one of my friend belongs in such units.


Panzerkiel is from the PA as well, he knows what he’s saying, not that you and your friend are wrong, just making sure you know

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Najaf A. Changezi

PanzerKiel said:


> Nopes dear, MIB is a separate type of unit, having its own tables of organization and equipment, different mission, different role and different posting stations.... Everything different from HAT .


Can you explain the differences in detail or is it classified to explain them openly? Interested to know..


----------



## PanzerKiel

Najaf A. Changezi said:


> Can you explain the differences in detail or is it classified to explain them openly? Interested to know..


Everything is different, as highlighted in my last post.... Starting from equipment to Manpower and weapons.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Najaf A. Changezi

PanzerKiel said:


> Everything is different, as highlighted in my last post.... Starting from equipment to Manpower and weapons.


Atleast one example?


----------



## Raja Porus

Najaf A. Changezi said:


> HAT is their specialized role after converting into MIBs..one of my friend belongs in such units.


MIB is different from APC borne??


----------



## PanzerKiel

Najaf A. Changezi said:


> Atleast one example?


MIB has 20 percent more firepower than HAT.


Desert Fox 1 said:


> MIB is different from APC borne??


Alot.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Reichmarshal

MIB stands for mechanized infantry battalion 
HAT stands for Heavy anti tank.

Don't think it gets any clearer than that.

P.s in some armies HAT stands for heavy air assault.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Reichmarshal said:


> MIB stands for mechanized infantry battalion
> HAT stands for Heavy anti tank.
> 
> Don't think it gets any clearer than that.
> 
> P.s in some armies HAT stands for heavy air assault.


I was talking about MIB and APC borne. Perhaps manstein was referring to both LATs and HATs as APC borne


----------



## Signalian

PanzerKiel said:


> Then there are no tank battalions in our army, we have regiments.
> 
> You misunderstood me, I meant to say that out of the 45 odd AK units, only 9 are mechanized and all these are HAT units, numbering from 37 till 45. There are no MIB or LAT units in AK regiment.


Careful mate

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> I was talking about MIB and APC borne. Perhaps manstein was referring to both LATs and HATs as APC borne


Nopes, LAT, HAT, MIB, APC BORNE.... They all are separate units, with separate missions.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Signalian

PanzerKiel said:


> Nopes, LAT, HAT, MIB, APC BORNE.... They all are separate units, with separate missions.


why would a HAT be preferred over a LAT that LATs are converting to HATs?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Signalian said:


> why would a HAT be preferred over a LAT that LATs are converting to HATs?


LAT are not being converted to HAT . The mission, doctrine, role and main weapon define the different roles of HAT and LAT.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Signalian

PanzerKiel said:


> LAT are not being converted to HAT . The mission, doctrine, role and main weapon define the different roles of HAT and LAT.


Thats good. Wheeled have own importance in recon and other tasks.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Signalian said:


> Thats good. Wheeled have own importance in recon and other tasks.


Oh, in that way.... There no more wheeled LATs, all are now M113 based or almost converted.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

All defender equipped LATs have been replaced with APCs
All defender equipped LATs have been replaced with APCs.


Signalian said:


> Thats good. Wheeled have own importance in recon and other tasks.


I pointed it out in this post:


Desert Fox 1 said:


> The question that puzzles me is that why have the LATs( apart from where 4×4 can not be used) been equipped with Apcs? Don't they lose their sole purpose of being small light and fast troops which can still pack a punch and wreak havoc. With the large M113s they are no more small and fast. They can't place ambushes as their signature would be greater. Moreover tanks can recognize and engage tank sized targets at a greater range than it can target infantry and jeeps.The only use of m113s in LATs would be that they would provide some protection against smaal arms fire while carrying the same number of launcher but it compromises the tactical advantage of them. The only difference bw HATs and LATs is of the atgm used which seems to be ridiculous. Infact the word "light" seems to be out of place.


----------



## PanzerKiel

Signalian said:


> why would a HAT be preferred over a LAT that LATs are converting to HATs?


Now, only the M113 platform is common between them, otherwise their main weapon is still different.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Tipu7

PanzerKiel said:


> Oh, in that way.... There no more wheeled LATs, all are now M113 based or almost converted.


Are RR guns mounted on Jeep still operational?

I believe the mounted weapon is the key determinant not the carrier platform. M113 equipped with Lighter but shorter range ATGMs (Baktar Shikan) constitute LAT, while TOW/Kornet armed M113 are part of HAT.

(We haven't spotted Kornet in PA yet as far as OSINT is concerned)


----------



## PanzerKiel

Tipu7 said:


> Are RR guns mounted on Jeep still operational?
> 
> I believe the mounted weapon is the key determinant not the carrier platform. M113 equipped with Lighter but shorter range ATGMs (Baktar Shikan) constitute LAT, while TOW/Kornet armed M113 are part of HAT.
> 
> (We haven't spotted Kornet in PA yet as far as OSINT is concerned)


RR guns are no more there.... 
Yes, mounted weapon is the key determinant. 
Of course, you'll not find Kornet or advanced Milans on OSINT..... Yet.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Najaf A. Changezi

PanzerKiel said:


> Now, only the M113 platform is common between them, otherwise their main weapon is still different.


Does army field Kornet ATGMs?? And have they procured significant amount of them?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Najaf A. Changezi said:


> Does army field Kornet ATGMs??


According to MoD yearbooks 52 systems were purchased from Russia.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

I suppose yhe number of Kornets is too small for LATs or HATs. They are for MI-35s (AFAIK).


Tipu7 said:


> We haven't spotted Kornet in PA yet as far as OSINT is concerned





PanzerKiel said:


> advanced Milans


We have MILANs? @iLION12345_1

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Desert Fox 1 said:


> I suppose yhe number of Kornets is too small for LATs or HATs. They are for MI-35s (AFAIK).
> 
> 
> 
> We have MILANs? @iLION12345_1


That 52 was likely just the first order, there will be or probably have been more delivered.
There are rumors that PA has advanced versions of MILAN, I believe those are true, but they aren’t being used/displayed, just like Kornet. Similarly PA also purchased advanced versions of Chinese third gen MANPADS (FN-6) during that same time period.

The Kornets are likely not for Mi35, they are not integrated to work from helicopter platforms. (there is nothing preventing them from being used on helicopters, and Russia or even Pakistan could configure them to do so with some Russian help, but it is unlikely either has happened). Russian helicopters Use either 9K121 Vikhr or the 9M120M Ataka (likely what Pakistan got for Mi35M). Both are specifically configured for helicopter use.

These platforms (Advanced ATGMs and MANPADS) are likely being bought in small numbers overtime by the PA, who knows, maybe they have decent stockpiles by now, there are usually follow up orders we don’t hear about.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Wow Wow:
2


----------



## Akh1112

wasnt it *52 launchers *as opposed to 52 missiles

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## iLION12345_1

Akh1112 said:


> wasnt it *52 launchers *as opposed to 52 missiles


It was 52 launchers, but for the size of PA 52 missile and 52 launchers are little difference. They need several tens of thousands to make them a standard, but even the Russians find them too expensive and only use it to supplement older types, just as PA is doing. Kornets are basically some of the best ATGMs in existence at the moment, same with the newer MILAN models.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akh1112

iLION12345_1 said:


> It was 52 launchers, but for the size of PA 52 missile and 52 launchers are little difference. They need several tens of thousands to make them a standard, but even the Russians find them too expensive and only use it to supplement older types, just as PA is doing. Kornets are basically some of the best ATGMs in existence at the moment, same with the newer MILAN models.




But who said the PA is interested in making them a standard? Maybe they'll SF units will be equipped with them?

(not attacking, just wondering(

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Akh1112 said:


> But who said the PA is interested in making them a standard? Maybe they'll SF units will be equipped with them?
> 
> (not attacking, just wondering(


PK and Signalian probably know about their use case scenario better, but SF in Anti-Tank role would be a pretty niche thing, entirely possible, but I think they would want more compact systems in that case.

I would assume they are simply force multipliers and that PA has ordered more since, but I could be wrong.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

iLION12345_1 said:


> PK and Signalian probably know about their use case scenario better,


Since these are the finest atgms out there they must be deployed in high threat areas where the highest concentration of enemy armour is expected i.e 31 corps, Gujranwala (8 and 15 inf div, Sialkot) or Southern/Central Punjab i.e 30 Corps (14 inf div, Okara) or 16 inf div(Panu Aqil) with V Corps.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Najaf A. Changezi

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Since these are the finest atgms out there they must be deployed in high threat areas where the highest concentration of enemy armour is expected i.e 31 corps, Gujranwala (8 and 15 inf div, Sialkot) or Southern/Central Punjab i.e 30 Corps (14 inf div, Okara) or 16 inf div(Panu Aqil) with V Corps.


Or LCB equipped with Kornet and Milan ATGMs during conventional warfare??


----------



## Inception-06

I like the concept of elite Tank hunting units then even 56 have great impact. Pakistani elite Panzerjäger a tactical evolution, which the Indian armored Corps would not like to face.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> I like the concept of elite Tank hunting units then even 56 have great impact. Pakistani elite Panzerjäger a tactical evolution, which the Indian armored Corps would not like to face.


Our HATs and LATs are doing the same job and they have no counterpart on the Indian side so they are a unique tactical asset. Each div has a LAT equipped with BSWS, which can be broken down as:
- 1 LAT Bn= 3× LAT companies
- 1 Inf div = 3 × inf bdes
Thus 1× LAT company for each bde.
While HAT is a Corps asset which is normally equipped with TOW. Thus all our formations have significant independent anti-tank assets which the Indians admittedly don't want to face.


Najaf A. Changezi said:


> Or LCB equipped with Kornet and Milan ATGMs during conventional warfare??


LCBs don't have atgms. There are designed for urban combat.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Our HATs and LATs are doing the same job and they have no counterpart on the Indian side so they are a unique tactical asset.


Indian Guard battalions are the direct counterpart of our HAT units. Moreover, Indian R&S units are the counterpart to our LAT, though they are much better armed and having greater mobility than our LAT.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Wow Wow:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> Indian Guard battalions are the direct counterpart of our HAT units. Moreover, Indian R&S units are the counterpart to our LAT, though they are much better armed and having greater mobility than our LAT.


Thanks sir!

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Tipu7

PanzerKiel said:


> Indian Guard battalions are the direct counterpart of our HAT units. Moreover, Indian R&S units are the counterpart to our LAT, though they are much better armed and having greater mobility than our LAT.


You should write a detailed comparison (people love it) whenever you get the opportunity...

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Great Janjua

PanzerKiel said:


> Indian Guard battalions are the direct counterpart of our HAT units. Moreover, Indian R&S units are the counterpart to our LAT, though they are much better armed and having greater mobility than our LAT.


Better equipped and more mobile.Does not sound good I may add,Have we done anything to negate the difference.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Great Janjua said:


> Better equipped and more mobile.Does not sound good I may add,Have we done anything to negate the difference.


From the defensive perspective yes, but not for offensive adventures.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Ghost 125

PanzerKiel said:


> Indian Guard battalions are the direct counterpart of our HAT units. Moreover, Indian R&S units are the counterpart to our LAT, though they are much better armed and having greater mobility than our LAT.


kyu karte hain ap esa?? thanda pani dal dete hain garam jazbat par

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
7


----------



## Raja Porus

Ghost 125 said:


> kyu karte hain ap esa?? thanda pani dal dete hain garam jazbat par


Nowadays he has limited himself to the role of a referee.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
2 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Thanks sir!



You and the most here are unrealistic ,you are all just thinking what we are good and what we pose, but never brought in relationship what we really will have to face, if we want to cross the border.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> but never brought in relationship what we really will have to face, if we want to cross the border


Exactly.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Great Janjua said:


> Better equipped and more mobile.Does not sound good I may add,Have we done anything to negate the difference.


Total number of HATs and LATs units on our side is many times that of Indian Guards and R&S units... That's the main difference.

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## PakFactor

Inception-06 said:


> You and the most here are unrealistic ,you are all just thinking what we are good and what we pose, but never brought in relationship what we really will have to face, if we want to cross the border.



Can you blame them? Our military posture and doctrine isn’t really offensive based to begin with, to think of crossing the border is a long shot. From the way things are looking Pak Army thinks it’s best to hold the line and come to a settlement through the conflict.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

Sir, I respectfully disagree. Our doctrine is of Offensive-defensive. There are many factors which lead to such a doctrine, first is our numerical inferiority to fight a battle of attrition, secondly international pressure will force both sides to end hostilities within at most two weeks and thirdly both countries have had more than 50 years to study and work on their defence thus very few avenues of approach are left (Which both sides will try to exploit).
Also it would be unfair to say that we are not ready to cross the border,infact we might be tge first ones to do so because of the nearness of our strike formations to the border as well as shorter mobilization time of PA as compared to IA. All of our regional commands have strike assets which are as follows
-Northern command has 34 light infantry Division and will also be supported by 1×inf div from 11 corps, Peshawar.
-Central command has the 1 strike corps(Army reserve north), Mangla with 6th armoured div, 17 and 37 infantry div( and may as well 19 inf div)
- Southern command has II corps(Army reserve South) with 1st armd div and 14 inf div. While V corps Karachi also has 25 mech div.
Another point to note here is that Pakistan army raised a whole new formation i.e 30th corps, Gujranwala so as to relieve 1 corps of any defensive ops. This 31 corps will be responsible for overall defence of Gujranwala salient so that 1 corps will be purely and solely responsible for offensive into the Indian Territory.
Similarly 26 mechanised div has been raised in Bahawalpur with 31 corps so that II corps won't have to commit its 1st armd div in central/southern punjab for def ops and instead any armoured thrust will be met by 25 mech div, 40(presumably mech inf) div and 35 inf div. It may also be supported by 1×inf div from 11 corps.
So we have dedicated assets responsible for offense inside India.


PakFactor said:


> Can you blame them? Our military posture and doctrine isn’t really offensive based to begin with, to think of crossing the border is a long shot. From the way things are looking Pak Army thinks it’s best to hold the line and come to a settlement through the conflict.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Inception-06



Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
2


----------



## khanasifm

What’s after 2021 ?


----------



## Signalian

Inception-06 said:


> View attachment 772392


GF couldnt make an arty gun

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Signalian said:


> GF couldnt make an arty gun



Just Tank guns.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Signalian

PanzerKiel said:


> Indian Guard battalions are the direct counterpart of our HAT units. Moreover, Indian R&S units are the counterpart to our LAT, though they are much better armed and having greater mobility than our LAT.


I think the initial conversion for Mech Inf Bns was:
1 Madras converted to 1 Mech Inf Bn 
1 Jat (LI) converted to 2 Mech Inf Bn
1/8 Grenadiers converted to 3 Mech Inf Bn
and so on.

The regular Mechanized Infantry Battalions were Equipped with BMP-2
The R&S Bns are further of two types:
1. Guards Bn - Tracked – Equipped with BMP-2
2. R&S Bn - Wheeled – Jeep mounted ATGM and BRDM-2 with ATGM

Conversion of Guards Bn to Regular Mechanized Infantry Bns has continued, although Guards Bns converted from pure Anti-tank role to R&S Bns.
Basically, R&S Bns are with all RAPIDs (6) and its said that R&S Bns are with IDs also.

The conversion of Indian Army Infantry Battalions to MIBs is another saga of internal politics.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Inception-06

*Commander Bahawalpur Corps Visits Bridge Company at Asrani*


The Commander visited the Bridge Training Area, where he was welcomed by GOC Mechanized Division. He was also briefed about the conduct of bridge training being conducted as part of operational readiness cycle.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

In the first picture, does the cage serve to sand bags as additional protection or just to carry supplies.





In this picture it's being used to carry sand bags.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Desert Fox 1 said:


> In the first picture, does the cage serve to sand bags as additional protection or just to carry supplies.
> View attachment 775599
> 
> In this picture it's being used to carry sand bags.


Can be used for carrying stuff too but in these cases, protection. M113 cannot stop HMG rounds (12.7) from the side. Only upto 7.62MM. So heavier sniper and HMG bullets remain a threat, hence the sandbags. Keep in mind sandbags are extremely effective at stopping bullets so even just one sandbag there is going to stop any small arms ammo, it’s obviously not ideal but it’s definitely an upgrade. In PA the other versions of M113 (Saad) have increased armor at the sides too to help with this, and the VCC variants even mount ERA in some cases for further increased protection.

At the end of the day all of this is less ideal than actual Modern APCs, but any benefit is better than none, especially considering the BMPs used by the adversary’s dont fare better in this regard.

Reactions: Love Love:
3


----------



## Raja Porus

PA doesn't like to use side skirts in exercises perhaps.


Inception-06 said:


> *Commander Bahawalpur Corps Visits Bridge Company at Asrani*
> 
> 
> The Commander visited the Bridge Training Area, where he was welcomed by GOC Mechanized Division. He was also briefed about the conduct of bridge training being conducted as part of operational readiness cycle.
> 
> View attachment 775580
> View attachment 775579
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 775585


The 2nd set of images is of the time when Sher Afgun was the corps commander thus must be of before 2018.
Also it seems that 26 mech has AK-1, AK, as well as Type-85II.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

iLION12345_1 said:


> Can be used for carrying stuff too but in these cases, protection. M113 cannot stop HMG rounds (12.7) from the side. Only upto 7.62MM. So heavier sniper and HMG bullets remain a threat, hence the sandbags. Keep in mind sandbags are extremely effective at stopping bullets so even just one sandbag there is going to stop any small arms ammo, it’s obviously not ideal but it’s definitely an upgrade. In PA the other versions of M113 (Saad) have increased armor at the sides too to help with this, and the VCC variants even mount ERA in some cases for further increased protection.
> 
> At the end of the day all of this is less ideal than actual Modern APCs, but any benefit is better than none, especially considering the BMPs used by the adversary’s dont fare better in this regard.


 M113 can stop 12.7 mm rounds from all sides. 

Sandbags are mainly there to protect the crew compartment from RPG and SPG 9 rounds by decreasing their effectiveness.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
2


----------



## MilSpec

PanzerKiel said:


> M113 can stop 12.7 mm rounds from all sides.
> 
> Sandbags are mainly there to protect the crew compartment from RPG and SPG 9 rounds by decreasing their effectiveness.


M113, A1 and A2 variants, Which is the bulk of your fleet are rated for protection againt 7.62x51 and shell fragmentation.

Even The M113A3 was designed to provide protection against a standard 7.62mm threat.

The M113’s minimal armor offered protection against small arms and artillery fragmentation but not against hits from weapons of 14.5mm and higher. Although appliqué armor could be applied, it never became standard issue.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PanzerKiel

MilSpec said:


> M113, A1 and A2 variants, Which is the bulk of your fleet are rated for protection againt 7.62x51 and shell fragmentation.
> 
> Even The M113A3 was designed to provide protection against a standard 7.62mm threat.
> 
> The M113’s minimal armor offered protection against small arms and artillery fragmentation but not against hits from weapons of 14.5mm and higher. Although appliqué armor could be applied, it never became standard issue.


Of course, 14.5 would be an issue.

I said about 12.7 mm, they all are rated for against these calibers. M113 can protect itself against 12.7 mm. It had been a norm for them to get hit from 12.7 mm weapons of terrorists, but they're has not been one instance in which they have been even disabled by 12.7 weapons. 

12.7 mm weapons are available with normal infantry units on both sides. No one would like to induct a platform giving protection against 7.62 only.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Signalian

Desert Fox 1 said:


> In the first picture, does the cage serve to sand bags as additional protection or just to carry supplies.
> View attachment 775599
> 
> In this picture it's being used to carry sand bags.


Is that a LMG on mount ?


Desert Fox 1 said:


> In the first picture, does the cage serve to sand bags as additional protection or just to carry supplies.
> View attachment 775599
> 
> In this picture it's being used to carry sand bags.


Considering this a COIN Ops, supplies shouldn't be an issue. Added protection is a requirement. Have you seen cages installed around Stryker or M-113 serving in Iraq and Afghanistan ? same solution.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MilSpec

PanzerKiel said:


> Of course, 14.5 would be an issue.
> 
> I said about 12.7 mm, they all are rated for against these calibers. M113 can protect itself against 12.7 mm. It had been a norm for them to get hit from 12.7 mm weapons of terrorists, but they're has not been one instance in which they have been even disabled by 12.7 weapons.
> 
> 12.7 mm weapons are available with normal infantry units on both sides. No one would like to induct a platform giving protection against 7.62 only.



COL William T. Nuckols Jr. and Dr. Robert S. Cameron






https://www.benning.army.mil/armor/eARMOR/content/issues/2016/JAN_MAR/1Nuckols-Cameron16.pdf





United States General Accounting Office Report to Congressional Committees 










Wayback Machine

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

MilSpec said:


> COL William T. Nuckols Jr. and Dr. Robert S. Cameron
> View attachment 775648
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.benning.army.mil/armor/eARMOR/content/issues/2016/JAN_MAR/1Nuckols-Cameron16.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> United States General Accounting Office Report to Congressional Committees
> 
> View attachment 775649
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wayback Machine


Again, I'll repeat, I did not talk about 14.5. I'm talking about 12.7.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

MilSpec said:


> COL William T. Nuckols Jr. and Dr. Robert S. Cameron
> View attachment 775648
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.benning.army.mil/armor/eARMOR/content/issues/2016/JAN_MAR/1Nuckols-Cameron16.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> United States General Accounting Office Report to Congressional Committees
> 
> View attachment 775649
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wayback Machine


Panzerkiel is also correct, because of the many thousands of the M113s in service with the PA, more than half are Talha, Saad or VCC variants which Do have protection from 12.7mm, they have been up-armored (the local ones with thicker armor in general and the Italian ones with add on armor and ERA).
Whereas the regular M113 that were bought from America are only rated for 7.62MM at the sides, it has been noted in actual combat they can usually stop 12.7MM (thank angles for the reason!), but the added side armor as sandbags is there for this reason on these base M113s, to ensure nothing gets through.


Signalian said:


> Is that a LMG on mount ?
> 
> Considering this a COIN Ops, supplies shouldn't be an issue. Added protection is a requirement. Have you seen cages installed around Stryker or M-113 serving in Iraq and Afghanistan ? same solution.


Yep, MG3 on the mount.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Yep, perhaps for higher rate of fire, more ammo and easier rotation.


Signalian said:


> Is that a LMG on mount ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Yep, perhaps for higher rate of fire, more ammo and easier rotation.


perhaps avoid collateral damage.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Yep, perhaps for higher rate of fire, more ammo and easier rotation.


MG3 is used on M113 once army is deployed in cities on IS duties in order to avoid more damage.....12.7 mm AA HMG can play havoc inside a city,

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Signalian

Desert Fox 1 said:


> View attachment 775674


Formation sign wasnt covered.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> View attachment 775674


Cage is only on left side.


----------



## PanzerKiel

Inception-06 said:


> Cage is only on left side.


At that time, cages were still being fixed on all M113s...project is near completion now.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Anza SAMs and twin 14.5mms on a PA m113.





Battar; twin RRs on an M113




(Both were indigenously produced in 502 EME workshop)


Signalian said:


> Formation sign wasnt covered.


Might just be a peace time move.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Anza SAMs and twin 14.5mms on a PA m113.
> View attachment 775685
> 
> Battar; twin RRs on an M113
> View attachment 775684
> 
> (Both were indigenously produced in 502 EME workshop)
> 
> Might just be a peace time move.


Both projects were discontinued since we started with RBS 70s and increased number of BGM-71s and BSWS weapons mounted on M113.


Desert Fox 1 said:


> Might just be a peace time move.


It wasnt a peace time move, it was an IS duty for which the army moved out.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## bananarepublic

Inception-06 said:


> View attachment 772392


Anyone have Pictures of W-653 recovery vehicles in Pakistani service?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

bananarepublic said:


> Anyone have Pictures of W-653 recovery vehicles in Pakistani service?







its always a treat for me to drive this beast, very responsive, clutch is a bit hard, strength required to shift the gear....but overall an excellent vehicle.

Reactions: Like Like:
8 | Love Love:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## bananarepublic

PanzerKiel said:


> View attachment 775689
> 
> its always a treat for me to drive this beast, very responsive, clutch is a bit hard, strength required to shift the gear....but overall an excellent vehicle.


We also built one on the Al-khalid hull right? 
Whats the towing and lifting capacity on these?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

bananarepublic said:


> We also built one on the Al-khalid hull right?
> Whats the towing and lifting capacity on these?


More than 70 tons.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Signalian

PanzerKiel said:


> Again, I'll repeat, I did not talk about 14.5. I'm talking about 12.7.


Kal 6 sept ki chutti enjoy kar. Kin chakron mein parr gaya hay. PDF se offline ho aur family ko dinner pe Le ja.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
3


----------



## bananarepublic

PanzerKiel said:


> More than 70 tons.





Signalian said:


> Kal 6 sept ki chutti enjoy kar. Kin chakron mein parr gaya hay. PDF se offline ho aur family ko dinner pe Le ja.


Haha this, enjoy the chutti


----------



## Raja Porus

Signalian said:


> Kal 6 sept ki chutti enjoy kar. Kin chakron mein parr gaya hay. PDF se offline ho aur family ko dinner pe Le ja.


Ni subah unit me SD pehan kar bhi jana ha ya phir corps headquarters me function par jahan APS ke bachay milli naghmay pesh karein ge.
Btw does anyone have the picture of the recovery veh built on AK chassis.

Reactions: Sad Sad:
1


----------



## bhola record

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Ni subah unit me SD pehan kar bhi jana ha ya phir corps headquarters me function par jahan APS ke bachay milli naghmay pesh karein ge.


kal PK sahab ki gari par phool bhi phainkain ge bachy.

Reactions: Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## MilSpec

PanzerKiel said:


> Again, I'll repeat, I did not talk about 14.5. I'm talking about 12.7.


Most sources seem to suggest the design of m113A3 was for protection from 7.62, not 12.7/50bmg.


----------



## Sayfullah

PanzerKiel said:


> Both projects were discontinued since we started with RBS 70s and increased number of BGM-71s and BSWS weapons mounted on M113.









Can Pakistan make this with M113 and anza manpads? Pakistan has many M113 and produces variants of them locally, we also produce anza manpads locally and, we produce ir sensor locally so it shouldn’t be hard to make this?
Can we make our own pansir type system with rbs 70s and hmg? We have lots of m113 lots of rbs 70s and lots of hmg’s. It could be a stop gap till we get something better?

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

G(old).

*








*

Reactions: Love Love:
2


----------



## Signalian

PanzerKiel said:


> At that time, cages were still being fixed on all M113s...project is near completion now.


rubber track during urban deployment ?


----------



## PanzerKiel

Signalian said:


> rubber track during urban deployment ?


It remains there all the times, whether internal or operational.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## blueazure

Desert Fox 1 said:


> G(old).
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *




sadly, we do not have short videos like these from the 80s produced anymore -

ISPR is infested with PR civilians only good for cheap songs 

and all documentaries today are in english ,

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Signalian

M-113s running alongside T-80s would have given mixed feelings to cold war analysts who wouldn't have imagined such a combination of NATO and USSR equipment working alongside each other.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Signalian said:


> M-113s running alongside T-80s would have given mixed feelings to cold war analysts who wouldn't have imagined such a combination of NATO and USSR equipment working alongside each other.


Iraq is even better in this regard; Abrams, T90s running along with BMP and M113s.


----------



## blueazure

Signalian said:


> M-113s running alongside T-80s would have given mixed feelings to cold war analysts who wouldn't have imagined such a combination of NATO and USSR equipment working alongside each other.




i doubt we'll ever see such armored formation displays ever again ,

Pakistan Army is definitely not buying any more AFV's from this point on .


----------



## Raja Porus

blueazure said:


> buying


Yep, because it is producing them.


----------



## blueazure

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Yep, because it is producing them.



then why did we go for the Vt4 sir ?


----------



## Raja Porus

blueazure said:


> then why did we go for the Vt4 sir ?


To fill up the numbers since AK production was too slow for replacement of old tanks in our major formations plus we have to raise new regts as well, so all this could've been met only by foreign off the shelf purchase.
VT4 for replacement and AK-1 for new raisings.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

The Al Khalid Production Rate needs to be improved no doubt
Perhaps more man power is needed to improve numbers being produced 
to meet demand


----------



## iLION12345_1

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> The Al Khalid Production Rate needs to be improved no doubt
> Perhaps more man power is needed to improve numbers being produced
> to meet demand


HIT has the capacity, the production rate was low due to a lack of funds, the money was all diverted to fight the war on terror So They only got enough funds to produce a few tanks a year and sometimes none. However with the War over, production has ramped up again, it reached 35/Year for the last batch of AK-1 and will be reaching 50/Year by 2022 (which is the max Peacetime production capacity of HITs Al-Khalid production line)

As explained by desert fox above, the reason we are buying VT-4s is because we have a large amount of older tanks to replace that ideally would have been retired by now if AK production wasn’t hampered. HIT is already working to bring AK-1 closer in capability to VT-4P so their mutual induction into the armed forces can continue into the decade.


blueazure said:


> then why did we go for the Vt4 sir ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

iLION12345_1 said:


> HIT is already working to bring AK-1 closer in capability to VT-4P


Sir any news about AK 2


----------



## iLION12345_1

Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> Sir any news about AK 2


I’m not sure if it will be getting the AK-2 name but an AK upgrade is definitely in development.

The army wants HIT to bring AK closer in capability to VT-4, this means adding tech from or similar to the VT4 onto it.

This includes a new RWS, likely a CITV and a new engine (hopefully the same one from VT-4) and hopefully LWRs and New ERA along with C4I/network centric upgrades.

We may see some of these upgrades already present in the next batch of AK-1, if HIT can get the things ready by then, if not we will see this upgrade in a couple of years when the current order of AK-1 finishes production and the next order is placed.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Muhammad Saftain Anjum

iLION12345_1 said:


> I’m not sure if it will be getting the AK-2 name but an AK upgrade is definitely in development.
> 
> The army wants HIT to bring AK closer in capability to VT-4, this means adding tech from or similar to the VT4 onto it.
> 
> This includes a new RWS, likely a CITV and a new engine (hopefully the same one from VT-4) and hopefully LWRs and New ERA along with C4I/network centric upgrades.
> 
> We may see some of these upgrades already present in the next batch of AK-1, if HIT can get the things ready by then, if not we will see this upgrade in a couple of years when the current order of AK-1 finishes production and the next order is placed.


How many VT 4 we will buy? 400-500?


----------



## iLION12345_1

Muhammad Saftain Anjum said:


> How many VT 4 we will buy? 400-500?


looking at the army requirement and the number of older tanks to replace, at least 600. But it Depends on how funding and requirements change as time goes on.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Pretty Modest figures for Tanks and Gunships

Needs attention , to fast track

Tanks Acquisition 
Local Tank Manufacturing (Al Khalid 2) 
T-129 Delivery 
More Augusta Helicopters , perhaps armed with light machine guns


----------



## Raja Porus

Got a few Qs;
Are these AZs?
Also is that an excavator or a bridge layer?
If it is a bridge layer then why are the dozers building (most probably) defences on home side of the canal?
If it's an excavator digging defences and tanks providing cover then is it a simulation of amroued thrusts reaching there designated objectives; going on the defensive based on some canal with tanks holding defences till inf catches up?
Don't flares give up positions and make them liable to arty fire?
What are those red lights on tanks?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## iLION12345_1

Desert Fox 1 said:


> View attachment 782120
> 
> Got a few Qs;
> Are these AZs?
> Also is that an excavator or a bridge layer?
> If it is a bridge layer then why are the dozers building (most probably) defences on home side of the canal?
> If it's an excavator digging defences and tanks providing cover then is it a simulation of amroued thrusts reaching there designated objectives; going on the defensive based on some canal with tanks holding defences till inf catches up?
> Don't flares give up positions and make them liable to arty fire?
> What are those red lights on tanks?


1.Could be AZ or type 85, though likely the former.

2. I believe that’s an excavator, you can see dozers too, Field engineers, they do more than just building defenses. You need engineers to keep an offense moving, especially in desert terrain, what they’re doing in this picture exactly, sir @PanzerKiel can probably tell better.

3. The red lights are identification lights. Notice how the engineers have green ones instead.
As for the tanks, The larger light in this picture is the convoy light, while the one I have circled is a GTS-64 “side light” system (that’s what the Russian translates to). It’s an old Soviet system which has lights all around the tank to keep its outline visible for infantry and other Allies. All PA tanks still use these Afaik. Even VT-4P. It’s useful.





Not sure what you mean by flares (the red lights up in the sky?). Flares can be fired from mortars and then you can simply move away. An artillery Illumination round is brighter but yes, can give your position away, however if you’re in a position where you don’t wish to be spotted, you don’t use illumination rounds/flares. You simply switch to NV.

PA soldiers and tanks have IR patches on them too so they can be similarly spotted and identified by Allies through NV/IR or thermal imagers and sights. All PA tanks have Thermal imagers and night vision as well. Soldiers in such an OP will be similarly equipped with them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> View attachment 782120
> 
> Got a few Qs;
> Are these AZs?
> Also is that an excavator or a bridge layer?
> If it is a bridge layer then why are the dozers building (most probably) defences on home side of the canal?
> If it's an excavator digging defences and tanks providing cover then is it a simulation of amroued thrusts reaching there designated objectives; going on the defensive based on some canal with tanks holding defences till inf catches up?
> Don't flares give up positions and make them liable to arty fire?
> What are those red lights on tanks?


AZ.... Bridge laying going on.... Dozers improving tanks for wheeled vehicles... All part of an extensive exercise in northern Pakistan. 

Red lights are on tanks as per their order of induction into bridgehead.... These are artillery illuminating rounds... That too once enemy artillery has been silenced...

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Signalian

iLION12345_1 said:


> looking at the army requirement and the number of older tanks to replace, at least 600. But it Depends on how funding and requirements change as time goes on.


Not to worry, all PA armor commanders are Rommels, they will always be pitted against larger enemy armor forces and depend upon infantry to save the day

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
3


----------



## farooqbhai007

Signalian said:


> Not to worry, all PA armor commanders are Rommels, they will always be pitted against larger enemy armor forces and depend upon infantry to save the day


That's why they have rommel's quote on the wall in the VT4 video , as spotted by @iLION12345_1

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
3


----------



## Inception-06

@Desert Fox 1 
Have you ever known about that tactic ?

Reactions: Love Love:
2


----------



## PanzerKiel

Inception-06 said:


> @Desert Fox 1
> Have you ever known about that tactic ?


We call it *jockeying*.....hull down.....battle positions.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> @Desert Fox 1
> Have you ever known about that tactic ?


It was part of a Russian exercise "Peace Mission 2021".
And the tank is T72.
Doesn't seem to be "Anti Terrorism Ops ".




__ https://www.facebook.com/199792500077367/posts/4579114638811776





Such a position would be a little time consuming to build and might only be used when we have settled for defence of a particular sector for an extended period.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Desert Fox 1 said:


> It was part of a Russian exercise "Peace Mission 2021".
> And the tank is T72.
> Doesn't seem to be "Anti Terrorism Ops ".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://www.facebook.com/199792500077367/posts/4579114638811776
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Such a position would be a little time consuming to build and might only be used when we have settled for defence of a particular sector for an extended period.


Actually not that time consuming with modern engineering equipment, it doesn’t need to be that elaborate either, a tank can set up a ditch for itself pretty quick with its own dozer, if the goal is just to make a hull-down position.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

iLION12345_1 said:


> Actually not that time consuming with modern engineering equipment, it doesn’t need to be that elaborate either, a tank can set up a ditch for itself pretty quick with its own dozer, if the goal is just to make a hull-down position.


Not a simple hull down position but building the V and then laying the camo over it. Plus Dozers etc don't follow the tanks directly.
All of this might not be possible in case of an enemy counter attack just after capturing a position.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1453421299477458950pinging some people @Desert Fox 1 @PanzerKiel




Wall-E makes a appearance in the new vid

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

farooqbhai007 said:


> Wall-E makes a appearance in the new vid


What exactly are you referring to?


----------



## farooqbhai007

PanzerKiel said:


> What exactly are you referring to?


M901 ITV ,

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

farooqbhai007 said:


> M901 ITV ,
> View attachment 788165


Maybe He doesn’t know what Wall-E is. Bachon wali film 😂

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## dexter

PanzerKiel said:


> What exactly are you referring to?



Don't tell me that you have never seen that masterpiece XD

Reactions: Sad Sad:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

dexter said:


> Don't tell me that you have never seen that masterpiece XD


First time I'm hearing about Wall E. Never heard of it before.

Reactions: Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
3


----------



## HRK

PanzerKiel said:


> First time I'm hearing about Wall E. Never heard of it before.


its a cartoon movie but with a good story line which even grown up men can enjoy .... wase hai tu bachoo ki tu simple si hai but it story has its own touch of innocence, dedication with the objective and struggle.

A nice movies to watch with your little children.

Reactions: Love Love:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Reichmarshal

PanzerKiel said:


> First time I'm hearing about Wall E. Never heard of it before.


Look.like Panzerkel has grown up.kids, unlike us lot who have young children n get to watch all sort of cartoons, while in their company.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Signalian

Infantry School usually has two courses per year for ATGM firing training in which some 200 troops are trained in total. Troops are trained on TOW and Baktar Shikan systems. Training is conducted to target both moving and stationary objects. The engagement ranges are usually around 2300 m or 2500 m.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Signalian said:


> Infantry School usually has two courses per year for ATGM firing training in which some 200 troops are trained in total. Troops are trained on TOW and Baktar Shikan systems. Training is conducted to target both moving and stationary objects. The engagement ranges are usually around 2300 m or 2500 m.


Are the officers of MIB trained only in Infantry school like SIB or undergo basic training (as do other arms) and then move on to Armour/mechanised school?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Are the officers of MIB trained only in Infantry school like SIB or undergo basic training (as do other arms) and then move on to Armour/mechanised school?


Every infantry officer is trained in Infantry School (YO's at least) and then i think they proceed to Nowshera. Officers from regular infantry battalions are trained in ATGM course also.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Signalian

PanzerKiel said:


> First time I'm hearing about Wall E. Never heard of it before.


Think of it as a small UGV. A modern cousin of WW2 German Goliath.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1457611330865836035

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Signalian

PanzerKiel said:


> Yes.
> 
> For your second question, several Mech Divs have come up recently.


Maybe we live to see the day when an IFV which is also an APC forms the backbone of Mech Divs. Something like BMP-3 or CV-90 or Tulpar.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

Signalian said:


> Maybe we live to see the day when an IFV which is also an APC forms the backbone of Mech Divs. Something like BMP-3 or CV-90 or Tulpar.


In the new HIT Vid , a second Hull of Viper IFV was seen being built

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Signalian

farooqbhai007 said:


> In the new HIT Vid , a second Hull of Viper IFV was seen being built


BMP3 holds a bit more firepower through that 100 mm cannon. Previously LATs had RR which also gave direct fire through 106 mm. Now LATs and HATs are equipped with ATGM, the cannon is gone. Viper has 25mm or 20mm with ATGM. It becomes a Cannon Vs Missile debate now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
2


----------



## farooqbhai007

Signalian said:


> BMP3 holds a bit more firepower through that 100 mm cannon. Previously LATs had RR which also gave direct fire through 106 mm. Now LATs and HATs are equipped with ATGM, the cannon is gone. Viper has 25mm or 20mm with ATGM. It becomes a Cannon Vs Missile debate now.


Viper has 30 mm plus two konkurs

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Signalian

farooqbhai007 said:


> Viper has 30 mm plus two konkurs



Yes boss, its still not close to 100 mm or 106 mm. BMP-3 has seen combat, Viper IFV may or may not have a future. M-113 is not built for direct combat/contact although a few variants were up gunned and up armored. Bradley faced T-72s and used ATGM. M-901 and Maaz will face T-90s using ATGMs from camouflaged positions, both don't have heavy caliber cannons, just 12.7mm. 

Now BMP-3 on the other hand has 100mm, 30mm, ATGM, 7.62mm and firing ports for troops, smoke dispensers for concealment and can carry troops. A bit of an over kill. If Viper is put in combat, its 30mm cannon can pose a serious threat to BMP-2 and other lightly armored vehicles, but M-901 and Maaz will be using ATGMs against BMP-2. That 12.7mm might damage at a closer range or from rear but maneuvering for the kill might be risky. Losing a troop transport is another risk. BMP-3 itself carries a lot of ammo, a single hit in ammo compartment will roast everyone sitting in it. Its armor is weak at certain places but it carries a strong punch.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
2


----------



## farooqbhai007

Signalian said:


> Yes boss, its still not close to 100 mm or 106 mm. BMP-3 has seen combat, Viper IFV may or may not have a future. M-113 is not built for direct combat/contact although a few variants were up gunned and up armored. Bradley faced T-72s and used ATGM. M-901 and Maaz will face T-90s using ATGMs from camouflaged positions, both don't have heavy caliber cannons, just 12.7mm.
> 
> Now BMP-3 on the other hand has 100mm, 30mm, ATGM, 7.62mm and firing ports for troops, smoke dispensers for concealment and can carry troops. A bit of an over kill. If Viper is put in combat, its 30mm cannon can pose a serious threat to BMP-2 and other lightly armored vehicles, but M-901 and Maaz will be using ATGMs against BMP-2. That 12.7mm might damage at a closer range or from rear but maneuvering for the kill might be risky. Losing a troop transport is another risk. BMP-3 itself carries a lot of ammo, a single hit in ammo compartment will roast everyone sitting in it. Its armor is weak at certain places but it carries a strong punch.


I am not saying BMP3 is bad , I was just saying that HIT was making a 2nd viper , perhaps a new demonstrator 

BMP3 over all itself is a bit outdated , but the turret is exceptionally good , A better option for PA would be similar to what the Emiratis did , placing bmp3 turret onto other better protected chassis , UAE took Rabdan 8x8 , Patria AMV , Al wahash 8x8 etc and had BMP3 turrets fitted onto them , 
The rabdan ( Emirati produced Otokar arma ) with BMP3 turret was then inducted into service

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Signalian

farooqbhai007 said:


> I am not saying BMP3 is bad , I was just saying that HIT was making a 2nd viper , perhaps a new demonstrator
> 
> BMP3 over all itself is a bit outdated , but the turret is exceptionally good , A better option for PA would be similar to what the Emiratis did , placing bmp3 turret onto other better protected chassis , UAE took Rabdan 8x8 , Patria AMV , Al wahash 8x8 etc and had BMP3 turrets fitted onto them ,
> The rabdan ( Emirati produced Otokar arma ) with BMP3 turret was then inducted into service


Another thing that u could have pointed out is the ATGM firing capability. It is fired through main gun which is 100 mm therefore ATGM also has to be 100 mm. TOW is 152mm, Baktar Shikan is 120 mm while konkurs is 135 mm.

So for a larger caliber or widely used ATGM in PA service, an outer port for ATGM like viper would be required. This also raises the point that 125 mm gun of PA MBTs cannot use TOW or BS to fire from main gun.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Some nice footage Of VT-4s and AZs together.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
4


----------



## farooqbhai007

Pakistan resumes armor modernization as terror threat recedes


With India having ordered advanced T-90MS tanks, built a fleet of T-90As and upgraded most of its T-72M1 fleet, Pakistan is countering with its own acquisition and upgrade programs.




www.defensenews.com





" An industry source with knowledge of HIT’s ongoing programs told Defense News on the condition of anonymity that the Viper was undergoing *pilot* *production* "

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
4


----------



## Signalian

@PanzerKiel 

If Viper IFV gets inducted, are we looking at mix M-113 and Viper MIB's or separate ?
Secondly, will section get broken down from 10 to 6 forming a squad ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

I for one hope they steer as clear of Viper as possible, apart from potentially being cheap as a local product, it’s got nothing going for it in my book. HIT totally has the capability to design an actual modern IFV that will also provide IED/Mine protection and not be that bloated (by-product of the thing being based on the M113 but with additional armor, might be what makes it very cheap in the end though). IFVs are a good idea, local or otherwise (Unfortunately Cavalier groups pitch turned out to be a failure, but the design was decent), but The Viper seems a poor take on an IFV.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

iLION12345_1 said:


> I for one hope they steer as clear of Viper as possible, apart from potentially being cheap as a local product, it’s got nothing going for it in my book. HIT totally has the capability to design an actual modern IFV that will also provide IED/Mine protection and not be that bloated (by-product of the thing being based on the M113 but with additional armor, might be what makes it very cheap in the end though). IFVs are a good idea, local or otherwise (Unfortunately Cavalier groups pitch turned out to be a failure, but the design was decent), but The Viper seems a poor take on an IFV.


Absolutely. They can find ample design support from Poland, for example, for a clean-sheet IFV. The market for subsystems and inputs is pretty good as well. No reason why HIT cannot design and build a good solution using COTS.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Signalian

iLION12345_1 said:


> I for one hope they steer as clear of Viper as possible, apart from potentially being cheap as a local product, it’s got nothing going for it in my book. HIT totally has the capability to design an actual modern IFV that will also provide IED/Mine protection and not be that bloated (by-product of the thing being based on the M113 but with additional armor, might be what makes it very cheap in the end though). IFVs are a good idea, local or otherwise (Unfortunately Cavalier groups pitch turned out to be a failure, but the design was decent), but The Viper seems a poor take on an IFV.


IA has 58 x BMPs in its MIBs. These are all ATGM carriers with cannons plus they carry troops. How many IFVs and in how much duration would PA equip its MIBs with them ? If an IFV is to be inducted, there could be future upgrades which could make it IED protected, though I know the hull design plays a role and the IFV is built around it. Yet sensors, detectors and armor upgrades could prove useful. The occurrence of IEDs in conventional battlefields in deserts and plains is still unknown, whether the Indians would prefer mining their areas or IED-ing them wherever they expect an attack from PA Strike Corps. It will still be the job of Assault Engineers to clear the minefields, unless this task is allocated to MIBs armed with M-113 or an IFV. BMP is dispersed to an extent that its even serving in IA Mountain Divs e.g. 27 Mountain Div. IA Armor Div has 6 x T-90 Regts and 4 x BMP Regts. PA matches that with a HAT Regt Plus the 6 X Armd Regts and 3 x MIBs of M-113. Should things still move in PA's favor If IFV induction is delayed? Only time will tell. It will take up to 8-10 years to fully equip PA MIBs with IFVs and send M-113 on secondary roles or allocate them towards Infantry Divisions whose AOR fall in plains or deserts. I am not in favor of Viper but Im also not against it as I dont head MRVDE neither T&E.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## iLION12345_1

Signalian said:


> IA has 58 x BMPs in its MIBs. These are all ATGM carriers with cannons plus they carry troops. How many IFVs and in how much duration would PA equip its MIBs with them ? If an IFV is to be inducted, there could be future upgrades which could make it IED protected, though I know the hull design plays a role and the IFV is built around it. Yet sensors, detectors and armor upgrades could prove useful. The occurrence of IEDs in conventional battlefields in deserts and plains is still unknown, whether the Indians would prefer mining their areas or IED-ing them wherever they expect an attack from PA Strike Corps. It will still be the job of Assault Engineers to clear the minefields, unless this task is allocated to MIBs armed with M-113 or an IFV. BMP is dispersed to an extent that its even serving in IA Mountain Divs e.g. 27 Mountain Div. IA Armor Div has 6 x T-90 Regts and 4 x BMP Regts. PA matches that with a HAT Regt Plus the 6 X Armd Regts and 3 x MIBs of M-113. Should things still move in PA's favor If IFV induction is delayed? Only time will tell. It will take up to 8-10 years to fully equip PA MIBs with IFVs and send M-113 on secondary roles or allocate them towards Infantry Divisions whose AOR fall in plains or deserts. I am not in favor of Viper but Im also not against it as I dont head MRVDE neither T&E.


The lack of IED protection is a minor issue in the grand scheme of issues with the Viper design.
To me the usefulness of the viper depends on just how cheap it actually is. Even if it’s half the cost of a modern-IFV (by which I mean a modern design, the sensors and weaponry on the viper prototype were already decent, but I highly doubt it has good mobility or good protection compared to modern Designs and it’s silhouette/design is already old given it’s just a larger and heavier M113) then it’s not worth purchasing given its just not future proof. How many years can it severe before PA just needs to replace it again? Is a large purchase of these vehicles cost effective? Will it become another bad project like The dragoon APC or the armed AS550 helicopters?

You understand the tactical aspect of any IFV and it’s deployment much better than I do, I only wanted point out the issues with its design.

One way I could see the viper being useful is if it’s used as a stop-gap. Purchase a smaller amount and equip the most important regiments/the regiments where a platform like it would be the most useful. Then pursue a better system and mass-introduce that into the PA over however many years it takes (that is if PA is indeed planning to introduce IFVs into its doctrine on a large scale). Otherwise it could just be procured in smaller amounts anyways to act as a force multiplier in important regions.

A viper over the M113 would be a considerable boost to the PAs capability given how basic an M113 is and how much of an upgrade the viper is over Indian BMPs, but what about when india replaces it’s BMPs with new IFVs? We’d be back to square one, that’s why I think it would be smarter to buy a proper IFV now and use it into the future instead of buying the viper now and having to replace it again with limited funds.

Edit: PA has recently shown some pretty forward thinking that has impressed me, particularly the acquisitions of the armor and the AD core. Both With good funds management and the choices of induction, they’ve managed to outpace the technology used currently and in the near future by the adversary despite having fewer options and money. I expect to see more of the same here and in other Fields too.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Raja Porus

I don't expect a long range offensive ops, so the APCs are just battle taxis to carry the troops to the frontline of defense or to follow up behind the armour and dismount during attack as shown by recent PA exercises.


I think PA is a bit too late to take the time to develop an IFV and even if it does; our production capacity will be slow that ultimately we'll have to go the Chinese route and end up with three different IFV types (M113, indigenous, Chinese) as was the case with the armd Corps. So it's better to get TOT for a Chinese ifv and simultaneously order them in a large enough number (again IF we want to replace M113s)
Another important point is the number of personal carried by an IFV as compared to M113. With M113 being able to carry almost double the number of infantrymen PA will have a hard time replacing its APCs with sufficient IFVs which can carry enough men as in case of Indo-Pak theatre a squad of 7-8 men would be ineffective and highly uneconomical.


Signalian said:


> PA matches that with a HAT Regt Plus


Isn't it Armoured recce regt?


Signalian said:


> PA matches that with a HAT Regt Plus


Isn't it Armoured recce regt?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Phantom.

Why dosent PA just Convert older Type-59 and Type-69 Hulls into IFVs with a new turret similar to the one on VN-17 IFV for stop Gap and wait for HIT to make a new Modern IFV .Similar to BMPT and Chinese conversions based on the Type 59 Hull.Algerians are doing the same with their older T-62s adding new turrets and converting them into IFVs.Ukranians have a similar vehicle Strazh based on the T-62 chasis.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Primus

PanzerKiel said:


> First time I'm hearing about Wall E. Never heard of it before.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Signalian said:


> @PanzerKiel
> 
> If Viper IFV gets inducted, are we looking at mix M-113 and Viper MIB's or separate ?
> Secondly, will section get broken down from 10 to 6 forming a squad ?


Mix is also an option, maintenance shouldnt be an issue since the base platform remains same, however additional facilities will have to be erected for the turret, its weapons and optics..which means that these IFVs will be inducted first with formation of North Pakistan, all near HIT / POF, so that initial teething problems can be rectified easily.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

PanzerKiel said:


> Mix is also an option, maintenance shouldnt be an issue since the base platform remains same, however additional facilities will have to be erected for the turret, its weapons and optics..which means that these IFVs will be inducted first with formation of North Pakistan, all near HIT / POF, so that initial teething problems can be rectified easily.


While probably not for Viper , but a certain cantt near HIT/POF was expanded recently to accommodate for new Units.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Signalian

iLION12345_1 said:


> The lack of IED protection is a minor issue in the grand scheme of issues with the Viper design.
> To me the usefulness of the viper depends on just how cheap it actually is. Even if it’s half the cost of a modern-IFV (by which I mean a modern design, the sensors and weaponry on the viper prototype were already decent, but I highly doubt it has good mobility or good protection compared to modern Designs and it’s silhouette/design is already old given it’s just a larger and heavier M113) then it’s not worth purchasing given its just not future proof. How many years can it severe before PA just needs to replace it again? Is a large purchase of these vehicles cost effective? Will it become another bad project like The dragoon APC or the armed AS550 helicopters?
> 
> You understand the tactical aspect of any IFV and it’s deployment much better than I do, I only wanted point out the issues with its design.
> 
> One way I could see the viper being useful is if it’s used as a stop-gap. Purchase a smaller amount and equip the most important regiments/the regiments where a platform like it would be the most useful. Then pursue a better system and mass-introduce that into the PA over however many years it takes (that is if PA is indeed planning to introduce IFVs into its doctrine on a large scale). Otherwise it could just be procured in smaller amounts anyways to act as a force multiplier in important regions.
> 
> A viper over the M113 would be a considerable boost to the PAs capability given how basic an M113 is and how much of an upgrade the viper is over Indian BMPs, but what about when india replaces it’s BMPs with new IFVs? We’d be back to square one, that’s why I think it would be smarter to buy a proper IFV now and use it into the future instead of buying the viper now and having to replace it again with limited funds.
> 
> Edit: PA has recently shown some pretty forward thinking that has impressed me, particularly the acquisitions of the armor and the AD core. Both With good funds management and the choices of induction, they’ve managed to outpace the technology used currently and in the near future by the adversary despite having fewer options and money. I expect to see more of the same here and in other Fields too.


Have you calculated its p/w ratio in Hp/Tonne ? That should give a rough idea if its mobile enough to run with MBTs. M-2 Bradley stands at 28 Tonnes with 600 HP engine and runs around with 1500 Hp powered Abrams. Viper has 360 Hp engine and is expected to run with 1000-1200 Hp powered MBTs. and check the difference in weight when a cage armor is added.

Training an infantry soldier to operate a turret could be the first major concern. Infantry is expected to be jack of all trades. Armor boys fire a main gun, ack ack and in some cases ATGM. Infantry crew will need to fire main gun, ATGM and control ack ack. Commander will also need to give orders for mount/dismount.

As for direct contact with enemy pertaining to armor and protection concern of IFV, it will be useful to see how Bradley, warrior, Marder and Indian BMP-2 are deployed by their respective armies along with MBTs.

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
3


----------



## iLION12345_1

Signalian said:


> Have you calculated its p/w ratio in Hp/Tonne ? That should give a rough idea if its mobile enough to run with MBTs. M-2 Bradley stands at 28 Tonnes with 600 HP engine and runs around with 1500 Hp powered Abrams. Viper has 360 Hp engine and is expected to run with 1000-1200 Hp powered MBTs. and check the difference in weight when a cage armor is added.
> 
> Training an infantry soldier to operate a turret could be the first major concern. Infantry is expected to be jack of all trades. Armor boys fire a main gun, ack ack and in some cases ATGM. Infantry crew will need to fire main gun, ATGM and control ack ack. Commander will also need to give orders for mount/dismount.
> 
> As for direct contact with enemy pertaining to armor and protection concern of IFV, it will be useful to see how Bradley, warrior, Marder and Indian BMP-2 are deployed by their respective armies along with MBTs.


Viper is based on Saad APC, which is 14.5 tons with a 354 HP engine. That’s 24.4 Hp/Tonne, if viper uses the same engine, given the increased armor and the RCWS, it’s P/W is likely less than or comparable to Bradley (20-22 Hp/Tonne depending on variant) and that’s with likely significantly less protection (Viper is STANAG level IV? And Bradley is STANAG level VI) and that’s before Add-on armor increases the weight.

PAs MBTs (apart from VT-4) are generally not more mobile than an abrams, because while on paper the 1200HP of the Al-Khalid gives it great P/W, the significantly lower torque of its engine also means that it’s Mobility is not ideal compared to other modern MBTs Like the VT-4. (it’s saved by its lower weight and good transmission,it’s still more mobile than an Indian T90S, so it’s perfectly adequate for our use)
The M1A1 Abrams has a 0-32KPH time of about 7 seconds (7.2 for the M1A2, probably more for the latest SEPV3). For Al-Khalid it’s about 10 Seconds. They both have similar top speeds, though the abrams is electronically limited (around 70KPH).

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Signalian

iLION12345_1 said:


> Viper is based on Saad APC, which is 14.5 tons with a 354 HP engine. That’s 24.4 Hp/Tonne, if viper uses the same engine, given the increased armor and the RCWS, it’s P/W is likely less than or comparable to Bradley (20-22 Hp/Tonne depending on variant) and that’s with likely significantly less protection (Viper is STANAG level IV? And Bradley is STANAG level VI) and that’s before Add-on armor increases the weight.
> 
> PAs MBTs (apart from VT-4) are generally not more mobile than an abrams, because while on paper the 1200HP of the Al-Khalid gives it great P/W, the significantly lower torque of its engine also means that it’s Mobility is not ideal compared to other modern MBTs Like the VT-4. (it’s saved by its lower weight and good transmission,it’s still more mobile than an Indian T90S, so it’s perfectly adequate for our use)
> The M1A1 Abrams has a 0-32KPH time of about 7 seconds (7.2 for the M1A2, maybe slightly more for the latest SEPV3). For Al-Khalid it’s about 10 Seconds. They both have similar top speeds, though the abrams is electronically limited (around 70KPH).


Based on these calculations, is Viper's mobility adequate for PA needs?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Signalian said:


> Based on these calculations, is Viper's mobility adequate for PA needs?


I’m not sure if anyone has the exact weight for the viper because that may change the calculations, currently I’ve assumed a weight of 16.5 tons.

But going with that educated guess, I would say it should have no trouble keeping up with older tanks like the Al-Zarrar, the type 85UGs and the T80UDs. It will probably also be fine following Al-Khalids, but will likely not be able to keep up with VT-4Ps, another thing to take into consideration would be the future plans for the Al-Khalid, which do include a more powerful engine, maybe the same one from VT-4 or a Ukrainian option.

However that also reminds me that there was a more powerful engine option available for the Saad APC itself, 405 HP I believe, I wonder if that has been or will be considered for the Viper, it could boost the mobility. But that still does leave some questions about it’s protection, if the base protection is STANAG level 4, then it should be able to stop 14.5MM rounds, and with Cage armor or ERA, maybe RPGs as well, how that would effect mobility also remains to be seen. I also remember you asking about how the aluminum armor of M113 (flammable) would react to getting hit given the M113s being battle taxis aren’t supposed to get hit, but this thing will. I assume the add-on armor isn’t aluminum at all, it is very likely steel, and I recall that Pakistani M113s/Talhas/Saads have their fuel tanks moved to reduce the risk of fire as well. The engines found in the Newer M113 models are also far less likely to catch fire than the original M113s. 

Keep in mind the armor, weight etc are my speculations but are hopefully close to the realistic values, I’d also wait and see what the new version of the viper is like, considering that it does seem to be somewhat modified from the original. PA may have asked for entirely different specifications.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Reddawn

iLION12345_1 said:


> The lack of IED protection is a minor issue in the grand scheme of issues with the Viper design.
> To me the usefulness of the viper depends on just how cheap it actually is. Even if it’s half the cost of a modern-IFV (by which I mean a modern design, the sensors and weaponry on the viper prototype were already decent, but I highly doubt it has good mobility or good protection compared to modern Designs and it’s silhouette/design is already old given it’s just a larger and heavier M113) then it’s not worth purchasing given its just not future proof. How many years can it severe before PA just needs to replace it again? Is a large purchase of these vehicles cost effective? Will it become another bad project like The dragoon APC or the armed AS550 helicopters?



What's wrong with the armed AS550?

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Signalian

iLION12345_1 said:


> I’m not sure if anyone has the exact weight for the viper because that may change the calculations, currently I’ve assumed a weight of 16.5 tons.
> 
> But going with that educated guess, I would say it should have no trouble keeping up with older tanks like the Al-Zarrar, the type 85UGs and the T80UDs. It will probably also be fine following Al-Khalids, but will likely not be able to keep up with VT-4Ps, another thing to take into consideration would be the future plans for the Al-Khalid, which do include a more powerful engine, maybe the same one from VT-4 or a Ukrainian option.
> 
> However that also reminds me that there was a more powerful engine option available for the Saad APC itself, 405 HP I believe, I wonder if that has been or will be considered for the Viper, it could boost the mobility. But that still does leave some questions about it’s protection, if the base protection is STANAG level 4, then it should be able to stop 14.5MM rounds, and with Cage armor or ERA, maybe RPGs as well, how that would effect mobility also remains to be seen. I also remember you asking about how the aluminum armor of M113 (flammable) would react to getting hit given the M113s being battle taxis aren’t supposed to get hit, but this thing will. I assume the add-on armor isn’t aluminum at all, it is very likely steel, and I recall that Pakistani M113s/Talhas/Saads have their fuel tanks moved to reduce the risk of fire as well. The engines found in the Newer M113 models are also far less likely to catch fire than the original M113s.
> 
> Keep in mind the armor, weight etc are my speculations but are hopefully close to the realistic values, I’d also wait and see what the new version of the viper is like, considering that it does seem to be somewhat modified from the original. PA may have asked for entirely different specifications.


Going by our discussion, Saad IFV seems to offer itself as a reasonable option for PA. 
VT-4 is deployed up in Punjab plains, its exact potential of mobility cannot be ascertained in the ambush-prone, mined, obstacle-laden area where its going to operate, the Sialkot-Narowal-Shakargarh axis and beyond into India. Perhaps, an Indian Army RAPID deployment north of this area with T-90s warranted a modern MBT where as AZ is still a potent tank.

We still have to look into how western Armies and Indian Army deploy their IFVs with MBTs.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Signalian

Giving an idea of MBTs operating with IFVs for direct contact with enemy. Here are Abrams with Bradley.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

One reason why PA maybe reluctant to immediately shift to IFVs from APCs is because both are designed to perform closely related yet different tasks. Different capabilities means different tactics (especially at coy and Bn lvl). This would mean complete changing/rewriting of training manuals and guides etc. As a result officers and JCOs would have to be re-trained accordingly by instructors who themselves have to to be trained first, most probably by foreign courses, cadres. However these type of changes are common as well as necessary for modern armies.
The real challenge lies at the operational lvl understanding and employment of MIBs equipped with IFVs since the will be completely different from APC equipped ones. Both have different capabilities and hence will have different objectives. This would result in re-defining the operational objs of MIBs as well as the formations including these MIBs. This would result in alteration of our operational doctrine to some limited extent. Thus we will see a strenuous period of instructing, war gaming, live exercises, reviewing these exercises and deducing results from them. The experiences and results gained from these exercises will then be used to further develop our manuals, change the operational employment of MIBs and their formations. These steps become even more painstaking for a budget conscious and a highly professional force.
Fortunately PA(unlike any other institution)has learned alot from its past experiences as well as from its neighbour and buying eqpt just with spec related trails and not considering/understanding their employment at all lvls only leads the shiny stuff to disaster as happened to our Pattons.
Thus we may(or it may not be publicised initially) first see PA getting a small batch of IFVs for experimenting and once PA feels confident of absorbing the eqpt it will go for them in large numbers. This is why me often not see new eqpt for the first time in parades but instead in live exercises once they are fully operational (as was the case with AD wpns, bridge layers and even VT4). However IFV, like pre-mentioned eqpt is not just a weapon system but a completely new concept of undertaking mech ops for us and considering the quantity in which its going to inducted in PA it will surely have a profound impact from Tactical to operational lvl. Thus its induction would effect our doctrine and Changing/modifying/improving a doctrine takes atleast a decade of it is to saved from being squandered by haste.
Fortunately our neighbour hasn't taken this important lesson and as Panzerkiel says "they want to do too much in too little time". Hence we see the confusion, lack of preparedness amd logistical issues on their side. On the other hand PA wants to be as cost effective and efficient as possible. Thus it meets up its deficiencies by thought process and hence we came up the ideas of LAT and HATs
In short it is neither the shortage of funds nor old school mindset of generals but infact a question of evolving our whole doctrine.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Signalian

Desert Fox 1 said:


> One reason why PA maybe reluctant to immediately shift to IFVs from APCs is because both are designed to perform closely related yet different tasks. Different capabilities means different tactics (especially at coy and Bn lvl). This would mean complete changing/rewriting of training manuals and guides etc. As a result officers and JCOs would have to be re-trained accordingly by instructors who themselves have to to be trained first, most probably by foreign courses, cadres. However these type of changes are common as well as necessary for modern armies.
> The real challenge lies at the operational lvl understanding and employment of MIBs equipped with IFVs since the will be completely different from APC equipped ones. Both have different capabilities and hence will have different objectives. This would result in re-defining the operational objs of MIBs as well as the formations including these MIBs. This would result in alteration of our operational doctrine to some limited extent. Thus we will see a strenuous period of instructing, war gaming, live exercises, reviewing these exercises and deducing results from them. The experiences and results gained from these exercises will then be used to further develop our manuals, change the operational employment of MIBs and their formations. These steps become even more painstaking for a budget conscious and a highly professional force.
> Fortunately PA(unlike any other institution)has learned alot from its past experiences as well as from its neighbour and buying eqpt just with spec related trails and not considering/understanding their employment at all lvls only leads the shiny stuff to disaster as happened to our Pattons.
> Thus we may(or it may not be publicised initially) first see PA getting a small batch of IFVs for experimenting and once PA feels confident of absorbing the eqpt it will go for them in large numbers. This is why me often not see new eqpt for the first time in parades but instead in live exercises once they are fully operational (as was the case with AD wpns, bridge layers and even VT4). However IFV, like pre-mentioned eqpt is not just a weapon system but a completely new concept of undertaking mech ops for us and considering the quantity in which its going to inducted in PA it will surely have a profound impact from Tactical to operational lvl. Thus its induction would effect our doctrine and Changing/modifying/improving a doctrine takes atleast a decade of it is to saved from being squandered by haste.
> Fortunately our neighbour hasn't taken this important lesson and as Panzerkiel says "they want to do too much in too little time". Hence we see the confusion, lack of preparedness amd logistical issues on their side. On the other hand PA wants to be as cost effective and efficient as possible. Thus it meets up its deficiencies by thought process and hence we came up the ideas of LAT and HATs
> In short it is neither the shortage of funds nor old school mindset of generals but infact a question of evolving our whole doctrine.


The amount of studies and exams conducted in Military are the most numerous in the country. All the other Govt and civilian sectors don't come close except the research sector. PA is lacking behind in IFV-concept when all the major modern armies are looked at considering the top 15 or top 20 armies of the world. Some 20 years ago PA had limited concept of COIN and AT Ops. SSG had to be sent everywhere for specialized combat, now LCB, Rangers and FC are trained to handle incidents. Infantry battalions of Army have been trained in COIN war too. Similarly, war and combat are evolving in different doctrines. Equipping army with IFVs is another one of them. Training and deployment will come next. The average infantry NCO has to go through a new curriculum in institutions to become more effective in leading a section or squad in IFV. The difference between a sepoy and a commander is that leader adapts according to changing and demanding circumstances, where as a sepoy just takes orders even if it costs him his life. Army is late in introducing IFV to its commanders and soldiers. It could be due to many reasons, the COIN war took priority in past decades and M-113s were seen with different up-armored/protective methods in the deployment zones. IFV is just one the concepts which need to be introduced. In future PA should make micro UAVs common for infantry recon/surveillance, more reliance on ground robots for infantry and stop deploying infantry as cannon fodder rather protect infantry by increasing support from long range and precise weapons for infantry soldiers to avoid direct combat and putting soldiers in harms way unless unavoidable. 
The R&S battalions came up with plan to hold ground through "mobility and firepower" since PA lacked the numbers, this is why an infantry battalion of 800 troops could be divided into two R&S battalions of 400+ troops and handed over HMGs and RR guns armed on 4x4 jeeps thus holding more ground than a regular infantry battalion. If PA had the numbers to face IA, maybe R&S battalion concept might never have come up.

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
3 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Cage armour on turrets of Russian tanks as anti-UCAV measure.





Despite the imprudent assertions that tanks have become redundant; tanks will hit back with improved turret protection especially from top attack munitions. 
Moreover Active protection systems and ECM may turn the tables altogether.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Cage armour on turrets of Russian tanks as anti-UCAV measure.
> View attachment 797358
> 
> 
> Despite the imprudent assertions that tanks have become redundant; tanks will hit back with improved turret protection especially from top attack munitions.
> Moreover Active protection systems and ECM may turn the tables altogether.


I believe this was added as Top-Attack ATGM protection more than UCAV protection. I can also tell you it’s hilarious and will not stop either of those, the most it will do is obstruct vision and make it harder for anyone to get in and out of the tank, and also increase the tanks footprint, making it easier to spot. It really confuses me why this was done, it really doesn’t look like it will help much.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TsAr

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Cage armour on turrets of Russian tanks as anti-UCAV measure.
> View attachment 797358
> 
> 
> Despite the imprudent assertions that tanks have become redundant; tanks will hit back with improved turret protection especially from top attack munitions.
> Moreover Active protection systems and ECM may turn the tables altogether.


What a stupid idea, looks more like a jangla for Kabootars to land...

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

iLION12345_1 said:


> I believe this was added as Top-Attack ATGM protection more than UCAV protection. I can also tell you it’s hilarious and will not stop either of those, the most it will do is obstruct vision and make it harder for anyone to get in and out of the tank, and also increase the tanks footprint, making it easier to spot. It really confuses me why this was done, it really doesn’t look like it will help much.


Though it may not be able to completely stop a Javelin used by Ukrainian forces it can considerably reduce its kill probability.
Ukrainians have also been using quadcopters woth rpg-3 warheads, that's why


iLION12345_1 said:


> It really confuses me why this was done,

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1465273074887139332M113 with a dhsk mount by the way so its probably PA

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

farooqbhai007 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1465273074887139332M113 with a dhsk mount by the way so its probably PA


Remember the news when COAS visited Ukraine and it was said that PA was interested in atgms.
Most probably a Skif↓













LUCH successfully demos guided missile weapon on M113 platform


The Kyiv-based state design bureau LUCH has successfully tested its guided missile from M113 tracked armored personnel carrier, as part of the weapon’s demonstrations for a potential unnamed Asian customer. The demo took place on the army’s proving ground in South Asia. According to the...




defence-blog.com

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## iLION12345_1

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Though it may not be able to completely stop a Javelin used by Ukrainian forces it can considerably reduce its kill probability.
> Ukrainians have also been using quadcopters woth rpg-3 warheads, that's why


It will still mission kill the tank be destroying most of the optics and the sensors on the roof. Maybe the crew will survive, you have to remember that the armor up top isn’t that thick anyways.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Remember the news when COAS visited Ukraine and it was said that PA was interested in atgms.
> Most probably a Skif↓
> View attachment 797571
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LUCH successfully demos guided missile weapon on M113 platform
> 
> 
> The Kyiv-based state design bureau LUCH has successfully tested its guided missile from M113 tracked armored personnel carrier, as part of the weapon’s demonstrations for a potential unnamed Asian customer. The demo took place on the army’s proving ground in South Asia. According to the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> defence-blog.com



Why is Pakistan not buying more Kornets ?


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> Why is Pakistan not buying more Kornets ?


Who knows we may have bought more.
Plus it is an expensive system.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TsAr

iLION12345_1 said:


> It will still mission kill the tank be destroying most of the optics and the sensors on the roof. Maybe the crew will survive, you have to remember that the armor up top isn’t that thick anyways.


I doubt you can even call that Jangla an armor

Reactions: Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Inception-06

TsAr said:


> I doubt you can even call that Jangla an armor



Don’t underestimate this improvements, Syrian Tank battles have shown that such field improvements can help in some situations. If I would be the commander of the Tank , I would do everything for more protection, even if it’s not 100 percent tested and proven, but it’s a moral booster for the crew.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
2


----------



## TsAr

Inception-06 said:


> Don’t underestimate this improvements, Syrian Tank battles have shown that such field improvements can help in some situations.


I doubt this will work in Indi/Pak war. I might take 1 hit for atgm but I am sure the second one would be lethal.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Akh1112

TsAr said:


> I doubt this will work in Indi/Pak war. I might take 1 hit for atgm but I am sure the second one would be lethal.




even one hit is a mission kill, its pointless, it MAY save the crew, whether it does or not i question.


IIRC the real reason for these was to prevent LM attacks, somewthing like a harpy, with a relatively small warhead.

either way, still a mission kill, tank will be inoperable, MAYBE they can run outta the field, aside from that, i question the effectiveness


----------



## Primus

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Who knows we may have bought more.
> Plus it is an expensive system.


Just wondering, when do the army expenditure books go public? Cant remember what they were called, but i remember seeing a few on here.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Huffal said:


> Just wondering, when do the army expenditure books go public? Cant remember what they were called, but i remember seeing a few on here.


You mean the trade registers, they’re always public, but not everything goes on them. We never saw the HQ-9P or any related systems on them, but we saw the VT-4s and the Mi35s.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Phantom.

iLION12345_1 said:


> You mean the trade registers, they’re always public, but not everything goes on them. We never saw the HQ-9P or any related systems on them, but we saw the VT-4s and the Mi35s.


I think he is asking for MODP year Books.Last book released was for year 2017-2018 in 2019.


Desert Fox 1 said:


> Though it may not be able to completely stop a Javelin used by Ukrainian forces it can considerably reduce its kill probability.
> Ukrainians have also been using quadcopters woth rpg-3 warheads, that's why


Yeah it may end up reducing the kill probability but it will still mission kill the tank.Javelin uses a tandem heat warhead with a precursor charge and a main charge.T72B3 has a roof armor of about 45mm without ERA.The precursor warhead will most likely detonate after hitting the Slat armor which will also cause the main warhead to also detonate the shaped HE charge of the javelin will most likely penetrate the armor but the damage would be alot less then a direct hit and it would also depend on the angle at which the javelin hits the slat armor.I also think its more of a UCAV protection then to protect against top attack ATGMs.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Huffal said:


> Just wondering, when do the army expenditure books go public? Cant remember what they were called, but i remember seeing a few on here.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

PanzerKiel said:


> First time I'm hearing about Wall E. Never heard of it before.


You should watch that movie too, "Sonic the hedgehog"  

Lots of drone action  

Command version like Sakb should be able to control drones for assisting dismounted infantry in recon and fire support as well as IFVs on the move. I would say one Drone per APC in MIB but that's asking too much.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Primus

Signalian said:


> You should watch that movie too, "Sonic the hedgehog"
> 
> Lots of drone action


Sonic the hedgehog 2 is coming out. Perhaps @PanzerKiel can see the new drone action in cinemas this time round

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Signalian

Huffal said:


> Sonic the hedgehog 2 is coming out. Perhaps @PanzerKiel can see the new drone action in cinemas this time round


After Turkey's UCAVs have shown what a drone can do in the battlefield, the infantry units should also be equipped with smaller ones to conduct recon, surveillance, and especially observation for snipers. After that comes the combat part, where they stand shoulder to shoulder with the infantry soldier in the battlefield to take on the enemy.

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
2


----------



## farooqbhai007

Signalian said:


> After Turkey's UCAVs have shown what a drone can do in the battlefield, the infantry units should also be equipped with smaller ones to conduct recon, surveillance, and especially observation for snipers. After that comes the combat part, where they stand shoulder to shoulder with the infantry soldier in the battlefield to take on the enemy.


the recent chanoki exercise had a few seconds of a IR cam footage , based on the angle and altitude from which this was taken i presume it was done through a quad copter / hexa copter fitted with IR cam or a AH-1Fs camera

Reactions: Like Like:
8 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

[


Desert Fox 1 said:


> Cage armour on turrets of Russian tanks as anti-UCAV measure.
> View attachment 797358
> 
> 
> Despite the imprudent assertions that tanks have become redundant; tanks will hit back with improved turret protection especially from top attack munitions.
> Moreover Active protection systems and ECM may turn the tables altogether.




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1473863221631242242

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Ghost 125

javelin is jack the ripper for tanks

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Pandora

Phantom. said:


> I think he is asking for MODP year Books.Last book released was for year 2017-2018 in 2019.
> 
> Yeah it may end up reducing the kill probability but it will still mission kill the tank.Javelin uses a tandem heat warhead with a precursor charge and a main charge.T72B3 has a roof armor of about 45mm without ERA.The precursor warhead will most likely detonate after hitting the Slat armor which will also cause the main warhead to also detonate the shaped HE charge of the javelin will most likely penetrate the armor but the damage would be alot less then a direct hit and it would also depend on the angle at which the javelin hits the slat armor.I also think its more of a UCAV protection then to protect against top attack ATGMs.



MODP 2 year report its already there but not much going on.
http://www.modp.gov.pk/SiteImage/Publication/Two Years Performance Report-MoDP.pdf

Also for 2018-21 report
http://www.modp.gov.pk/SiteImage/Publication/Year Book 2018-21 Copy.pdf


----------



## Maarkhoor

Ghost 125 said:


> javelin is jack the ripper for tanks


We should acquire









OMTAS - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Super Falcon

Today machnised division needs support
we lack proper air defence umbrella for troops and tanks FM 90 is not alone enough we need koral type EW suits with them and pantsir is must to take on any cruise missiles and laser weapons to take on drones etc with soft kills


----------



## Rafi

Super Falcon said:


> Today machnised division needs support
> we lack proper air defence umbrella for troops and tanks FM 90 is not alone enough we need koral type EW suits with them and pantsir is must to take on any cruise missiles and laser weapons to take on drones etc with soft kills



Hahahahahahahahaahaha 😄

Reactions: Haha Haha:
4


----------



## Primus

Super Falcon said:


> Today machnised division needs support
> we lack proper air defence umbrella for troops and tanks FM 90 is not alone enough we need koral type EW suits with them and pantsir is must to take on any cruise missiles and laser weapons to take on drones etc with soft kills


LY80, FM90 and HQ9P form the umbrella you are referring to. Not just the fm90

Reactions: Wow Wow:
2


----------



## Super Falcon

Bro


Huffal said:


> LY80, FM90 and HQ9P form the umbrella you are referring to. Not just the fm90


Bro these ly 80 and hq90 wont be moving with machnised dvision and crossing border if needed theses ly 80 and hq 9 will defend pak air space u cant use big ticket missile to shoot small drones which create havoc in armenia war you need ecnomoica weapon for soft kills and pantsir woth gatling gun is a cheap option

Ly 80 and hq 9 will se off IAF threat to our ports missile positions and strategic instilations

We cant pit to much burden on these high tickets sam

This is why israel invented scorpio air defenxe to keep ecnomically and kill enemy missiles with just push of electricity
Machnised division moving all the time so sam coverage may very dedicated air defence neded

Reactions: Love Love:
3


----------



## Primus

Super Falcon said:


> Bro
> Bro these ly 80 and hq90 wont be moving with machnised dvision and crossing border if needed theses ly 80 and hq 9 will defend pak air space u cant use big ticket missile to shoot small drones which create havoc in armenia war you need ecnomoica weapon for soft kills and pantsir woth gatling gun is a cheap option
> 
> Ly 80 and hq 9 will se off IAF threat to our ports missile positions and strategic instilations
> 
> We cant pit to much burden on these high tickets sam
> 
> This is why israel invented scorpio air defenxe to keep ecnomically and kill enemy missiles with just push of electricity
> Machnised division moving all the time so sam coverage may very dedicated air defence neded


Pantsir is off the table, probably good thing as well seeing its performance against UCAVs (albeit the countries operating them arent exactly known for their military power) 

FK 2000 seems like the alternative.

Reactions: Wow Wow:
3


----------



## Signalian

@PanzerKiel

Is this expected from our M-113 also when facing IA armor ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
10


----------



## Ghost 125

Signalian said:


> @PanzerKiel
> 
> Is this expected from our M-113 also when facing IA armor ?


hilarious, i dont know how this ACV driver came face to face with a tank but he trolled him pretty good.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
5


----------



## Raja Porus

Signalian said:


> @PanzerKiel
> 
> Is this expected from our M-113 also when facing IA armor ?


Pakistani tankers and crewmen after becoming high on "NEW Mardan" eff-sola naswar


----------



## Raja Porus

In 1971, the 6th armoured division was commanded by Major general Iskandar ul Karim a Bengali!
However Major General Bashir Ahmad was made the commander ARN to keep an eye on him.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> In 1971, the 6th armoured division was commanded by Major general Iskandar ul Karim a Bengali!
> However Major General Bashir Ahmad was made the commander ARN to keep an eye on him.


Whats the point of discussing this issue in this particular thread?

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> Whats the point of discussing this issue in this particular thread?


It is about 6th armd div. Moreover there isn't any related thread.
I was surprised that despite all the prejudices such an important formation was under command of a Bengali officer. 
Also what was the any need of a separate commander ARN when I corps was there? Was it a lesson learnt from khem Kharan?
I suppose with raising of Gujranwala corps this post would've been abolished.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> It is about 6th armd div. Moreover there isn't any related thread.
> I was surprised that despite all the prejudices such an important formation was under command of a Bengali officer.
> Also what was the any need of a separate commander ARN when I corps was there? Was it a lesson learnt from khem Kharan?
> I suppose with raising of Gujranwala corps this post would've been abolished.


That officer was as much qualified for this post as any other officer.

At that time, ARN and ARS were adhoc formations not under command of any Corps. Therefore, one of the GOCs used to act as the overall commander as well (lesson NOT learnt from Khem Karan). It was very later, somewhere in the 80s, that 1 and 2 Corps were designated as proper Strike Corps and their ORBAT were updated correspondingly.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> That officer was as much qualified for this post as any other officer


Of course but what I meant was that usually in those days Bengalis weren't given command of such formations.


PanzerKiel said:


> Therefore, one of the GOCs used to act as the overall commander as well (lesson NOT learnt from Khem Karan).


But in this case the Commander ARN was not a GOC. That's why implied so.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> But in this case the Commander ARN was not a GOC. That's why implied so.


Gen Bashir was commander of ARN. He was also GOC of 17 Division which was part of ARN.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

PanzerKiel said:


> Gen Bashir was commander of ARN. He was also GOC of 17 Division which was part of ARN.


ARN shoro yeh batao is dafa parade mey 
PA ka kya kuch naya aa raha hai , Sheikh Rasheed confirmed a few minutes earlier PAF J10C has beeb inducted and will be taking part in parade

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> Gen Bashir was commander of ARN. He was also GOC of 17 Division which was part of ARN.


I've read that R.D Shamim was its GOC


farooqbhai007 said:


> ARN shoro yeh batao is dafa parade mey
> PA ka kya kuch naya aa raha hai , Sheikh Rasheed confirmed a few minutes earlier PAF J10C has beeb inducted and will be taking part in parade


80 days..
Btw I hope this time it wouldn't be a cut down version with only three tanks of each type and not even included AZs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

farooqbhai007 said:


> PAF J10C


Will be taking part as of now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

PanzerKiel said:


> Will be taking part as of now.


Yes according to Sheikh Rasheed 25 J10Cs will fly together in the parade.


Desert Fox 1 said:


> I've read that R.D Shamim was its GOC
> 
> 80 days..
> Btw I hope this time it wouldn't be a cut down version with only three tanks of each type and not even included AZs.


Shiekh Rasheed was also saying this years parade is going to be special due to a large number of VIPs arriving from Abroad for the parade and so he was saying about moving the parade onto a later date in March since 23rd march will be for celebration and there won't be that much security measures applicable for security.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Reichmarshal

farooqbhai007 said:


> ARN shoro



Wt a huge give away

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Signalian

PanzerKiel said:


> Will be taking part as of now.


More interested to see Pak made equipment such as HIT's 155mm gun system or Viper IFV or AK-II. Joint ventures give hope, however a fully exported version of equipment like J-10, F-16, M-109 etc shows buying power, not a stint from national talent pool really. It's like you throw a party and then display the expensive items you bought for lounge and drawing room. The only stuff made by your household is food, unless you ordered uber eats or food panda. 

Its like what majority in engineering do. They run, maintain, trouble shoot and repair the equipment and feel proud of that job. They never design it or test it during acceptance phase or can further improve it by programming/hardwiring more features in it. 

Fly the J-10, yaaaaay, our pilots can fly the aircrafts, we drive them so we own them, that is something right ? We never could design and then produce them.

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
3 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## kursed

@PanzerKiel
I have a question for you, I am not sure if this is the right thread but but please do bear with me.

Galwan proved the usefulness of anti personnel and armor suicide drone systems, considering how Chinese utilized Sula 89 in Depsang to counter and interdict larger Indian infantry forces.

How would you explain PA’s continued lack of interest in loitering munition?

Specially now that India (having already deployed Harpy and another system for about a decade) has just issued a RFP for a anti armor and anti personnel reprogrammable, loitering munition with a range of 60km. This, alongside SpikeER will be a headache for Pakistani armor.

Even Iranians with all the sanctions on them continue to produce more of such systems and developing doctrines around them.

From the looks of it, PA does not exactly seem interested in these. Why?

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

kursed said:


> @PanzerKiel
> I have a question for you, I am not sure if this is the right thread but but please do bear with me.
> 
> Galwan proved the usefulness of anti personnel and armor suicide drone systems, considering how Chinese utilized Sula 89 in Depsang to counter and interdict larger Indian infantry forces.
> 
> How would you explain PA’s continued lack of interest in loitering munition?
> 
> Specially now that India (having already deployed Harpy and another system for about a decade) has just issued a RFP for a anti armor and anti personnel reprogrammable, loitering munition with a range of 60km. This, alongside SpikeER will be a headache for Pakistani armor.
> 
> Even Iranians with all the sanctions on them continue to produce more of such systems and developing doctrines around them.
> 
> From the looks of it, PA does not exactly seem interested in these. Why?


No probs dear, i can bear you till you like....

PA's continued lack of interest in loitering munition.....well please dont take it this way.....this is exactly what everyone thinks before each new procurement of Pakistan Armed Forces....and then suddenly it pops up that, in form of a parade or a Balakot.... that Pakistan Armed Forces were always ahead of their enemies......so please, there is no lack of interest....

We know that Indians have got kamikaze drones of a specific brand from Israel, an older version of which was used to devastating effect by Azeri guys......we know that.

It is exactly like you said.....FROM THE LOOKS OF IT, PA DOES NOT SEEM INTERESTED....thats exactly the point....we also like the art of war as Sun Tzu would have liked.

Reactions: Like Like:
9 | Love Love:
4


----------



## kursed

PanzerKiel said:


> No probs dear, i can bear you till you like....
> 
> PA's continued lack of interest in loitering munition.....well please dont take it this way.....this is exactly what everyone thinks before each new procurement of Pakistan Armed Forces....and then suddenly it pops up that, in form of a parade or a Balakot.... that Pakistan Armed Forces were always ahead of their enemies......so please, there is no lack of interest....
> 
> We know that Indians have got kamikaze drones of a specific brand from Israel, an older version of which was used to devastating effect by Azeri guys......we know that.
> 
> It is exactly like you said.....FROM THE LOOKS OF IT, PA DOES NOT SEEM INTERESTED....thats exactly the point....we also like the art of war as Sun Tzu would have liked.


I do hope they’re taking this seriously because the other side is now reacting to the Chinese moves in Galwan and we’d sooner than later see them induct cheap, locally made loitering munition.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## bhola record

PanzerKiel said:


> No probs dear, i can bear you till you like....


sir dont mind me saying you are a very romantic.

Reactions: Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
4


----------



## PanzerKiel

bhola record said:


> sir dont mind me saying you are a very romantic.


Bhai, aap logon se mohabbat hi itni hai.....

Reactions: Haha Haha:
3


----------



## bhola record

PanzerKiel said:


> Bhai, aap logon se mohabbat hi itni hai.....


arey sir, the feeling is mutual. You teach us so much.

Reactions: Love Love:
3


----------



## PanzerKiel

bhola record said:


> arey sir, the feeling is mutual. You teach us so much.


I always feel honored......chalain hum bhi kisi qaabil hain, koi hum jaison se bhi seekh sakta hai.

Reactions: Love Love:
3


----------



## Inception-06

kursed said:


> I do hope they’re taking this seriously because the other side is now reacting to the Chinese moves in Galwan and we’d sooner than later see them induct cheap, locally made loitering munition.



The prophesied battles with India of which some will be fought defensively in Pakistan, means a immense mass of TNT barrage will rain over the Pakistani ground forces be it from Indian Artillery rounds, rockets , loitering munitions etc.

And countering that with a equal equipment in every class is not necessary neither possible, nor will save it pakistani soldiers and their equipment. Also Pakistans current economic conditions wouldn’t allow a arms race, the future economy outlook is eventually not more promising.

There are war proven defensive measures which have been implemented in human war history since the induction of the industrial made artillery, which never have been calculated or less spoken in this forum from the war historical and post wars perspective, specifically the strategy and tactics regarding in the art of human and machine made bunkers and the natural given buildings such as mountains, hills, dry river beds, marsh lands etc. In my opinion the reason for less realistic discussion of this kind are underestimating India’s war capacity. This underestimating is hindering to see things from the realistic battle field perspective, which can only be done be personally war experience or studying human war history.
Seeing the victory only in countering equipment and systems with other equipment systems, while making comparisons by naming the technical data: ”for example this Indian artillery gun has a longer range, then ours, so we need a bigger artillery gun”, while forgetting that, short range artillery guns can take out the enemy if it is positioned under the enemies nose, as it has been done war proven successfully in Kargil 1999. Pakistan Army had fantastically (fantasy- idea - art in war - the art of war) disassembled artillery guns and transported them by Mulls and posted near river sides in the Batalik and Tololing sector covered by mountains, and the cold river water, made the world war 2 era guns of Pakistan equal to the indian deployment in the first phase of the war.

Reactions: Love Love:
4


----------



## Inception-06

Then there are different phases of a battle, in the first phase the highest technically and electronic and most qualified weapons are used from both sides, that is the phase of artillery bombardments and air raids. In this chaotic situation, not much of the electricity and electrical equipment or Hightech equipment as it is now in the Orbat lists will be functional as it was planned. For example a Alkhalid Tank Unit, was attacked by Indian loitering munitions, 50% of the unit was destroyed and 20% of the tank unit is still in excellent condition as before while the rest 30% is still functional, means the optronics and thermal visions of the Tanks are destroyed through the shrapnel and impact of the loitering munitions but the weapons of the Tank and the crew survived, so the machine will be now good as the crew’s are trained, understand and learned their Tank-machines. So it will be with most of the equipment, the expensive equipment will only be functional and useful when your enemy has not a functional Army, for example US-Iraq wars. In Pakistan and Indian war scenarios both Army’s will face heavy resistance when they try to capture and hold territory.

The India’s can buy what ever they want, if India really want to capture and hold Pakistani territory, then it can only be done by conquering the deep Pakistani defence strongholds and defence lines. Coming back to loitering munitions. If it’s known by Pakistani ground formations that air cover will not be provided and there is a high danger of loosing men and material through Indian air operations, then it’s the responsibility of the Generals and field commanders to prepare fighting positions such as firing trenches and holes for Tanks and artillery guns, underground ammunition lines near the expected battle field, reserve communication lines which are independent from electronic, field hospitals build in tunnels, analysing and study the natural terrain which can be used as protection in future war. If the positions in peace time are prepared then they can be covered and camouflaged by planting trees and green plants, if it’s in the deserts then it’s sand. I doubt that the Pakistani military has implemented such strategy of defence lines as I described above, peace time Tank garages, Military bases and bushes on Tanks can’t probably protect men and material from Indian bombardments. The mission objective in the defensive strategy is to save equipment and survive men till the opportunity arrives to counter attacks.


So at the edge of the war or peak, it comes down to facts, motivation of the soldiers, functional of mechanical parts of the equipment, supplies of food and ammunition. This are some factors which will decide the victory or defeat. We have seen that perfectly in the Kargil war and the recent global civil wars. For a defensive war Pakistan is very well prepared. For large scale Offensives not !

For those who want my references and sources here they are:

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
4


----------



## kursed

Inception-06 said:


> Then there are different phases of a battle, in the first the highest technically and electronic and most qualified weapons are used from both sides, that is the phase of artillery bombardments and air raids. In this chaotic situation, not much of the electricity and electrical equipment or Hightech equipment as it is now in the Orbat lists will be functional as it was planned. For example a Alkhalid Tank Unit, was attacked by Indian loitering munitions, 50% of the unit was destroyed and 20% of the tank unit is still in excellent condition as before while the rest 30% is still functional, means the optronics and thermal visions of the Tanks are destroyed through the shrapnel and impact of the loitering munitions but the weapons of the Tank and the crew survived, so the machine will be now good as the crew’s are trained, understand and learned their Tank-machines. So it will be with most of the equipment, the expensive equipment will only be functional and useful when your enemy has not a functional Army, for example US-Iraq wars. In Pakistan and Indian war scenarios both Army’s will face heavy resistance when they try to capture and hold territory.
> 
> The India’s can buy what ever they want, if India really want to capture and hold Pakistani territory, then it can only be done by conquering the deep Pakistani defence strongholds and defence lines. Coming back to loitering munitions. If it’s known by Pakistani ground formations that air cover will not be provided and there is a high danger of loosing men and material through Indian air operations, then it’s the responsibility of the Generals and field commanders to prepare fighting positions such as firing trenches and holes for Tanks and artillery guns, underground ammunition lines near the expected battle field, reserve communication lines which are independent from electronic, field hospitals build in tunnels, analysing and study the natural terrain which can be used as protection in future war. If the positions in peace time are prepared then they can be covered and camouflaged by planting trees and green plants, if it’s in the deserts then it’s sand. I doubt that the Pakistani military has implemented such strategy of defence lines as I described above, peace time Tank garages, Military bases and bushes on Tanks can’t probably protect men and material from Indian bombardments. The mission objective in the defensive strategy is to save equipment and survive men till the opportunity arrives to counter attacks.
> 
> 
> So at the edge of the war or peak, it comes down to facts, motivation of the soldiers, functional of mechanical parts of the equipment, supplies of food and ammunition. This are some factors which will decide the victory or defeat. We have seen that perfectly in the Kargil war and the recent global civil wars. For a defensive war Pakistan is very well prepared. For large scale Offensives not !
> 
> For those who want my references and sources here they are:
> View attachment 804865
> View attachment 804867
> View attachment 804868


The issue with systems like Sula89 and ones now being looked at by India is exactly this, it doesn’t need to be deployed by the Air Force. But shoot and scoot 4x4 jeeps. A single jeep in case of the Chinese can launch 8-12 such birds (one scout, rest loitering munition) and get out of the area. Azeri and Iranian systems are truck-based.

Such systems can be used to interdict a large force with minimal footprint. Chinese deployed it, even before their LACMs to counter Indian armor and infantry advantage in Depsang planes. The system is intelligent enough to take out enemy hiding within mountains, simply eroding any territorial advantage Indians have had against the Chinese with a bigger deployment in place (during initial days of confrontation).

In all honesty, the pervasiveness of loitering ammo in today’s battlefields around the world can be regarded as the single most democratized access to mil tech since the good ol’ WW2 machine gun so it’s just surprising that Pak doesn’t seem to be thinking of it.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Inception-06

Question is also what’s the objec


kursed said:


> The issue with systems like Sula89 and ones now being looked at by India is exactly this, it doesn’t need to be deployed by the Air Force. But shoot and scoot 4x4 jeeps. A single jeep in case of the Chinese can launch 8-12 such birds (one scout, rest loitering munition) and get out of the area. Azeri and Iranian systems are truck-based.
> 
> Such systems can be used to interdict a large force with minimal footprint. Chinese deployed it, even before their LACMs to counter Indian armor and infantry advantage in Depsang planes. The system is intelligent enough to take out enemy hiding within mountains, simply eroding any territorial advantage Indians have had against the Chinese with a bigger deployment in place (during initial days of confrontation).
> 
> In all honesty, the pervasiveness of loitering ammo in today’s battlefields around the world can be regarded as the single most democratized access to mil tech since the good ol’ WW2 machine gun so it’s just surprising that Pak doesn’t seem to be thinking of it.



You are right, but this single system and many more and other in the Indian inventory will not be a decision factor over a battle victory or defeat. But may be my thinking is to much infantry field minted related to my own backround and you might be absolutely right. No Offenes, just interest to know about the poster and for better understanding, What’s you real job in live ?

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## kursed

Inception-06 said:


> Question is also what’s the objec
> 
> 
> You are right, but this single system and many more and other in the Indian inventory will not be a decision factor over a battle victory or defeat. But may be my thinking is to much infantry field minted related to my own backround and you might be absolutely right. No Offenes, just interest to know about the poster and for better understanding, What’s you real job in live ?


My background is in avionics and systems development.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## kursed

Inception-06 said:


> Question is also what’s the objec
> 
> 
> You are right, but this single system and many more and other in the Indian inventory will not be a decision factor over a battle victory or defeat. But may be my thinking is to much infantry field minted related to my own backround and you might be absolutely right. No Offenes, just interest to know about the poster and for better understanding, What’s you real job in live ?


And I am sure you are right that this one type of system will not be a decisive factor on the battlefield. This was just a question regarding how something that's now pretty common to see on the battlefield, even with lesser armed forces, is still missing in Pak's side.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bilal Khan (Quwa)

kursed said:


> And I am sure you are right that this one type of system will not be a decisive factor on the battlefield. This was just a question regarding how something that's now pretty common to see on the battlefield, even with lesser armed forces, is still missing in Pak's side.


I wonder if it's because loitering munitions are so democratized that we're not hearing about it? It's possible that the armed forces are seeking it, but because it isn't a big-ticket, high-profile thing, the activity is just flying through cracks. They're definitely aware, e.g., PGZ literally handed a sample to a PAF CAS back in 2017.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Dreamer.

farooqbhai007 said:


> Yes according to Sheikh Rasheed 25 J10Cs will fly together in the parade.
> 
> Shiekh Rasheed was also saying this years parade is going to be special due to a large number of VIPs arriving from Abroad for the parade and so he was saying about moving the parade onto a later date in March since 23rd march will be for celebration and there won't be that much security measures applicable for security.


Sheikh Rasheed was not saying to move the parade, he was asking the opposition to postpone their political agitation which they have announced to start on march 23rd, and that would not be good since many VIP's are coming etc. etc. However, someone on the forum has already pointed out that Imran Khan was not so considerate in 2014 and Chinese President visit had to be postponed due to his dharna.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

@iLION12345_1 ; AZ with ERA↓

        View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram


----------



## iLION12345_1

Desert Fox 1 said:


> @iLION12345_1 ; AZ with ERA↓
> 
> View this content on Instagram            View this content on Instagram


Common sight, older AZ with differently shaped turret. All of these have ERA on hull and turret. The newer ones usually don’t, but it can be equipped when needed as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PanzerKiel

No separate thread available so.... 

TOW 2 RF has been made available to all HAT units. TOW 2B RF is modified with a one-way, stealthy radio-frequency command link, which dispenses with the wire link and gives a range of 4.5km plus . The system is compatible with current launchers

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
5


----------



## HRK

PanzerKiel said:


> No separate thread available so....
> 
> TOW 2 RF has been made available to all HAT units. TOW 2B RF is modified with a one-way, stealthy radio-frequency command link, which dispenses with the wire link and gives a range of 4.5km plus . The system is compatible with current launchers


so it have dual guidance ??

I mean it have both Radio & wire guidance ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> No separate thread available so....
> 
> TOW 2 RF has been made available to all HAT units. TOW 2B RF is modified with a one-way, stealthy radio-frequency command link, which dispenses with the wire link and gives a range of 4.5km plus . The system is compatible with current launchers


RF version of TOW 2Aero.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1479455646282129412T59s with 11Div.
Moreover the LATs are on 4×4s(red flags)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## HRK

PanzerKiel said:


> which dispenses with the wire link and gives a range of 4.5km plus



@PanzerKiel this sentence is confusing me If you could give more detail If possible.

I might be wrong but TOW 2B is RF guided missile, so I am not getting the point about wire link.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

HRK said:


> @PanzerKiel this sentence is confusing me If you could give more detail If possible.
> 
> I might be wrong but TOW 2B is RF guided missile, so I am not getting the point about wire link.


TOW2 Aero has a range of 4.5 KM (greater than the 3.75km of previous version). The only difference between Aero and RF is that Aero is wire guided while RF has the same range but uses Rf.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## HRK

Desert Fox 1 said:


> TOW2 Aero has a range of 4.5 KM (greater than the 3.75km of previous version). The only difference between Aero and RF is that Aero is wire guided while RF has the same range but uses Rf.


I know but I think I am confusing about it because as far as I know TOW-2B is RF guided than there is no need to modify it unless we modified it our own RF guidance module and *IF *modification is already done then what is the connection of wire link with the modified TOW-2B 



> TOW 2B RF is modified with a one-way, stealthy radio-frequency command link, which dispenses with the wire link and gives a range of 4.5km plus

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

HRK said:


> I know but I think I am confusing about it because as far as I know TOW-2B is RF guided than there is no need to modify it unless we modified it our own RF guidance module and *IF *modification is already done then what is the connection of wire link with the modified TOW-2B


2B has a range of 3.75km while this one has 4.5km

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Zulfiqar

PanzerKiel said:


> No separate thread available so....
> 
> TOW 2 RF has been made available to all HAT units. TOW 2B RF is modified with a one-way, stealthy radio-frequency command link, which dispenses with the wire link and gives a range of 4.5km plus . The system is compatible with current launchers




I thought RF version was bought years ago.

Has new stock been bought or just reorientation of prev eqpt?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Phantom.

Zulfiqar said:


> I thought RF version was bought years ago.
> 
> Has new stock been bought or just reorientation of prev eqpt?


The RF version which PA previously bought was TOW-2A this looks like a new order because PA didnt have any TOW-2Bs we only had TOW-2A RF other variants like TOW,ITOW,TOW2 had reached their 20 year Shelf life by 2007 and were most likely phased out after TOW-2A and RF purchase in 2004 and 2007 respectively.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Inception-06



Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

Alcotan 100 


Inception-06 said:


> View attachment 807683

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Inception-06

farooqbhai007 said:


> Alcotan 100

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Inception-06

@iLION12345_1 @Desert Fox 1

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
2


----------



## farooqbhai007

Inception-06 said:


> View attachment 810520


QLZ-87 35mm Lightweight Long Range Grenade Launcher



Inception-06 said:


> @iLION12345_1 @Desert Fox 1
> View attachment 810527


And that unidentified old wheeled APC on the poster in the back

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Inception-06

farooqbhai007 said:


> QLZ-87 35mm Lightweight Long Range Grenade Launcher
> 
> 
> And that unidentified old wheeled APC on the poster in the back



Dragoon APC in the back poster, but more interesting is the front display!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## farooqbhai007

Inception-06 said:


> Dragoon APC in the back poster, but more interesting is the front display!


Dragoon APC is standing behind the posters , but the APC on the poster behind the Hilux poster is not a Dragoon but something else that has been appearing in HIT videos recently.
Also any link for the QLZ87 video.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Inception-06

farooqbhai007 said:


> Dragoon APC is standing behind the posters , but the APC on the poster behind the Hilux poster is not a Dragoon but something else that has been appearing in HIT videos recently.
> Also any link for the QLZ87 video.



Which HIT Videos ?


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> View attachment 810520





farooqbhai007 said:


> QLZ-87 35mm Lightweight Long Range Grenade Launcher








@PanzerKiel can you tell us more about this weapon and its employment

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

Inception-06 said:


> Which HIT Videos ?


Two kld ones from 2021 ,one was the HIT documentary one and another vid was of coas visit to HIT.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Inception-06

farooqbhai007 said:


> Two kld ones from 2021 ,one was the HIT documentary one and another vid was of coas visit to HIT.



OK tell me where I can see the HIT documentary, the pictures which I post are Vlogs from youtube, where private people visit legally Pakistan Army base-cantt on different bases invitations and relations!


----------



## farooqbhai007

Inception-06 said:


> OK tell me where I can see the HIT documentary, the pictures which I post are Vlogs from youtube, where private people visit legally Pakistan Army base-cantt on different bases invitations and relations!


@iLION12345_1 do you have a link to that documentary in which they announced the Towed artillery and AK2

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus



Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
2 | Haha Haha:
11


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> View attachment 810549
> 
> 
> @PanzerKiel can you tell us more about this weapon and its employment


All i can tell is that i have fired it alot during "my times". Excellent weapon, highly accurate upto 1000 m , good fragmentation effect all around.

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> All i can tell is that i have fired it alot during "my times". Excellent weapon, highly accurate upto 1000 m , good fragmentation effect all around.


Did we induct it in decent quantities or just like Alcotan?

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Inception-06

farooqbhai007 said:


> @iLION12345_1 do you have a link to that documentary in which they announced the Towed artillery and AK2

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Inception-06

VT-4 in Punjab !

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
3


----------



## iLION12345_1

farooqbhai007 said:


> @iLION12345_1 do you have a link to that documentary in which they announced the Towed artillery and AK2


Are you talking about the SamaaTV doc? Not sure if they announced both those projects in that, I recall the AK-2 being mentioned by the HIT chairman in an interview with GlobalVillageSpace. He gave a little bit of info on it there.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> VT-4 in Punjab !
> View attachment 810716


First time I'm seeing tanks being covered.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> First time I'm seeing tanks being covered.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
6


----------



## farooqbhai007

PanzerKiel said:


> View attachment 810824


13 VT4s in that train vid though , Also i had a question like how the PA started inducting the VS21(MBT2000 based) recovery vehicles with the AK-1 batch , so similar to that did the PA induct the VS21 with the VT4s as well or did they choose to induct the VT4 chassis based ARV with the new VT4 batches.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Inception-06

@iLION12345_1 Why Pakistan Army is not acquiring more Kornets and Alcotan anti Tank missiles or producing them under license, why buy so many different systems in low numbers? Training and maintenance are not getting easier without equipment standardisation right ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

Inception-06 said:


> @iLION12345_1 Why Pakistan Army is not acquiring more Kornets and Alcotan anti Tank missiles or producing them under license, why buy so many different systems in low numbers? Training and maintenance are not getting easier without equipment standardisation right ?


Why ? MODP year books were the only source of info on these and the 2017-18 year book was the last one that showed info on the kornet purchase and the second batch of Alcotan Purchase. No Year books have been released after that except a single 2018-2021 one in which no information about purchases was listed at all. So its pretty obvious even if newer batches would have been purchased which is likely , even then we have no idea of knowing.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Inception-06

farooqbhai007 said:


> Why ? MODP year books were the only source of info on these and the 2017-18 year book was the last one that showed info on the kornet purchase and the second batch of Alcotan Purchase. No Year books have been released after that except a single 2018-2021 one in which no information about purchases was listed at all. So its pretty obvious even if newer batches would have been purchased which is likely , even then we have no idea of knowing.


 
I see, @all you and @iLION12345_1 what were the tactical requirements for the Pakistan Army which lead to the decision for the purchase of the Alcotan and Kornet ? What advantages in the battlefield can be gained in contrast to the Indian military ?

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## kursed

farooqbhai007 said:


> Why ? MODP year books were the only source of info on these and the 2017-18 year book was the last one that showed info on the kornet purchase and the second batch of Alcotan Purchase. No Year books have been released after that except a single 2018-2021 one in which no information about purchases was listed at all. So its pretty obvious even if newer batches would have been purchased which is likely , even then we have no idea of knowing.


Pakistan continues to buy batches of Alcotan every year. The latest batch was received at end of last year.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Inception-06

kursed said:


> Pakistan continues to buy batches of Alcotan every year. The latest batch was received at end of last year.



Why not TOT or a local licensed production ?


----------



## kursed

Inception-06 said:


> Why not TOT or a local licensed production ?


Must not have been part of the deal.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Inception-06 said:


> @iLION12345_1 Why Pakistan Army is not acquiring more Kornets and Alcotan anti Tank missiles or producing them under license, why buy so many different systems in low numbers? Training and maintenance are not getting easier without equipment standardisation right ?





Inception-06 said:


> I see, @all you and @iLION12345_1 what were the tactical requirements for the Pakistan Army which lead to the decision for the purchase of the Alcotan and Kornet ? What advantages in the battlefield can be gained in contrast to the Indian military ?


PA does seem to have a habit of doing that. The Kornet is an expensive system, PA can’t buy large numbers at once to replace all its older ATGMs. So they buy it in small numbers as a force multiplier, equipping the units in certain key areas with it where the increase in capability will be most useful. They do a similar thing with MANPADs, older ones remain in large numbers as they buy new ones in small numbers. Maybe this is how PA plans to replace the older systems fully too, small numbers over an amount of years. Although if we go with Chinese Attack helicopters, PAs next mainstay ATGM might be the HJ-10, which is good, I believe it has top-attack and true fire-and-forget capability, which no other ATGM in PA inventory has. India already has SPIKE-NLOS. Also keep in mind, part of me thinks that the kornet purchase was more of a message, along with the Mi35Ms, to show the world (mainly india) that Russia is an option to buy weapons for Pakistan now, and they’re not out enemy anymore. It certainly did it’s job in that regard, sent quite a wave of panic through the east.

Also, As Farooq said, we don’t really know if PA has bought more and we likely never will because it’s not always made public. If they can hide something like HQ-9P several years, they can surely hide these. As for ToT, i doubt Russia would allow that in the first place for the Kornet.

Coming to the ALCOTAN, PA buys that in massive numbers already and is still buying them. They’re not as big of a system as a Kornet. These are basically for when you need more than an RPG but need to stay more mobile than an ATGM squad, they’re found all over the PA and I must say the fact that PA has this many is rather impressive, many armies are still using RPG7s as their principle infantry-carried Anti-armor weapon, PA uses a proper AT weapon like the ALCOTAN instead. Keep in mind india also has its equivalent system in service, so do most other armies, such a system is commonplace for light armor, APCs, IFVs, bunkers and even tanks at certain ranges and angles.

Again, as for ToT, it was Likely not possible, otherwise PA would have definitely went for it, they got ToT for RBS-70 and produced those, that’s a more advanced system than an ALCOTAN. It really depends on wether the country of origin is willing to give ToT or is willing to give a good deal for it.

Reactions: Love Love:
3


----------



## farooqbhai007

iLION12345_1 said:


> PA does seem to have a habit of doing that. The Kornet is an expensive system, PA can’t buy large numbers at once to replace all its older ATGMs. So they buy it in small numbers as a force multiplier, equipping the units in certain key areas with it where the increase in capability will be most useful. They do a similar thing with MANPADs, older ones remain in large numbers as they buy new ones in small numbers. Maybe this is how PA plans to replace the older systems fully too, small numbers over an amount of years. Although if we go with Chinese Attack helicopters, PAs next mainstay ATGM might be the HJ-10, which is good, I believe it has top-attack and true fire-and-forget capability, which no other ATGM in PA inventory has. India already has SPIKE-NLOS. Also keep in mind, part of me thinks that the kornet purchase was more of a message, along with the Mi35Ms, to show the world (mainly india) that Russia is an option to buy weapons for Pakistan now, and they’re not out enemy anymore. It certainly did it’s job in that regard, sent quite a wave of panic through the east.
> 
> Also, As Farooq said, we don’t really know if PA has bought more and we likely never will because it’s not always made public. If they can hide something like HQ-9P several years, they can surely hide these. As for ToT, i doubt Russia would allow that in the first place for the Kornet.
> 
> Coming to the ALCOTAN, PA buys that in massive numbers already and is still buying them. They’re not as big of a system as a Kornet. These are basically for when you need more than an RPG but need to stay more mobile than an ATGM squad, they’re found all over the PA and I must say the fact that PA has this many is rather impressive, many armies are still using RPG7s as their principle infantry-carried Anti-armor weapon, PA uses a proper AT weapon like the ALCOTAN instead. Keep in mind india also has its equivalent system in service, so do most other armies, such a system is commonplace for light armor, APCs, IFVs, bunkers and even tanks at certain ranges and angles.
> 
> Again, as for ToT, it was Likely not possible, otherwise PA would have definitely went for it, they got ToT for RBS-70 and produced those, that’s a more advanced system than an ALCOTAN. It really depends on wether the country of origin is willing to give ToT or is willing to give a good deal for it.


india has Spike SR *

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## iLION12345_1

farooqbhai007 said:


> india has Spike SR *


Thanks for the correction

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Inception-06

iLION12345_1 said:


> PA does seem to have a habit of doing that. The Kornet is an expensive system, PA can’t buy large numbers at once to replace all its older ATGMs. So they buy it in small numbers as a force multiplier, equipping the units in certain key areas with it where the increase in capability will be most useful. They do a similar thing with MANPADs, older ones remain in large numbers as they buy new ones in small numbers. Maybe this is how PA plans to replace the older systems fully too, small numbers over an amount of years. Although if we go with Chinese Attack helicopters, PAs next mainstay ATGM might be the HJ-10, which is good, I believe it has top-attack and true fire-and-forget capability, which no other ATGM in PA inventory has. India already has SPIKE-NLOS. Also keep in mind, part of me thinks that the kornet purchase was more of a message, along with the Mi35Ms, to show the world (mainly india) that Russia is an option to buy weapons for Pakistan now, and they’re not out enemy anymore. It certainly did it’s job in that regard, sent quite a wave of panic through the east.
> 
> Also, As Farooq said, we don’t really know if PA has bought more and we likely never will because it’s not always made public. If they can hide something like HQ-9P several years, they can surely hide these. As for ToT, i doubt Russia would allow that in the first place for the Kornet.
> 
> Coming to the ALCOTAN, PA buys that in massive numbers already and is still buying them. They’re not as big of a system as a Kornet. These are basically for when you need more than an RPG but need to stay more mobile than an ATGM squad, they’re found all over the PA and I must say the fact that PA has this many is rather impressive, many armies are still using RPG7s as their principle infantry-carried Anti-armor weapon, PA uses a proper AT weapon like the ALCOTAN instead. Keep in mind india also has its equivalent system in service, so do most other armies, such a system is commonplace for light armor, APCs, IFVs, bunkers and even tanks at certain ranges and angles.
> 
> Again, as for ToT, it was Likely not possible, otherwise PA would have definitely went for it, they got ToT for RBS-70 and produced those, that’s a more advanced system than an ALCOTAN. It really depends on wether the country of origin is willing to give ToT or is willing to give a good deal for it.



First thanks for the detailed analysis. Then how many infantry fighting troops could be carried by *Maaz* - Fitted with Baktar-Shikan anti-tank missile firing unit? Would it make sense to equip the infantry squads of the M-113 infantry squads FIRST with the Alcotan ?


----------



## iLION12345_1

Inception-06 said:


> First thanks for the detailed analysis. Then how many infantry fighting troops could be carried by *Maaz* - Fitted with Baktar-Shikan anti-tank missile firing unit? Would it make sense to equip the infantry squads of the M-113 infantry squads FIRST with the Alcotan ?.



ALCOTAN given to soldiers wherever needed, I believe PA at this point has enough to equip most of the frontline with it. They’d obviously start with wherever they think it’ll be most useful (where more armor or fortifications are expected) and considering PAs battle taxi doctrine of APCs, i’m sure the troops in those carry these too. It doesn’t really make the ATGM on top or the alcotan any more redundant because the purpose of the ALCOTAN is to be Carried forward in combat, it’s light and portable and is for anything with armor, not just a tank, so light armor, fortifications, bunkers etc.

it’s like a standard squad AT weapon I suppose, much like the Bazooka and then the AT4 and now SMAW is for the US, however I don’t know if PAs exact usage and equipment scenario is the same as those of the Americans in this case.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> First thanks for the detailed analysis. Then how many infantry fighting troops could be carried by *Maaz* - Fitted with Baktar-Shikan anti-tank missile firing unit? Would it make sense to equip the infantry squads of the M-113 infantry squads FIRST with the Alcotan ?


MIBs aslo had RPGs and considering the number of Alcotans we've bought, MIBs must've been equipped with them along with SIBs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Inception-06

iLION12345_1 said:


> The Maaz and other APCs of the PA armed with ATGMS (Baktar-Shikan, TOW etc) can carry as many troops as a regular M113 (more in the case of the stretched versions like Saad APC). I believe it’s 13 troops in the regular ones.
> 
> As for the Alcotan, it’s given to soldiers wherever needed, I believe PA at this point has enough to equip most of the frontline with it. They’d obviously start with wherever they think it’ll be most useful (where more armor or fortifications are expected) and considering PAs battle taxi doctrine of APCs, i’m sure the troops in those carry these too. It doesn’t really make the ATGM on top or the alcotan any more redundant because the purpose of the ALCOTAN is to be Carried forward in combat, it’s light and portable and is for anything with armor, not just a tank, so light armor, fortifications, bunkers etc.
> 
> it’s like a standard squad AT weapon I suppose, much like the Bazooka and then the AT4 and now SMAW is for the US, however I don’t know if PAs exact usage and equipment scenario is the same as those of the Americans in this case.



Would it make sense to equipping all M-113 with the Baktharshikan ATGM, that would increase the survival against Indian mechanised formations and, change the role from battle taxi to a supporting fighting vehicle, right ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

iLION12345_1 said:


> The Maaz and other APCs of the PA armed with ATGMS (Baktar-Shikan, TOW etc) can carry as many troops as a regular M113 (more in the case of the stretched versions like Saad APC). I believe it’s 13 troops in the regular ones.





Inception-06 said:


> Would it make sense to equipping all M-113 with the Baktharshikan ATGM, that would increase the survival against Indian mechanised formations and, change the role from battle taxi to a supporting fighting vehicle, right ?


Maaz can carry only four personnel and no infantry. Thus it would be useless. 
Moreover there are already many Baktar shikan equipped APCs in an MIB(it is a platoon lvl weapon), that'd make every 1 in 5 APCs a BSWS carrier.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Maaz can carry only four personnel and no infantry. Thus it would be useless.
> Moreover there are already many Baktar shikan equipped APCs in an MIB(it is a platoon lvl weapon), that'd make every 1 in 5 APCs a BSWS carrier.


And is the Mouz -RBS-70 also a platoon level weapon ? Since when did the production of the RBS-70 started ? Would you recommend installing Kornets on M-113 ?


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> And is the Mouz -RBS-70 also a platoon level weapon ? Since when did the production of the RBS-70 started ?


AD regiments are not organised like that. BSWS in a platoon is to provide AT support to its own platoon(Bn) APCs, while RBS-70 equipped APC will provide AD coverage to mech assets of another arm so its difficult to say if its a platoon lvl weapon. It'd depend on the concentration of RBS-70 in that force.
@PanzerKiel will be better able to answer this question.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Inception-06 said:


> First thanks for the detailed analysis. Then how many infantry fighting troops could be carried by *Maaz* - Fitted with Baktar-Shikan anti-tank missile firing unit? Would it make sense to equip the infantry squads of the M-113 infantry squads FIRST with the Alcotan ?


All ATGM carriers only carry the weapon detachment since the rest of the space is taken up by the missiles inside the APC. 
Alcotan will be issues to all infantry (foot and mech).



Inception-06 said:


> Would it make sense to equipping all M-113 with the Baktharshikan ATGM, that would increase the survival against Indian mechanised formations and, change the role from battle taxi to a supporting fighting vehicle, right ?


All APCs with ATGMs means that all troops will not carried inside the APC. Thats why a specific number of weapon carriers are used..



Inception-06 said:


> And is the Mouz -RBS-70 also a platoon level weapon ? Since when did the production of the RBS-70 started ? Would you recommend installing Kornets on M-113 ?


There are several units for that. They are attached as platoons with mech units when needed.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
3


----------



## farooqbhai007

iLION12345_1 said:


> The Maaz and other APCs of the PA armed with ATGMS (Baktar-Shikan, TOW etc) can carry as many troops as a regular M113 (more in the case of the stretched versions like Saad APC). I believe it’s 13 troops in the regular ones.
> 
> As for the Alcotan, it’s given to soldiers wherever needed, I believe PA at this point has enough to equip most of the frontline with it. They’d obviously start with wherever they think it’ll be most useful (where more armor or fortifications are expected) and considering PAs battle taxi doctrine of APCs, i’m sure the troops in those carry these too. It doesn’t really make the ATGM on top or the alcotan any more redundant because the purpose of the ALCOTAN is to be Carried forward in combat, it’s light and portable and is for anything with armor, not just a tank, so light armor, fortifications, bunkers etc.
> 
> it’s like a standard squad AT weapon I suppose, much like the Bazooka and then the AT4 and now SMAW is for the US, however I don’t know if PAs exact usage and equipment scenario is the same as those of the Americans in this case.


We do have SMAW as well 😎 , standard single shot system of the PN Marines.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Maaz can carry only four personnel and no infantry. Thus it would be useless.
> Moreover there are already many Baktar shikan equipped APCs in an MIB(it is a platoon lvl weapon), that'd make every 1 in 5 APCs a BSWS carrier.





PanzerKiel said:


> All ATGM carriers only carry the weapon detachment since the rest of the space is taken up by the missiles inside the APC.
> Alcotan will be issues to all infantry (foot and mech).
> 
> 
> All APCs with ATGMs means that all troops will not carried inside the APC. Thats why a specific number of weapon carriers are used..
> 
> 
> There are several units for that. They are attached as platoons with mech units when needed.


My bad in that case, did not consider that the APCs with ATGMs would need to carry ammo somewhere and hence couldn’t carry troops, that does make more sense

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Hopefully frim 23 March. insha'Allah this year the armoured component will be larger this year.
Identifying From the insignias:
Alkhalid of XXX Corps, Gujranwala(seems like 30th Corps has a mix of t59s,AZs and AKs)
T80UD of 1st armoured div
Alzarrar of 6th armoured div





Why Dont we bring type85s?

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Hopefully frim 23 March. insha'Allah this year the armoured component will be larger this year.
> Identifying From the insignias:
> Alkhalid of XXX Corps, Gujranwala(seems like 30th Corps has a mix of t59s,AZs and AKs)
> T80UD of 1st armoured div
> Alzarrar of 6th armoured div
> View attachment 814144
> 
> Why Dont we bring type85s?


Quite an old photo. They probably don’t bring in the Type 85s because until the recent upgrades they were basically obsolete. At this point they should be in the parade, but last year i believe not even the Al-zarrars were there, only the third Gen tanks, so maybe they’ll stick to just those.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Inception-06

Lahore Garrison​​

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## farooqbhai007

Man TG Mil Flat bed trucks for carrying logistics / ISO containers. Previously the Mercedes Benz Actros (older model one) were being used for this purpose while these Man trucks seem to be supplementing those. 








PAF_Army_Navy_🇵🇰 on Instagram: "Love Pak Army🇵🇰 ♡ ㅤ ❍ㅤ ⎙ ⌲ ˡᶦᵏᵉ ᶜᵒᵐᵐᵉⁿᵗ ˢᵃᵛᵉ ˢʰᵃʳᵉ #paf #pakistan #pakarmy #paknavy #pakistanarmy #ssg #pakistanairforce #pakistanzindabad #pakarmylovers #isi #ssgzindabad #pakfauj #airshow #27February


PAF_Army_Navy_🇵🇰 shared a post on Instagram: "Love Pak Army🇵🇰 ♡ ㅤ ❍ㅤ ⎙ ⌲ ˡᶦᵏᵉ ᶜᵒᵐᵐᵉⁿᵗ ˢᵃᵛᵉ ˢʰᵃʳᵉ #paf #pakistan #pakarmy #paknavy #pakistanarmy #ssg #pakistanairforce #pakistanzindabad #pakarmylovers #isi #ssgzindabad #pakfauj #airshow #27February2019 #pmamemories #pakairforce...




www.instagram.com

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

farooqbhai007 said:


> QLZ-87 35mm Lightweight Long Range Grenade Launcher






seesm like we've been using these since 2006-8.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

II Corps was raised in Lahore and then shifted to Multan while IV corps was raised in Multan and then transferred to Lahore.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## rvats

I've done a basic overview of the Pakistan Army, its Corps and Divisions. Posting it here for reference and feedback. If there is a more appropriate thread for this, please let me know.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Raja Porus

rvats said:


> I've done a basic overview of the Pakistan Army, its Corps and Divisions. Posting it here for reference and feedback. If there is a more appropriate thread for this, please let me know.


Excellent. You could also have added about the Northern, Central and Southern commands of PA.
Btw are you the same Rohit who wrote those blogs about defence canals of Paksitan; if so then you are a welcome addition.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## rvats

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Excellent. You could also have added about the Northern, Central and Southern commands of PA.
> Btw are you the same Rohit who wrote those blogs about defence canals of Paksitan; if so then you are a welcome addition.


Thank you for the welcome. And yes, guilty as charged. I'm the same Rohit Vats!

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

rvats said:


> Thank you for the welcome. And yes, guilty as charged. I'm the same Rohit Vats!


Hoping for similar blogs on PDF.


----------



## dilpakistani

rvats said:


> I've done a basic overview of the Pakistan Army, its Corps and Divisions. Posting it here for reference and feedback. If there is a more appropriate thread for this, please let me know.


nicely done


----------



## Signalian

rvats said:


> I've done a basic overview of the Pakistan Army, its Corps and Divisions. Posting it here for reference and feedback. If there is a more appropriate thread for this, please let me know.


Do some visuals/video on following information also for comparison. Correct if necessary.

*Northern Command
XIV Fire and Fury Corps - **Leh*
3 Infantry Division - Trishul - Leh
8 Mountain Division - Forever in Ops - Dras
121 (I) Infantry Brigade - Kargil Brigade - Kargil
102 (I) Infantry Brigade - Siachen Brigade - Partapur
118 (I) Infantry Brigade - Parashu - Nyoma
254 (I) Armoured Brigade - Snow Leopard - Leh


*XV Chinar Corps - **Srinagar*
19 Infantry Division - Dagger - Baramulla
28 Infantry Division - Vajr - Gurez


*XVI White Knight Corps - Nagrota*
10 RAPID - Crossed Swords - Akhnoor
25 Infantry Division - Ace of Spades - Rajauri
39 Infantry Division - Dah - Yol


*Western Command
II Kharga Corps - Ambala*
1 Armoured Division - Airavat - Patiala
9 Infantry Division - Pine - Meerut
22 Infantry Division - Charging Ram - Meerut
40 Artillery Division - - Ambala
16 (I) Armoured Brigade - Black Arrow - Mamun


*IX Rising Star Corps - Yol*
26 Infantry Division - Tiger - Jammu
29 Infantry Division - Gurj/Silver Mace - Pathankot
2 (I) Armoured Brigade - Fleur de Lis - Mamun
3 (I) Armoured Brigade - Sabre - Ratnuchak


*XI Vajra Corps - Jalandhar*
7 Infantry Division - Golden Arrow - Firozpur
15 Infantry Division - Panther - Amritsar
23 (I) Armoured Brigade - Flaming Arrow - Amritsar
55 (I) Mechanised Brigade - Double Victory - Beas


*Southwestern Command
I First Strike Corps - Mathura*
33 Armoured Division - Dot - Hisar
4 RAPID - Red Eagle - Allahabad
42 Artillery Division - Strategic Strikers - Alwar
14 (I) Armoured Brigade - Black Charger - Bathinda


*X Chetak Corps - Bhatinda*
16 Infantry Division - Amogh - Sriganganagar
18 RAPID - Gandiv - Kota
24 RAPID - Ranbankura - Bikaner
6 (I) Armoured Brigade - Sand Viper - Suratgarh


*Southern Command
XXI Sudarshan Chakra Corps - Bhopal*
31 Armoured Division - White Tiger - Jhansi
36 RAPID - Shahbaaz - Sagar
54 Infantry Division - Bison - Secunderabad
41 Artillery Division - Agnibaaz - Pune


*XII Konark Corps - Jodhpur*
11 Infantry Division - Golden Katar - Ahmedabad
75 (I) Infantry Brigade - Bald Eagle - Bhuj
12 RAPID - Golden Axe - Jodhpur
4 (I) Armoured Brigade - Black Mace - Bathinda
340 (I) Mechanised Brigade - Scorpions? - Nasirabad


*Eastern Command
XVII Brahmastra Corps - Panagarh*
59 Mountain Division - Trinetra - Panagarh
72 Infantry Division - - Pathankot
23 Infantry Division - Cockerel - Ranchi


*I**II Spear Corps -Dimapur*
2 Mountain Division - Dao - Dibrugarh
56 Mountain Division - Spearhead - Likabeli
57 Mountain Division - Red Shield - Leimakhong


*IV** Gajraj Corps - Tezpur*
5 Mountain Division - Ball of Fire - Tengra
21 Mountain Division - Red Horns - Rangia
71 Mountain Division - Blazing Sword - Missamari


*XXXIII Trishakti Corps - Siliguri*
17 Mountain Division - Blackcat - Gangtok
20 Mountain Division - Kirpan - Binnaguri
27 Mountain Division - Striking Lion - Kalimpong


*Central Command*
14 RAPID - Golden Key - Kapurthala
6 Mountain Division - Garud - Bareilly
50 (I) Parachute Brigade - Shatrujeet - Agra
9 (I) Mountain Brigade - Ibex - Joshimath
119 (I) Mountain Brigade - Panchshul - Pithoragarh
136 (I) Infantry Brigade - Tripeak - Sumdo

Reactions: Like Like:
10 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Signalian said:


> Do some visuals/video on following information also for comparison. Correct if necessary.
> 
> *Northern Command
> XIV Fire and Fury Corps - **Leh*
> 3 Infantry Division - Trishul - Leh
> 8 Mountain Division - Forever in Ops - Dras
> 121 (I) Infantry Brigade - Kargil Brigade - Kargil
> 102 (I) Infantry Brigade - Siachen Brigade - Partapur
> 118 (I) Infantry Brigade - Parashu - Nyoma
> 254 (I) Armoured Brigade - Snow Leopard - Leh
> 
> 
> *XV Chinar Corps - **Srinagar*
> 19 Infantry Division - Dagger - Baramulla
> 28 Infantry Division - Vajr - Gurez
> 
> 
> *XVI White Knight Corps - Nagrota*
> 10 RAPID - Crossed Swords - Akhnoor
> 25 Infantry Division - Ace of Spades - Rajauri
> 39 Infantry Division - Dah - Yol
> 
> 
> *Western Command
> II Kharga Corps - Ambala*
> 1 Armoured Division - Airavat - Patiala
> 9 Infantry Division - Pine - Meerut
> 22 Infantry Division - Charging Ram - Meerut
> 40 Artillery Division - - Ambala
> 16 (I) Armoured Brigade - Black Arrow - Mamun
> 
> 
> *IX Rising Star Corps - Yol*
> 26 Infantry Division - Tiger - Jammu
> 29 Infantry Division - Gurj/Silver Mace - Pathankot
> 2 (I) Armoured Brigade - Fleur de Lis - Mamun
> 3 (I) Armoured Brigade - Sabre - Ratnuchak
> 
> 
> *XI Vajra Corps - Jalandhar*
> 7 Infantry Division - Golden Arrow - Firozpur
> 15 Infantry Division - Panther - Amritsar
> 23 (I) Armoured Brigade - Flaming Arrow - Amritsar
> 55 (I) Mechanised Brigade - Double Victory - Beas
> 
> 
> *Southwestern Command
> I First Strike Corps - Mathura*
> 33 Armoured Division - Dot - Hisar
> 4 RAPID - Red Eagle - Allahabad
> 42 Artillery Division - Strategic Strikers - Alwar
> 14 (I) Armoured Brigade - Black Charger - Bathinda
> 
> 
> *X Chetak Corps - Bhatinda*
> 16 Infantry Division - Amogh - Sriganganagar
> 18 RAPID - Gandiv - Kota
> 24 RAPID - Ranbankura - Bikaner
> 6 (I) Armoured Brigade - Sand Viper - Suratgarh
> 
> 
> *Southern Command
> XXI Sudarshan Chakra Corps - Bhopal*
> 31 Armoured Division - White Tiger - Jhansi
> 36 RAPID - Shahbaaz - Sagar
> 54 Infantry Division - Bison - Secunderabad
> 41 Artillery Division - Agnibaaz - Pune
> 
> 
> *XII Konark Corps - Jodhpur*
> 11 Infantry Division - Golden Katar - Ahmedabad
> 75 (I) Infantry Brigade - Bald Eagle - Bhuj
> 12 RAPID - Golden Axe - Jodhpur
> 4 (I) Armoured Brigade - Black Mace - Bathinda
> 340 (I) Mechanised Brigade - Scorpions? - Nasirabad
> 
> 
> *Eastern Command
> XVII Brahmastra Corps - Panagarh*
> 59 Mountain Division - Trinetra - Panagarh
> 72 Infantry Division - - Pathankot
> 23 Infantry Division - Cockerel - Ranchi
> 
> 
> *I**II Spear Corps -Dimapur*
> 2 Mountain Division - Dao - Dibrugarh
> 56 Mountain Division - Spearhead - Likabeli
> 57 Mountain Division - Red Shield - Leimakhong
> 
> 
> *IV** Gajraj Corps - Tezpur*
> 5 Mountain Division - Ball of Fire - Tengra
> 21 Mountain Division - Red Horns - Rangia
> 71 Mountain Division - Blazing Sword - Missamari
> 
> 
> *XXXIII Trishakti Corps - Siliguri*
> 17 Mountain Division - Blackcat - Gangtok
> 20 Mountain Division - Kirpan - Binnaguri
> 27 Mountain Division - Striking Lion - Kalimpong
> 
> 
> *Central Command*
> 14 RAPID - Golden Key - Kapurthala
> 6 Mountain Division - Garud - Bareilly
> 50 (I) Parachute Brigade - Shatrujeet - Agra
> 9 (I) Mountain Brigade - Ibex - Joshimath
> 119 (I) Mountain Brigade - Panchshul - Pithoragarh
> 136 (I) Infantry Brigade - Tripeak - Sumdo


Have been searching for such a brief yet wholesome ORBAT of IA for quite some time.
Thanks

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## TaimiKhan

Signalian said:


> Do some visuals/video on following information also for comparison. Correct if necessary.
> 
> *Northern Command
> XIV Fire and Fury Corps - **Leh*
> 3 Infantry Division - Trishul - Leh
> 8 Mountain Division - Forever in Ops - Dras
> 121 (I) Infantry Brigade - Kargil Brigade - Kargil
> 102 (I) Infantry Brigade - Siachen Brigade - Partapur
> 118 (I) Infantry Brigade - Parashu - Nyoma
> 254 (I) Armoured Brigade - Snow Leopard - Leh
> 
> 
> *XV Chinar Corps - **Srinagar*
> 19 Infantry Division - Dagger - Baramulla
> 28 Infantry Division - Vajr - Gurez
> 
> 
> *XVI White Knight Corps - Nagrota*
> 10 RAPID - Crossed Swords - Akhnoor
> 25 Infantry Division - Ace of Spades - Rajauri
> 39 Infantry Division - Dah - Yol
> 
> 
> *Western Command
> II Kharga Corps - Ambala*
> 1 Armoured Division - Airavat - Patiala
> 9 Infantry Division - Pine - Meerut
> 22 Infantry Division - Charging Ram - Meerut
> 40 Artillery Division - - Ambala
> 16 (I) Armoured Brigade - Black Arrow - Mamun
> 
> 
> *IX Rising Star Corps - Yol*
> 26 Infantry Division - Tiger - Jammu
> 29 Infantry Division - Gurj/Silver Mace - Pathankot
> 2 (I) Armoured Brigade - Fleur de Lis - Mamun
> 3 (I) Armoured Brigade - Sabre - Ratnuchak
> 
> 
> *XI Vajra Corps - Jalandhar*
> 7 Infantry Division - Golden Arrow - Firozpur
> 15 Infantry Division - Panther - Amritsar
> 23 (I) Armoured Brigade - Flaming Arrow - Amritsar
> 55 (I) Mechanised Brigade - Double Victory - Beas
> 
> 
> *Southwestern Command
> I First Strike Corps - Mathura*
> 33 Armoured Division - Dot - Hisar
> 4 RAPID - Red Eagle - Allahabad
> 42 Artillery Division - Strategic Strikers - Alwar
> 14 (I) Armoured Brigade - Black Charger - Bathinda
> 
> 
> *X Chetak Corps - Bhatinda*
> 16 Infantry Division - Amogh - Sriganganagar
> 18 RAPID - Gandiv - Kota
> 24 RAPID - Ranbankura - Bikaner
> 6 (I) Armoured Brigade - Sand Viper - Suratgarh
> 
> 
> *Southern Command
> XXI Sudarshan Chakra Corps - Bhopal*
> 31 Armoured Division - White Tiger - Jhansi
> 36 RAPID - Shahbaaz - Sagar
> 54 Infantry Division - Bison - Secunderabad
> 41 Artillery Division - Agnibaaz - Pune
> 
> 
> *XII Konark Corps - Jodhpur*
> 11 Infantry Division - Golden Katar - Ahmedabad
> 75 (I) Infantry Brigade - Bald Eagle - Bhuj
> 12 RAPID - Golden Axe - Jodhpur
> 4 (I) Armoured Brigade - Black Mace - Bathinda
> 340 (I) Mechanised Brigade - Scorpions? - Nasirabad
> 
> 
> *Eastern Command
> XVII Brahmastra Corps - Panagarh*
> 59 Mountain Division - Trinetra - Panagarh
> 72 Infantry Division - - Pathankot
> 23 Infantry Division - Cockerel - Ranchi
> 
> 
> *I**II Spear Corps -Dimapur*
> 2 Mountain Division - Dao - Dibrugarh
> 56 Mountain Division - Spearhead - Likabeli
> 57 Mountain Division - Red Shield - Leimakhong
> 
> 
> *IV** Gajraj Corps - Tezpur*
> 5 Mountain Division - Ball of Fire - Tengra
> 21 Mountain Division - Red Horns - Rangia
> 71 Mountain Division - Blazing Sword - Missamari
> 
> 
> *XXXIII Trishakti Corps - Siliguri*
> 17 Mountain Division - Blackcat - Gangtok
> 20 Mountain Division - Kirpan - Binnaguri
> 27 Mountain Division - Striking Lion - Kalimpong
> 
> 
> *Central Command*
> 14 RAPID - Golden Key - Kapurthala
> 6 Mountain Division - Garud - Bareilly
> 50 (I) Parachute Brigade - Shatrujeet - Agra
> 9 (I) Mountain Brigade - Ibex - Joshimath
> 119 (I) Mountain Brigade - Panchshul - Pithoragarh
> 136 (I) Infantry Brigade - Tripeak - Sumdo



Excellent. I suggest, we open a separate sticky thread, titled Indian Army ORBAT in the Pakistan Army section, and would be more clarifying if you can point the Corps facing Pakistan, which ones are for China and which ones facing Bangladesh or others. 
This way a very clear picture would be available, and in future we can plot these formations on an Indian map and post also for a visual ORBAT of IA. 

Lets work on it.

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
3


----------



## farooqbhai007

TaimiKhan said:


> Excellent. I suggest, we open a separate sticky thread, titled Indian Army ORBAT in the Pakistan Army section, and would be more clarifying if you can point the Corps facing Pakistan, which ones are for China and which ones facing Bangladesh or others.
> This way a very clear picture would be available, and in future we can plot these formations on an Indian map and post also for a visual ORBAT of IA.
> 
> Lets work on it.


999.99 USD bhijwao aap ko orbat ki google earth file with regiments dey dey gain India ki

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
5


----------



## Raja Porus

farooqbhai007 said:


> 999.99 USD bhijwao aap ko orbat ki google earth file with regiments dey dey gain India ki


Bhai itne me to unka DG MO a jai ga.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## farooqbhai007

Interesting vests with the PA ,

Also Saudi fitness levels

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Steppe Wolff

farooqbhai007 said:


> View attachment 817318
> View attachment 817319
> 
> Interesting vests with the PA ,
> 
> Also Saudi fitness levels


Masha’Allah. Our Troops looking fit and disciplined as usual.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rvats

Signalian said:


> Do some visuals/video on following information also for comparison. Correct if necessary.
> 
> *Northern Command
> XIV Fire and Fury Corps - **Leh*
> 3 Infantry Division - Trishul - Leh
> 8 Mountain Division - Forever in Ops - Dras
> 121 (I) Infantry Brigade - Kargil Brigade - Kargil
> 102 (I) Infantry Brigade - Siachen Brigade - Partapur
> 118 (I) Infantry Brigade - Parashu - Nyoma
> 254 (I) Armoured Brigade - Snow Leopard - Leh
> 
> 
> *XV Chinar Corps - **Srinagar*
> 19 Infantry Division - Dagger - Baramulla
> 28 Infantry Division - Vajr - Gurez
> 
> 
> *XVI White Knight Corps - Nagrota*
> 10 RAPID - Crossed Swords - Akhnoor
> 25 Infantry Division - Ace of Spades - Rajauri
> 39 Infantry Division - Dah - Yol
> 
> 
> *Western Command
> II Kharga Corps - Ambala*
> 1 Armoured Division - Airavat - Patiala
> 9 Infantry Division - Pine - Meerut
> 22 Infantry Division - Charging Ram - Meerut
> 40 Artillery Division - - Ambala
> 16 (I) Armoured Brigade - Black Arrow - Mamun
> 
> 
> *IX Rising Star Corps - Yol*
> 26 Infantry Division - Tiger - Jammu
> 29 Infantry Division - Gurj/Silver Mace - Pathankot
> 2 (I) Armoured Brigade - Fleur de Lis - Mamun
> 3 (I) Armoured Brigade - Sabre - Ratnuchak
> 
> 
> *XI Vajra Corps - Jalandhar*
> 7 Infantry Division - Golden Arrow - Firozpur
> 15 Infantry Division - Panther - Amritsar
> 23 (I) Armoured Brigade - Flaming Arrow - Amritsar
> 55 (I) Mechanised Brigade - Double Victory - Beas
> 
> 
> *Southwestern Command
> I First Strike Corps - Mathura*
> 33 Armoured Division - Dot - Hisar
> 4 RAPID - Red Eagle - Allahabad
> 42 Artillery Division - Strategic Strikers - Alwar
> 14 (I) Armoured Brigade - Black Charger - Bathinda
> 
> 
> *X Chetak Corps - Bhatinda*
> 16 Infantry Division - Amogh - Sriganganagar
> 18 RAPID - Gandiv - Kota
> 24 RAPID - Ranbankura - Bikaner
> 6 (I) Armoured Brigade - Sand Viper - Suratgarh
> 
> 
> *Southern Command
> XXI Sudarshan Chakra Corps - Bhopal*
> 31 Armoured Division - White Tiger - Jhansi
> 36 RAPID - Shahbaaz - Sagar
> 54 Infantry Division - Bison - Secunderabad
> 41 Artillery Division - Agnibaaz - Pune
> 
> 
> *XII Konark Corps - Jodhpur*
> 11 Infantry Division - Golden Katar - Ahmedabad
> 75 (I) Infantry Brigade - Bald Eagle - Bhuj
> 12 RAPID - Golden Axe - Jodhpur
> 4 (I) Armoured Brigade - Black Mace - Bathinda
> 340 (I) Mechanised Brigade - Scorpions? - Nasirabad
> 
> 
> *Eastern Command
> XVII Brahmastra Corps - Panagarh*
> 59 Mountain Division - Trinetra - Panagarh
> 72 Infantry Division - - Pathankot
> 23 Infantry Division - Cockerel - Ranchi
> 
> 
> *I**II Spear Corps -Dimapur*
> 2 Mountain Division - Dao - Dibrugarh
> 56 Mountain Division - Spearhead - Likabeli
> 57 Mountain Division - Red Shield - Leimakhong
> 
> 
> *IV** Gajraj Corps - Tezpur*
> 5 Mountain Division - Ball of Fire - Tengra
> 21 Mountain Division - Red Horns - Rangia
> 71 Mountain Division - Blazing Sword - Missamari
> 
> 
> *XXXIII Trishakti Corps - Siliguri*
> 17 Mountain Division - Blackcat - Gangtok
> 20 Mountain Division - Kirpan - Binnaguri
> 27 Mountain Division - Striking Lion - Kalimpong
> 
> 
> *Central Command*
> 14 RAPID - Golden Key - Kapurthala
> 6 Mountain Division - Garud - Bareilly
> 50 (I) Parachute Brigade - Shatrujeet - Agra
> 9 (I) Mountain Brigade - Ibex - Joshimath
> 119 (I) Mountain Brigade - Panchshul - Pithoragarh
> 136 (I) Infantry Brigade - Tripeak - Sumdo



Your knowledge of Indian Army ORBAT is commendable. Let me share some inputs:

1)14 RAPID is not RAPID anymore. Its an infantry division now. And only the armored brigade of erstwhile 14 RAPID has moved to Kapurthala.
2) 1 Strike Corps - 4 RAPID, 6 Mountain Division. 33 Armoured Division, while under 1 Corps, is also now AHQ reserve. Reason being, 1 Corps will go to Eastern Ladakh if required.

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1496694991334391809
Here goes another one of our ultimate god weapons which have made all other weapon systems obsolete and which would've had "cooked" the old Russian MBTs..
See everything has its own place in a battlefield and driving conclusions from a completely one sided encounter (Azer-Armenia) in which the UCAVs flew without any hindrance from effective AD systems is imprudent..
Now can these ultimate UAVs stop the "obsolete" mechanised forces which have adequate AD coverage?

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## SQ8

Desert Fox 1 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1496694991334391809
> Here goes another one of our ultimate god weapons which have made all other weapon systems obsolete and which would've had "cooked" the old Russian MBTs..
> See everything has its own place in a battlefield and driving conclusions from a completely one sided encounter (Azer-Armenia) in which the UCAVs flew without any hindrance from effective AD systems is imprudent..
> Now can these ultimate UAVs stop the "obsolete" mechanised forces which have adequate AD coverage?


Usage also matters - the Armenians didn’t utilize their AD systems how they should have while it is likely that the Ukrainians didn’t deploy the TB2s as they should have.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Raja Porus

SQ8 said:


> Usage also matters - the Armenians didn’t utilize their AD systems how they should have while it is likely that the Ukrainians didn’t deploy the TB2s as they should have.


Of course,that's what I wanted to infer. The effectiveness of a system depends on its employment. If you put an armoured regt in unfavorable terrain with AD it will quickly eliminated.
Most people here believe that mechanised forces have been made redundant because of UCAVs because of that conflict but forget to mention that there the tanks were without any effective AD hence they could be easily picked out. Similarly UAVs without proper usage are also useless. 
In modern battlefield no system can standout alone and must be synergised to create a symphony. However whenever we discuss a weapon system we attribute godly powers to it. All I wanted to imply was that we should adopt a more sane approach while discussing weapon systems keeping in mind their operational limits and requirements.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Primus

Desert Fox 1 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1496694991334391809
> Here goes another one of our ultimate god weapons which have made all other weapon systems obsolete and which would've had "cooked" the old Russian MBTs..
> See everything has its own place in a battlefield and driving conclusions from a completely one sided encounter (Azer-Armenia) in which the UCAVs flew without any hindrance from effective AD systems is imprudent..
> Now can these ultimate UAVs stop the "obsolete" mechanised forces which have adequate AD coverage?


I have always said, the effectivesness of drones in combat is still yet to be seen until it is used against a country with a decent air force or AD systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Of course,that's what I wanted to infer. The effectiveness of a system depends on its employment. If you put an armoured regt in unfavorable terrain with AD it will quickly eliminated.
> Most people here believe that mechanised forces have been made redundant because of UCAVs because of that conflict but forget to mention that there the tanks were without any effective AD hence they could be easily picked out. Similarly UAVs without proper usage are also useless.
> In modern battlefield no system can standout alone and must be synergised to create a symphony. However whenever we discuss a weapon system we attribute godly powers to it. All I wanted to imply was that we should adopt a more sane approach while discussing weapon systems keeping in mind their operational limits and requirements.



Most posters are to lazy to read and study the combined warfare. They go sometimes so deeply in the technical details, while they don’t have any clue how it would be in a real war, where the human, terrain, and weather factors are the main players on the battlefield.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Of course,that's what I wanted to infer. The effectiveness of a system depends on its employment. If you put an armoured regt in unfavorable terrain with AD it will quickly eliminated.
> Most people here believe that mechanised forces have been made redundant because of UCAVs because of that conflict but forget to mention that there the tanks were without any effective AD hence they could be easily picked out. Similarly UAVs without proper usage are also useless.
> In modern battlefield no system can standout alone and must be synergised to create a symphony. However whenever we discuss a weapon system we attribute godly powers to it. All I wanted to imply was that we should adopt a more sane approach while discussing weapon systems keeping in mind their operational limits and requirements.


I know it’s off-topic but it’s related to the core issue which we are facing here in PDF: While many believe we can only be on par with India through an arms race, the PAF showed the opposite during the Pakistan China Air Force exercise, where PAF-7PG demonstrated tactics to confront and defend against SU-27 - J-11series. Also in 1965 (as references: Men of Steel 6 armoured Division in the 1965 war Major General Abrar Hussain) and 1971 wars (as reference: In the Ring and on its Feet- Air Cdre M Kaiser Tufail) The Pakistan Army and Air force were capable of doing more with less military equipment.


See below and understand the impact of Human-tactics-strategy-training:
China Pakistan air force joint exercises J-7PG J-11B-simulated SU-30MKI​
*The PAF Pilot says: "So we split at the close range, we arrange the complete formation in such a manner, that we are representing simultaneously, a multi-directional threat to the adversary, to the hostile, now it will be very difficult to the hostile coming in hot to decipher or to make his mind either to engage this one, this one or this one. So this is, what we call a targeting dilemma". *





*So now I would love to see the technical experts in data comparing arguing with this PAF Pilot, that his plan is antique, and he should straight jump off his combat suit, the war is lost. 


/www.rediff.com/news/special/the-daredevil-fighter-pilot-who-survived-a-pakistani-bullet/20150909.htm

Here is another great example for ground warfare, Indian source:*

_The Pattons have an anti-aircraft gun on top. We attacked them and they fired back. S K Sharma was hit at no 3, I was hit too. I was diving and this tank was shooting at me*.*The bullet which hit me, came through the side of the aircraft, grazed my shoulder completely and disappeared behind my head.
The noise in the airplane suddenly increased because the canopy had burst and I saw my overall getting soaked in blood_.
I didn't know where the bullet went. Our plan was to carry out 4, 5 attacks and this happened in my second attack....."

Watch closely the past war history of other developing countries and the actually ongoing war, The Ukraine Pilots were not capable to sustain the Russian military impact and pressure to take their fighter jets in the air, opposite example the Pakistan Air Force did give the Indian Air force in east Pakistan 1971 war a bloody fight, before surrender.

Many of us haven't participated in any war, including me, some have served and they speak volumes and a realistic language in their military analytics, very less even have handled or operated daily a machine at its peak it might be a car or household machine or a computer and smartphone.

*The Janbaaz Force- under the aspect of Men and their machines in the context of Drones and Helicopter as mentioned by @Desert Fox 1 :*

































*My point is: *If you are capable to operate a machine, even if it's not on pare with the enemy equipment, but continuously operating it despite the psychological pressure (such as bullet impact, the blood of injured, grenade explosions etc.) and impact of the battlefield, to maintain it and to use every function of the machine to its limits, then you can defend and hold your bay, today Pakistani Forces have reached a military-technical level more than to defend, they can reach success in the battlefield by inflicting heavy losses to men and material of the hostile forces. More the Pakistani Force are capable of damaging the adversary to an unimaginable level.

*@Deino*​

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
3


----------



## Joe Shearer

TaimiKhan said:


> Excellent. I suggest, we open a separate sticky thread, titled Indian Army ORBAT in the Pakistan Army section, and would be more clarifying if you can point the Corps facing Pakistan, which ones are for China and which ones facing Bangladesh or others.
> This way a very clear picture would be available, and in future we can plot these formations on an Indian map and post also for a visual ORBAT of IA.
> 
> Lets work on it.


@Nilgiri had done some kind of visual ORBAT for our discussions with @PanzerKiel. I wonder whether that might be helpful.

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Inception-06

@jhungary I have written a little bit about human and machines in the above post. Would you like to comment it ? It would be a great honour for us I don’t expect that you favour any side, but it’s a great contribution for the readers and Members, who have other views. I am not an expert but, trying my best to learn from everyone being it Indians like @Joe Shearer or @Nilgiri ( I think that was his name) or any other nation, I am absolutely not discriminate, when someone can have great analytical discussion.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## jhungary

Inception-06 said:


> @jhungary I have written a little bit about human and machines in the above post. Would you like to comment it ? It would be great honor for, I don’t expect that you davor any side, but it’s a great contribution for the readers and Members, who have other views.


Will do it tomorrow. It's 3 am here

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## TaimiKhan

Joe Shearer said:


> @Nilgiri had done some kind of visual ORBAT for our discussions with @PanzerKiel. I wonder whether that might be helpful.



Link to the post ??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

TaimiKhan said:


> Link to the post ??


Just give me a little time. Perhaps an hour? Two of the four participants are no longer with us, a third is aloof and out of reach, and there's nobody here but this chicken.



Inception-06 said:


> @jhungary I have written a little bit about human and machines in the above post. Would you like to comment it ? It would be great a honor for us I don’t expect that you favour any side, but it’s a great contribution for the readers and Members, who have other views. I am not an expert but, trying my best to learn from everyone being it Indians like @Joe Shearer or @Nilgri ( I think that was his name), I am absolutely not discriminate, when someone can have great analytical discussion.


@Nilgiri

I rather fear he has left permanently. Not sure, but think so.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Inception-06

It’s not off topic because the Pakistani Military’s adversary is the Indian Military, so it makes absolutely sense to involve Indian Members and Indian military potential in this discussion, to get a brighter and more realistic picture for any future conflict, god forbids, but the world shows at the moment something else.
We can’t always have discussions, where we just applaud the Pakistani military capabilities without a view and analysis and involvement of Indian inputs. @Signalian hat started this offensive consequently years ago I will continue it, because of the actual ongoing war in war Europe. I wish @Zarvan and @iLION12345_1 @Desert Fox 1 would participate.

@Joe Shearer Sir, I and some other analysts, respected and gentlemen would like to read your perspective.

After seeing the escalation of the Ukraine and Russian war. Pakistan and India have both similary equipment of the ex-soviet or Russian and Ukraine origin. What are the Indian doctrines regarding the combine warfare of Indian mechanised and armoured Units ? Do you think that the Indian logistical and *Reconnaissance -surveillance doctrine,* discipline and drill’s are equally to the Pakistani or have even a edge in some fields or maybe are totally superior ? How would you rate and dossier the Pakistani combine warfare of the mechanised and armour units in relation clashing the Indian military.

Best regards to all

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> It’s not if topic because the Pakistani Military’s adversary is the Indian Military, so it makes absolutely sense to involve Indian and Indian military potential in this discussion, to get a brighter and more realistic picture for any future conflict, god forbids, but the world show at the moment something else.
> We can’t always have discussions, where we just applaud the Pakistani military capabilities without a view and analysis and involvement of Indian inputs. @Signalian hat started this offensive consequently years ago I will continue it, because of the actual ongoing war in war Europe. I wish @Zarvan and @iLION12345_1 @Desert Fox 1 would participate.
> 
> @Joe Shearer Sir, I and I think some other analysts, respected and gentlemen would like to read your perspective.
> 
> After seeing the escalation of the Ukraine and Russian war. Pakistan and India have both similary equipment of the ex-soviet or Russian and Ukraine origin. What are the Indian doctrines regarding the combine warfare of Indian mechanised and armoured Units ? Do you think that the Indian logistical and surveillance doctrine, discipline and drill’s are equally to the Pakistani or have even a edge in some fields or maybe are totally superior ? How would you rate and dossier the Pakistani combine warfare of the mechanised and armour units in relation clashing the Indian military.
> 
> Best regards to all


Thank God someone restarted such exercise which had become almost extinct,here in PDF.

Reactions: Love Love:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Inception-06 said:


> It’s not off topic because the Pakistani Military’s adversary is the Indian Military, so it makes absolutely sense to involve Indian Members and Indian military potential in this discussion, to get a brighter and more realistic picture for any future conflict, god forbids, but the world show at the moment something else.
> We can’t always have discussions, where we just applaud the Pakistani military capabilities without a view and analysis and involvement of Indian inputs. @Signalian hat started this offensive consequently years ago I will continue it, because of the actual ongoing war in war Europe. I wish @Zarvan and @iLION12345_1 @Desert Fox 1 would participate.
> 
> @Joe Shearer Sir, I and I think some other analysts, respected and gentlemen would like to read your perspective.
> 
> After seeing the escalation of the Ukraine and Russian war. Pakistan and India have both similary equipment of the ex-soviet or Russian and Ukraine origin. What are the Indian doctrines regarding the combine warfare of Indian mechanised and armoured Units ? Do you think that the Indian logistical and surveillance doctrine, discipline and drill’s are equally to the Pakistani or have even a edge in some fields or maybe are totally superior ? How would you rate and dossier the Pakistani combine warfare of the mechanised and armour units in relation clashing the Indian military.
> 
> Best regards to all


I’ll leave the tactics part of the discussion to the others since I’m not too well versed in that, and I only know enough about the doctrines of either side to know how their forces and equipment will be used.

However if such a discussion is held by the others, I’d love to give insight and compare the technical and technological aspects, that’s my field 

PS: happy to see Sir Joe back on the forum, always a pleasure to read your posts. Hope you’re doing well.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
3


----------



## Inception-06

iLION12345_1 said:


> I’ll leave the tactics part of the discussion to the others since I’m not too well versed in that, and I only know enough about the doctrines of either side to know how their forces and equipment will be used.
> 
> However if such a discussion is held by the others, I’d love to give insight and compare the technical and technological aspects, that’s my field
> 
> PS: happy to see Sir Joe back on the forum, always a pleasure to read your posts. Hope you’re doing well.



Have you seen my previous posts above about human and machine regarding their effectiveness in battlefield ?


----------



## Sayfullah

Desert Fox 1 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1496694991334391809
> Here goes another one of our ultimate god weapons which have made all other weapon systems obsolete and which would've had "cooked" the old Russian MBTs..
> See everything has its own place in a battlefield and driving conclusions from a completely one sided encounter (Azer-Armenia) in which the UCAVs flew without any hindrance from effective AD systems is imprudent..
> Now can these ultimate UAVs stop the "obsolete" mechanised forces which have adequate AD coverage?




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1498002862005276677

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1498337642043387914

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1498285240015540224

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1498019455716057088

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1498321914552532992
Seems like Ukrainians have learned how to use these beasts properly

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PanzerKiel

Jf-17 block 3 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1498002862005276677
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1498337642043387914
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1498285240015540224
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1498019455716057088
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1498321914552532992
> Seems like Ukrainians have learned how to use these beasts properly


Cmon dear, you still believe that Ukraine is behind all these counters?

Reactions: Like Like:
7 | Love Love:
3


----------



## arjunk

PanzerKiel said:


> Cmon dear, you still believe that Ukraine is behind all these counters?


ISI is secretly helping Ukraine from the 500th floor of Serena Kyiv. Drone strikes are being done on Russian punditz from GHQ.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
6


----------



## Inception-06

PanzerKiel said:


> Cmon dear, you still believe that Ukraine is behind all these counters?



I thought the same, that the operators sit outside or the Ukraines are not doing this alone.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

Inception-06 said:


> It’s not off topic because the Pakistani Military’s adversary is the Indian Military, so it makes absolutely sense to involve Indian Members and Indian military potential in this discussion, to get a brighter and more realistic picture for any future conflict, god forbids, but the world shows at the moment something else.
> We can’t always have discussions, where we just applaud the Pakistani military capabilities without a view and analysis and involvement of Indian inputs. @Signalian hat started this offensive consequently years ago I will continue it, because of the actual ongoing war in war Europe. I wish @Zarvan and @iLION12345_1 @Desert Fox 1 would participate.
> 
> @Joe Shearer Sir, I and some other analysts, respected and gentlemen would like to read your perspective.
> 
> After seeing the escalation of the Ukraine and Russian war. Pakistan and India have both similary equipment of the ex-soviet or Russian and Ukraine origin. What are the Indian doctrines regarding the combine warfare of Indian mechanised and armoured Units ? Do you think that the Indian logistical and surveillance doctrine, discipline and drill’s are equally to the Pakistani or have even a edge in some fields or maybe are totally superior ? How would you rate and dossier the Pakistani combine warfare of the mechanised and armour units in relation clashing the Indian military.
> 
> Best regards to all


I would love to discuss these aspects, but I need time.

The problem is that my generation, my cohort retired between nine to seven years ago. There are juniors from SSP, but they too have retired. I have to dig hard to get to any of the sub-juniors. To give you a perspective, my roll number is in the very low 100s; the current number has crossed 5000.

All this while, since you posted, I have been talking to a buddy who is still in touch. HIS cohort has reached the top of the field grade, and is on the verge of critical selections, and he is quite up to date. To be quite honest, we spend a lot of time cursing various people and their idiotic behaviour. Also, he and I differ, but all that is hypothetical, two armchair generals pulling theories out of their, er, gazoo.

Day after tomorrow, I will meet him, if my health permits; I am still in very indifferent state. I have already warned him that I have a lot to ask to update myself on current doctrine (or lack of it). Please understand that I may share what is appropriate to share from our conversations, and also that he, too, has an information lag, the lag between military decision-maker and military serving officer not taking these decisions, and the additional lag between the serving officer and his civilian friend.

It is already clear that there has been a significant shift in thinking and in threat perception in Army, Navy and Air Force. Honestly speaking, the order in terms of capacity and competence should be Navy, Army and Air Force, but the shift is the same. The main threat has changed and is sitting in different locations where we had never paid much attention before, but that have become hot points. The older perceived threats have sunk down lower and are now seen only as areas where the line is to be held, and where natural wear and tear is hoped to grind down the opposition. At the highest level, it is apparently thought that it is a risk that will neutralise itself, over time, over the next two decades, and besides staying on guard, rather better than it has been done so far, it may be inappropriate to make dramatic moves of any kind.

This has been apparent for some time now. If we had had competent leadership at the CDS level, the difficulties of jointmanship, especially between Army and Air Force, would have been resolved by now. As it is, tempers are high, and egos are bruised, and someone who can heal the situation has to be there.



Inception-06 said:


> What are the Indian doctrines regarding the combine warfare of Indian mechanised and armoured Units ? Do you think that the Indian logistical and surveillance doctrine, discipline and drill’s are equally to the Pakistani or have even a edge in some fields or maybe are totally superior ? How would you rate and dossier the Pakistani combine warfare of the mechanised and armour units in relation clashing the Indian military.


I will be making specific enquiries in these areas anyway. The impression is that there are five sectors that are focus areas - the alpine sector, the high mountain sector, the forested hill sector, the plains and the desert. At the moment, there is no sixth, contrary to speculation that has appeared here. These all relate to the western front, not to the northern front. There are differences in approach in all five.

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
3


----------



## iLION12345_1

Inception-06 said:


> Have you seen my previous posts above about human and machine regarding their effectiveness in battlefield ?


Not sure, can you link some of them here, thank you

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Inception-06

iLION12345_1 said:


> Not sure, can you link some of them here, thank you


Post in thread 'Mechanised Divisions Pakistan Army'
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/mechanised-divisions-pakistan-army.529460/post-13580673


----------



## Inception-06

Joe Shearer said:


> I would love to discuss these aspects, but I need time.
> 
> The problem is that my generation, my cohort retired between nine to seven years ago. There are juniors from SSP, but they too have retired. I have to dig hard to get to any of the sub-juniors. To give you a perspective, my roll number is in the very low 100s; the current number has crossed 5000.
> 
> All this while, since you posted, I have been talking to a buddy who is still in touch. HIS cohort has reached the top of the field grade, and is on the verge of critical selections, and he is quite up to date. To be quite honest, we spend a lot of time cursing various people and their idiotic behaviour. Also, he and I differ, but all that is hypothetical, two armchair generals pulling theories out of their, er, gazoo.
> 
> Day after tomorrow, I will meet him, if my health permits; I am still in very indifferent state. I have already warned him that I have a lot to ask to update myself on current doctrine (or lack of it). Please understand that I may share what is appropriate to share from our conversations, and also that he, too, has an information lag, the lag between military decision-maker and military serving officer not taking these decisions, and the additional lag between the serving officer and his civilian friend.
> 
> It is already clear that there has been a significant shift in thinking and in threat perception in Army, Navy and Air Force. Honestly speaking, the order in terms of capacity and competence should be Navy, Army and Air Force, but the shift is the same. The main threat has changed and is sitting in different locations where we had never paid much attention before, but that have become hot points. The older perceived threats have sunk down lower and are now seen only as areas where the line is to be held, and where natural wear and tear is hoped to grind down the opposition. At the highest level, it is apparently thought that it is a risk that will neutralise itself, over time, over the next two decades, and besides staying on guard, rather better than it has been done so far, it may be inappropriate to make dramatic moves of any kind.
> 
> This has been apparent for some time now. If we had had competent leadership at the CDS level, the difficulties of jointmanship, especially between Army and Air Force, would have been resolved by now. As it is, tempers are high, and egos are bruised, and someone who can heal the situation has to be there.
> 
> 
> I will be making specific enquiries in these areas anyway. The impression is that there are five sectors that are focus areas - the alpine sector, the high mountain sector, the forested hill sector, the plains and the desert. At the moment, there is no sixth, contrary to speculation that has appeared here. These all relate to the western front, not to the northern front. There are differences in approach in all five.



I wish you a healthy recovery, peace !

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Joe Shearer

iLION12345_1 said:


> I’ll leave the tactics part of the discussion to the others since I’m not too well versed in that, and I only know enough about the doctrines of either side to know how their forces and equipment will be used.
> 
> However if such a discussion is held by the others, I’d love to give insight and compare the technical and technological aspects, that’s my field
> 
> PS: happy to see Sir Joe back on the forum, always a pleasure to read your posts. Hope you’re doing well.




Good ole Joe, not Sir Joe.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Signalian

Identify all armored vehs

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Inception-06

Signalian said:


> Identify all armored vehs



Will be grilled so or so before they reach their destination. No sorry, the one is of course the TOS-1 Buratino, the rest is homework for @Zarvan who seems to be totally absence from PDF.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Signalian

Inception-06 said:


> Will be grilled so or so before they reach their destination. No sorry, the one is of course the TOS-1 Buratino, the rest is homework for @Zarvan who seems to be totally absence from PDF.







all troops are mounted in the streets.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Inception-06

Signalian said:


> all troops are mounted in the streets.



Dismount and spread to the flanks, some can stay behind the vehicles while the gunner und vehicle commander continues to surveillance the forwarding area- men even the Syrias have perfected that baby lessons.

Because they are to afraid or even don’t know how to dismount ? Feeling saver inside and waiting for some Drone attacks or RPGs, Molotov cocktails or more terrifying NLAWS or Javelins, I don’t see any rational thing in the Russian art of war fighting compared to NATO standards, may be I am to ideally and to NATO drilled. What your assumption? Possible that Pakistanis are better artists in this field ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Hakikat ve Hikmet

PanzerKiel said:


> Cmon dear, you still believe that Ukraine is behind all these counters?


It's a JV!! For a reason, a number of JVs for the critical components, especially for the engines of all sorts, were formed b/w the Ukranian and Turkish companies a couple of years back! Even a thief finds a way out if he starts planning early....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hakikat ve Hikmet

Inception-06 said:


> that Pakistanis are better artists in this field ?


Who had won over the Soviets and NATO in Afganistan??? Running over a garrison of 34K troops - without any air, armored artlillary, naval, logistics etc. support - stationed 1200 miles away and being surrounded by 15:1 enemy advantage is the epitome of the Indo-Soviet military success in the last 50 years....

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Signalian

Inception-06 said:


> Dismount and spread to the flanks, some can stay behind the vehicles while the gunner und vehicle commander continues to surveillance the forwarding area- men even the Syrias are perfected that baby lessons.
> 
> Because they are to afraid or even don’t know how to dismount ? Feeling saver inside and waiting for some Drone attacks or RPGs, Molotov cocktails or more terrifying NLAWS or Javelins, I don’t see any rational thing in the Russian art of war fighting compared to NATO standards, may be I am to ideally and to NATO drilled. What your assumption? Possible that Pakistanis are better artists in this field ?


They are not anticipating resistance from the streets in the form of RPG or ATGM or bazooka. Maybe the town has been cleared from Ukranian soldiers while civilians could be carrying AKs only which wont leave a dent even on the armored vehs. Possibly the routes for convoys offer no threat except from the air (UCAV).

Now have you noted the amount of russian army trucks in other videos. Those are the support vehs to sustain armored and mechanized forces. Next, Russian soldiers are moving in MRAPs instead of light 4x4s like pickups or SUVs. Basically there are T-72s, BMPs and MRAPs.

Notice three things in below video:

1. civilian cars driving as if its a normal day
2. Russian MRAP engaging Ukranian Strela at short distance
3. Strela not engaging MRAP 








PanzerKiel said:


> Cmon dear, you still believe that Ukraine is behind all these counters?


If it was Ukrainian's, then such attacks would have been occurring from Day-1 on Ukrainian-Russian border. In fact, Russians might not have made it to outskirts of Kyiv in a matter of a day or 2. "Droning" has started a bit late, nonetheless, its effective.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Signalian

Joe Shearer said:


> I would love to discuss these aspects, but I need time.


Time ? 
That is Sunderji's doctrine. 

Try the IBG doctrine, bring your best energies forward, don't wait for reserves or amassing all energy for a full scale invasion on PDF.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
6


----------



## Joe Shearer

Signalian said:


> Time ?
> That is Sunderji's doctrine.
> 
> Try the IBG doctrine, bring your best energies forward, don't wait for reserves or amassing all energy for a full scale invasion on PDF.


With @PanzerKiel watching, and laughing himself into hiccups over every other post, I dare not.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
5


----------



## Inception-06

Signalian said:


> Time ?
> That is Sunderji's doctrine.
> 
> Try the IBG doctrine, bring your best energies forward, don't wait for reserves or amassing all energy for a full scale invasion on PDF.



The Drones are making new rules on the battlefield, anything Pakistan can throw against it, expect the static GDF guns. ( I guess the Drones have reduced the price and attractiveness of the Russian equipment.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Inception-06 said:


> The Drones are making new rules on the battlefield, anything Pakistan can throw against ? expect the static GDF guns.


Triangulation through inter-linked radars for detecting and then tracking drone. A laser guided SAM achieving LOS (line of sight) trajectory for targeting the drone like (RBS-70 with Gir-radar) could be better than targeting with a heat-seeker SAM like Anza series/Stinger.

Those 35mm/40mm AAA guns are linked with Gir-radar too for pin-point accuracy to tear away any threat (UAV/gunships) which passes through SAM line. They are also effective against drone-swarm attack and mini/micro drones so wouldnt count them out yet. As for static, load GDFs onto a flat bed and move them around. Static is fine too. Barrels and Tubes combination is effective, they compliment each other.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Inception-06

Signalian said:


> Triangulation through inter-linked radars for detecting and then tracking drone. A laser guided SAM achieving LOS (line of sight) trajectory for targeting the drone like (RBS-70 with Gir-radar) could be better than targeting with a heat-seeker SAM like Anza series/Stinger.
> 
> Those 35mm/40mm AAA guns are linked with Gir-radar too for pin-point accuracy to tear away any threat (UAV/gunships) which passes through SAM line. They are also affective against drone-swarm attack and mini/micro drones so wouldnt count them out yet. As for static, load GDFs onto a flat bed and move them around. Static is fine too. Barrels and Tubes combination is effective, they compliment each other.



Hopefully Indians haven’t something like the Turkish Drones, what you write sound logically and good, but what I see from the Russians as self declared superpower regarding the SHORAD performance its a joke.


----------



## Signalian

Inception-06 said:


> Hopefully Indians haven’t something like the Turkish Drones, what you write sound logically and good, but what I see from the Russians as self declared superpower regarding the SHORAD performance its a joke.


Which AD do you have in mind as an effective counter to UAVs ?

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Signalian

Hakikat ve Hikmet said:


> Who had won over the Soviets and NATO in Afganistan??? Running over a garrison of 34K troops - without any air, armored artlillary, naval, logistics etc. support - stationed 1200 miles away and being surrounded by 15:1 enemy advantage is the epitome of the Indo-Soviet military success in the last 50 years....


Alright back to the thread.

Have you seen videos of Ukrainian civilians confronting Russian Armored vehicles like MBTs? Pondering why Tanks are operating in smaller groups without infantry support.

Secondly, tanks and other vehicles running out of fuel. This is the logistical part which comes in planning before invasion and then sustainability during campaign. I have been saying in Indo-Pak scenario that PA logistics line has to be held intact if Strike Corps were to cross border and enter India. 

In Russia's case, was the scale of invasion too quick than anticipated by Russian Generals ? Were Logistics slow to catch up ? Was it badly planned from the start ? Were local fuel resources (Ukrainian petrol pumps) considered as an alternative ? 

Ordinance by MBTs may not have been spent much however there was lot of small arms and artillery fire, so ordinance and ammo supplies shouldn't be an issue.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Inception-06

Signalian said:


> Which AD do you have in mind as an effective counter to UAVs ?




Your description with the RBS-70 and the OTHER MANPAD inventory could be tested in training sessions with the PAKISTANI DRONES.

A development of a Anti-UAV Defense System (AUDS) in Pakistan in collaboration with Turkey or China. Something like the Chinese TY-90 the Yitian or in the line with US Stryker SHORAD version. The Drone Shrek is a new phenomenal factor which can be dealt with a in-house solution, the military leaders see it as necessary.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Signalian

Is a 5-km long armored and supply convoy lined up on the road a good idea ? 
Fuel, logistics, armored vehs. 

Pros and Cons please ?



Joe Shearer said:


> With @PanzerKiel watching, and laughing himself into hiccups over every other post, I dare not.


I have given diverse food for thought in posts after request from Inception-06's. 
Care to chip in now.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hakikat ve Hikmet

Inception-06 said:


> A development of a Anti-UAV Defense System (AUDS) in Pakistan in collaboration with Turkey or China.


A Turkish plan is to extract a thorn with a thorn!! Hence, Akinji and Aksungur type heavy load long duration UAVs with on-the-fly AI capability, AESA radars, BVR/WVR A2A missiles, EW suites, laser weapons etc. are being planned to be deployed in a net centric environment at 40K to 50K ft altitude in large numbers for a 24/7 coverage....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Oldman1

Signalian said:


> Is a 5-km long armored and supply convoy lined up on the road a good idea ?
> Fuel, logistics, armored vehs.
> 
> Pros and Cons please ?
> 
> 
> I have given diverse food for thought in posts after request from Inception-06's.
> Care to chip in now.



I can't think of pro thing about it, except being close together.



https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FMs3zuJWQAU58J9?format=jpg&name=large


----------



## Signalian

Inception-06 said:


> A development of a Anti-UAV Defense System (AUDS) in Pakistan in collaboration with Turkey or China.


I personally like ADATs.

A regiment or 2 in every Armored/Mechanized Division. 18-24 launchers per regiment on M-113 chassis. Upgraded 10 Km+ range to take out ground and air threats. Its a swing role platform. 

You saw that Ukrainian Strela coming up on Russian MRAP. That MRAP would have been history if ADATs was installed on Strela chassis.



Oldman1 said:


> I can't think of pro thing about it, except being close together.
> 
> 
> 
> https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FMs3zuJWQAU58J9?format=jpg&name=large


Doesn't it show desperation for providing supplies? failure to plan supplies and routes and timing ?
It also shows that Russians dont fear Ukrainian aerial attacks by gunships, UCAVS, aircrafts or even ambushes from Ukrainian ground forces. The "highway of death" in 1991 Gulf war should not be repeated. 

Russian isn't facing USAF or NATO-AF, story would be different then.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

Signalian said:


> Alright back to the thread.
> 
> Have you seen videos of Ukrainian civilians confronting Russian Armored vehicles like MBTs? Pondering why Tanks are operating in smaller groups without infantry support.
> 
> Secondly, tanks and other vehicles running out of fuel. This is the logistical part which comes in planning before invasion and then sustainability during campaign. I have been saying in Indo-Pak scenario that PA logistics line has to be held intact if Strike Corps were to cross border and enter India.
> 
> In Russia's case, was the scale of invasion too quick than anticipated by Russian Generals ? Were Logistics slow to catch up ? Was it badly planned from the start ? Were local fuel resources (Ukrainian petrol pumps) considered as an alternative ?
> 
> Ordinance by MBTs may not have been spent much however there was lot of small arms and artillery fire, so ordinance and ammo supplies shouldn't be an issue.


Way too fast and lack of training and not much motivation and sending conscripts with mostly old or broken down equipment who most don't even know why or where they are or think they just doing exercises. If it was exercises, it's the most realistic ever in military training of what not to do.



Signalian said:


> I personally like ADATs.
> 
> A regiment or 2 in every Armored/Mechanized Division. 18-24 launchers per regiment on M-113 chassis. Upgraded 10 Km+ range to take out ground and air threats. Its a swing role platform.
> 
> You saw that Ukrainian Strela coming up on Russian MRAP. That MRAP would have been history if ADATs was installed on Strela chassis.
> 
> 
> Doesn't it show desperation for providing supplies? failure to plan supplies and routes and timing ?
> It also shows that Russians dont fear Ukrainian aerial attacks by gunships, UCAVS, aircrafts or even ambushes from Ukrainian ground forces. The "highway of death" in 1991 Gulf war should not be repeated.
> 
> Russian isn't facing USAF or NATO-AF, story would be different then.


Either it shows no fear of possible airstrikes or artillery on those supply convoys or they are just poorly trained or very ignorant.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Signalian

Oldman1 said:


> Way too fast and lack of training and not much motivation and sending conscripts with mostly old or broken down equipment who most don't even know why or where they are or think they just doing exercises. If it was exercises, it's the most realistic ever in military training of what not to do.


So you identified "training" issues and that conscripts probably don't give better results in war. Are officers also conscripts ?

I think the command and control also needs to improve a lot. Russia had good experience of air strikes in Syrian war, however this invasion is dominantly ground force. A brigade-structure would have been better for cohesion among regiments for command and control. US Army shifted to Brigade sized structure for effective deployment leading up to war. Russian forces in smaller groups (company level) seem to lack that.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Oldman1

Signalian said:


> So you identified "training" issues and that conscripts probably don't give better results in war. Are officers also conscripts ?
> 
> I think the command and control also needs to improve a lot. Russia had good experience of air strikes in Syrian war, however this invasion is dominantly ground force. A brigade-structure would have been better for cohesion among regiments for command and control. US Army shifted to Brigade sized structure for effective deployment leading up to war. Russian forces in smaller groups (company level) seem to lack that.


Yes they have lots of experience in air strikes as we have seen in Syria, but since this is Ukraine and Putin says he's a liberator, that pretty held him back, but at the same time, most of the troops involved have no experience as well as lack of training mostly due to corruption where the money was suppose to be used for training and equipment but went instead into the pockets of the politicians.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Inception-06

Signalian said:


> Is a 5-km long armored and supply convoy lined up on the road a good idea ?
> Fuel, logistics, armored vehs.
> 
> Pros and Cons please ?
> 
> 
> I have given diverse food for thought in posts after request from Inception-06's.
> Care to chip in now.



Really Brother I get headaches watching Russian convoy movement-

- no convoy discipline in camouflage
- I don’t see any tactical movement of convoy with a protection against hidden insurgents for example first middle and last vehicles should the best protected and weaponed and be responsible for commanding and and leading the fight against ambushes
- the convoy vehicles mainly trucks haven’t any medium machine guns on the top hatches and no measures for observing and firing positions on the sides and rear of the trucks and other vehicles
- UAV surveillance, ELINT and ground reconnaissance should be drilled and implemented and their result’s calculated in the battle or convoy movement plan
- there doesn’t exist any plan or tactics in convoy movement like restrictions of vehicles to a limited numbers
- medium machine guns are installed less on all vehicles, the Russians are facing mainly infantry, while the Russians try heavily deploy large calibres against this infantry, so mass of the Russians vehicles are equipped with big calibres weapons, but the advantages of medium machine guns is, more ammunition for fire suppression, aiming and firing is faster and easier then larger calibres, the bullet straying is greater and faster
- air defence network with observation and surveillance must be established over the battlefield, while the air defence units must be protected by dismounted infantry

What I noticed I the in first two days, and I deleted many times my posts, thought it couldn’t be true, the Russians are repeating the same failures of Afghanistan and Chechen war. What they have learned their seemed not to be written any where. They don’t to have the quality of structure, discipline and training like the NATO standards, very low level leading by the command as you mention it above. I don’t see any concept or plan here.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Oldman1

Inception-06 said:


> Really Brother I get headaches watching Russian convoy movement-











Feeding the Bear: A Closer Look at Russian Army Logistics and the Fait Accompli - War on the Rocks


Editor's note: Don't miss our comprehensive guide to Russia's war against Ukraine. Russia’s military buildup along the border with Ukraine has



warontherocks.com




I just include a sample, but the rest is in the link about the logistics of the Russian Army.

_Lt. Col. Alex Vershinin commissioned as a second lieutenant, branched armor, in 2002. He has 10 years of frontline experience in Korea, Iraq, and Afghanistan, including four combat tours. Since 2014, he has worked as a modeling and simulations officer in concept development and experimentation field for NATO and the U.S. Army, including a tour at the U.S. Army Sustainment Battle Lab, where he led the experimentation scenario team._
FEEDING THE BEAR: A CLOSER LOOK AT RUSSIAN ARMY LOGISTICS AND THE FAIT ACCOMPLI​ALEX VERSHININ
NOVEMBER 23, 2021
COMMENTARY

"Most of these wargames, such as RAND’s Baltic study, focus on _fait accompli,_ an attack by the Russian government aimed at seizing terrain — then quickly digging in. This creates a dilemma for NATO: launch a costly counter-attack and risk heavy casualties and possibly a nuclear crisis or accept a Russian _fait accompli_ and undermine faith in the credibility of the alliance. Some analysts have argued that these seizures are much more likely to be small in size, limited to one or two towns. While that scenario should, of course, be studied, the concern about the feasibility of a _fait accompli_ in the form of a major invasion still stands.

While the Russian army definitely has the combat power to achieve these scenarios, does Russia have the logistics force structure to support these operations? The short answer is not in the timelines envisioned by Western wargames. In an initial offensive — depending on the fighting involved — Russian forces might reach early objectives, but logistics would impose requirements for operational pauses. As a result, a large land grab is unrealistic as a _fait accompli_. The Russian army has the combat power to capture the objectives envisioned in a _fait accompli_ scenario, but it does not have the logistic forces to do it in a single push without a logistical pause to reset its sustainment infrastructure. The Russian Aerospace Forces (with a sizable tactical bomber and attack aircraft force) and attack helicopters can also pick up fire support to alleviate artillery ammunition consumption.

NATO planners should develop plans focusing on exploiting Russian logistic challenges rather than trying to address the disparity in combat power. This involves drawing the Russian army deep into NATO territory and stretching Russian supply lines to the maximum while targeting logistics and transportation infrastructure such as trucks, railroad bridges, and pipelines. Committing to a decisive battle at the frontier would play directly into Russian hands, allowing a shorter supply to compensate for their logistic shortfalls."

*Railroads and Russian Logistics Capabilities*

Russian army logistics forces are not designed for a large-scale ground offensive far from their railroads. Inside maneuver units, Russian sustainment units are a size lower than their Western counterparts. Only brigades have an equivalent logistics capability, but it’s not an exact comparison. Russian formations have only three-quarters the number of combat vehicles as their U.S. counterparts but almost three times as much artillery. On paper (not all brigades have a full number of battalions), Russian brigades have two artillery battalions, a rocket battalion, and two air defense battalions per brigade as opposed to one artillery battalion and an attached air defense company per U.S. brigade. As a result of extra artillery and air defense battalions, the Russian logistics requirements are much larger than their U.S. counterparts.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## farooqbhai007

Signalian said:


> They are not anticipating resistance from the streets in the form of RPG or ATGM or bazooka. Maybe the town has been cleared from Ukranian soldiers while civilians could be carrying AKs only which wont leave a dent even on the armored vehs. Possibly the routes for convoys offer no threat except from the air (UCAV).
> 
> Now have you noted the amount of russian army trucks in other videos. Those are the support vehs to sustain armored and mechanized forces. Next, Russian soldiers are moving in MRAPs instead of light 4x4s like pickups or SUVs. Basically there are T-72s, BMPs and MRAPs.
> 
> Notice three things in below video:
> 
> 1. civilian cars driving as if its a normal day
> 2. Russian MRAP engaging Ukranian Strela at short distance
> 3. Strela not engaging MRAP
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If it was Ukrainian's, then such attacks would have been occurring from Day-1 on Ukrainian-Russian border. In fact, Russians might not have made it to outskirts of Kyiv in a matter of a day or 2. "Droning" has started a bit late, nonetheless, its effective.


Thats a Ukrainian Kozak Mrap

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

farooqbhai007 said:


> Thats a Ukrainian Kozak Mrap


Russian convoy has spread to 17 miles.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sayfullah

PanzerKiel said:


> Cmon dear, you still believe that Ukraine is behind all these counters?


Ukraine should be a lesson to all Muslim countries like Pakistan tho. Sending weapons to Rohingya or to any other Muslim group resisting occupation isn’t wrong. If west can support Ukrainians against Russia and openly send weapons then why can’t we against an irrelevant state like Burma? This is the perfect time as well because world won’t care about such irrelevant states and won’t even care to stop us. 

BIG lesson for Muslim states. NO ONE IS YOUR ALLY EXCEPT YOUR SELVES. STOP SUCKING WEST’S D*ck and grow some balls and stand for what you believe in! 

No one will come defend us, no one will help us , no one will care about us. Only people who will help us are our Muslim brothers. Quit the crying sanctions and help our Muslim brothers around the world. 

PDFers crying there’s no ummah. Man the whites are more united then you. Look at the whites “ummah” work. A white nation was attacked all came to its defence yet y’all want to continue fighting your brothers. 

@PanzerKiel you tell me your self, what is the difference between Ukraine and say Palestine or Kashmir or Rohingyas etc? You said your self rn others are behind this. Why shall we muslim countries and Muslim armies stay quiet and see our Muslim brothers get massacred mercilessly around the world? Where’s our ghairat? Where’s the only Muslim nuclear power in the world? Where’s the largest Muslim army in the world why can’t we provide atgms and manpads to our fellow Muslim brothers or our own people our jugular view Kashmir? Why don’t we have Javid Nasir’s or Hameed Gul’s in our army anymore?


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1498488294413373448
40 miles long 😳



Signalian said:


> Russian convoy has spread to 17 miles.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Whatever the geographical implications of this conflict are.. One thing is guaranteed, that from now on pdf will move away from just technical details/comparisons and towards a more professional approach to kinetic warfare.

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Jf-17 block 3 said:


> Why don’t we have Javid Nasir’s or Hameed Gul’s in our army anymore?


Because they had to retire one day.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Haha Haha:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> What your assumption? Possible that Pakistanis are better artists in this field ?


We fared relatively well in the battles against Taliban especially those in Bajaur. Our infantry was always leading and covering the tanks. We were in the initial period of WoT and had not developed proper tactics for COIN ops still we are able to root out the ttp. The terrain was much more complicated and fire support was limited due to civs. Much of the credit goes to one man- Gen Tariq khan, who happened to be of armour.
We were able to develop our own operational concept called the A4I (Armour, Arty, Airforce, Aviation and Infantry). This paid great dividends and must have helped improve our conventional planning as well.



Signalian said:


> rsonally like ADATs.
> 
> A regiment or 2 in every Armored/Mechanized Division. 18-24 launchers per regiment on M-113 chassis. Upgraded 10 Km+ range to take out ground and air threats. Its a swing role platform


What if AD support is required at one place and HAT support somewhere else.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> We were able to develop our own operational concept called the A4I (Armour, Arty, Airforce, Aviation and Infantry). This paid great dividends and must have helped improve our conventional planning as well


You forgot the most important element... 
L..... Logistics.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
4 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> You forgot the most important element...
> L..... Logistics.


I was talking about infantry support to armoured.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Oldman1

PanzerKiel said:


> You forgot the most important element...
> L..... Logistics.


So just upgrade it from A4I to A4IL.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
5


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> This paid great dividends and must have helped improve our conventional planning as well.


Not at all. It was not bound to be otherwise.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> Not at all. It was not bound to be otherwise.


It was only for WoT?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> Not at all. It was not bound to be otherwise.





Desert Fox 1 said:


> It was only for WoT?


What about its effects at tactical lvl? There it must've been fruitful?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## arjunk

Signalian said:


> Is a 5-km long armored and supply convoy lined up on the road a good idea ?
> Fuel, logistics, armored vehs.
> 
> Pros and Cons please ?
> 
> 
> I have given diverse food for thought in posts after request from Inception-06's.
> Care to chip in now.


Normally this is a terrible idea. However, this indicates that Russians are confident of their hold of the skies.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Desert Fox 1 said:


> What if AD support is required at one place and HAT support somewhere else.


One system. Two roles. 
Swing from AD to AT or AT to AD.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jhungary

Inception-06 said:


> @jhungary I have written a little bit about human and machines in the above post. Would you like to comment it ? It would be a great honour for us I don’t expect that you favour any side, but it’s a great contribution for the readers and Members, who have other views. I am not an expert but, trying my best to learn from everyone being it Indians like @Joe Shearer or @Nilgiri ( I think that was his name) or any other nation, I am absolutely not discriminate, when someone can have great analytical discussion.



Just finish reading you post. 

First of all, you need to understand war is a 3-dimensional things, you cannot just compare strength per strength (i.e. your tanks vs Indian tank, you aircraft vs their aircraft, or your soldier vs their soldier and so on) Warfighting Capability is a complex matrix and it basically focus on 3 things. 

1.) The Force you process
2.) The ability you can support such force
3.) The ability you can replace such force 

Explanation - 

1.) Pretty straight forward, how much force you have at hand that you can use to conduct a war. It's quite obvious how much warfighting power is directly proportional to how many tanks, fighter, ships, artillery and etc you have. That I don't need to explain.

2.) Just because you have X amount of force, that does not translate to you can deploy such force in battle as a whole. For example, say you have 1700 fighter aircrafts, that does not mean you can have all 1700 up in the sky at one time and engage your enemy at the same time, some of those aircraft is going to be on down time, some of those are not going to be at the same AO (Area of Operation) and some of those are going to be hold in reserve and etc. Now, how much aircraft you can send is directly proportional to how quick you can arm and fuel your aircraft and make them combat ready. So that number you can put up in a war is not going to have the entire stock up in the air. And that number largely depends on several variable, logistic capability, maintenance capability and so on.

3.) Combat lost have to be replaced, and by combat lost I don't just mean the tank you lost in combat, or the ship that's sunk, but every single bullet, grenade, missile, artillery round, tank round, rocket have to be replaced in war, because once you'd used it, that's gone, you need to replace it somehow, you cannot fight a war if you do not have the capability to replace something. That means local industry support, local manufacturing capability. 

Now, I am not try to offend you or any of our Pakistani member. Objective analysis would suggest there are no way Pakistan can keep up with the Warfighting Capability of India, any sort of thought that this is on par is not logical or unreasonable and hence damaging your own warfighting capability. Because you are building your battle on a unreasonable calculation.

Why? Number wise, you may be able to catch up, but with less manpower (a lot of logistic and replacement effort are manpower extensive) and less economic might, Pakistan will suffer on point 2 and 3 above. I mean you can adjust some different with being efficient on something or have an automated process, but the sheer manpower India can dump on maintaining war effort dwarf Pakistan, you are talking about a billion more people, that's 6 time the man hour over Pakistan that Indian can dump into any field, which mean they can replace stuff faster and maintain a supply chain longer. Simply because they have more man power to spare. 

If you want I can do a more detail comparison between the 2 country using the 3 points I raise at a latter day, I won't be doing it here because it would make this post 19 pages long........

So does that mean it is lost? No. That is what force multiplier come in. Since Pakistan realistically do not have enough Warfighting Power to resist India. You must be looking at X-Factors (not that TV-show), by that I mean you need to think of something that will increase your strategic depth and does not increase the burden of your warfighting capability. Things like an cooperation with Chinese ISTAR asset, like what the Ukrainian did with Russian now, sure, Russian can destroy the entire Target Acquisition network (eg Radar, Scout, Drone and so on) but they cannot destroy the communication between Ukrainian and NATO, and when Ukrainian incorporated themselves with NATO L-3 Communication Network, which mean NATO can share information from their asset to Ukraine, which in effect can direct their Air Defence even tho their own Radar has been knocked out by the Russian. Pakistan can do the same vis-a-vis China. 

The problem Pakistan facing is that Pakistan is a long and narrow country compare to India, which mean Pakistan need to focus on area denial weapon (like bombs fortification and so on) instead of point to point weapon.(eg missile) Pakistan need to be able to hit India in a wide area if and when they advance, and missile cannot do the job because 1 missile is on 1 target, say if you fire a missile on a tank, you destroy that tank, but if you drop a smart bomb or cluster bomb on a tank column, you destroy the things next to it as well. Which mean the A2/AD capability should be Pakistan first priority

Another factor is increasing the strategic depth, overland, that mean radar system, coordination with Chinese ISTAR network, you need to know what India is doing on their side of the table, which means Early Warning capability, because that will give you time to react and in term you can start the first step of your fight before the Indian Military move out from their own staging area, formulate and plan your move before you know they will hit you. You can also use the sea/coast as an extension of the strategic depth, Naval Borne Drone take up no space on land, but you can put them to work overland. I will not go so far to suggest Pakistan should get a Aircraft Carrier because that would mean escort, fuel, aircraft, which in turn will becoming a liability. What I am suggesting is for Pakistan Navy get an added function (Oh my god, this is not about COVID) to have them fight both Naval and Land warfare, thus bolstering your land force, there are several ways to do that, you can focus on the ISTAR capability like having a MQ-8 Fire Scout or MQ-21 drone (Or similar Chinese Drone) to perform target acquisition and surveillance overland or go all the way to provide a full land combat solution by employing Drones like XQ-58 and Loyal Wingman that can provide combat support overland.

Reactions: Like Like:
6 | Love Love:
3


----------



## bananarepublic

PanzerKiel said:


> You forgot the most important element...
> L..... Logistics.


Look look, we've got a logistics nerd. 
Don't you know big tank and big gun win wars.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2 | Sad Sad:
2


----------



## Signalian

bananarepublic said:


> Look look, we've got a logistics nerd.
> Don't you know big tank and big gun win wars.


How many trucks are in a S&T battalion ?
How many 2.5T, 5T ?
How many trucks and trailers ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Signalian

@bananarepublic 

And when u have answered the above, why don’t you tell us why every cantonment had a station commander and what’s his primary role ?

Secondly, why has PA made the post of LOG AREA Commander and what’s his role ?

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Signalian

bananarepublic said:


> Look look, we've got a logistics nerd.
> Don't you know big tank and big gun win wars.


Here is a MCQ for you. A vehicle is stuck in sand. Who is the best driver option to get the vehicle out ? And why ? 

A. Armour regiment driver
B. Motorised infantry battalion driver 
C. ASC driver 
D. Ordnance unit drive

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
5


----------



## farooqbhai007

I have a question though , PA doesn't seem to have 8x8 trucks in standard service apart for those in specialized roles like engineering , bridges etc.

Reactions: Love Love:
2


----------



## Signalian

farooqbhai007 said:


> I have a question though , PA doesn't seem to have 8x8 trucks in standard service apart for those in specialized roles like engineering , bridges etc.


How are Pakistani roads, Sindh to AJK ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Inception-06

@Signalian is blasting away the naiv Members of PDF without mercy, all the birds have gone stealth, when such discussion are taking form and dynamic ! Keep on !

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
4


----------



## bananarepublic

Signalian said:


> @bananarepublic
> 
> And when u have answered the above, why don’t you tell us why every cantonment had a station commander and what’s his primary role ?
> 
> Secondly, why has PA made the post of LOG AREA Commander and what’s his role ?





Inception-06 said:


> @Signalian is blasting away the naiv Members of PDF without mercy, all the birds have gone stealth, when such discussion are taking form and dynamic ! Keep on !


Bhai can't you guys understand sarcasm, really sometimes you guys get a bit serious

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
2 | Sad Sad:
2


----------



## Cuirassier

Forgive my long hiatus, but was just wondering whether the Phase-1 order of AK-1s (110xtks) was meant to equip 2 standard armoured regiments, or 3 recce regts. would appreciate a response.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Cuirassier said:


> Forgive my long hiatus, but was just wondering whether the Phase-1 order of AK-1s (110xtks) was meant to equip 2 standard armoured regiments, or 3 recce regts. would appreciate a response.


Armoured regts. Since they are in IBGs(karachi).

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Cuirassier

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Armoured regts. Since they are in IBGs(karachi).


IABGs or directly under 25 Mech Div?

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Cuirassier said:


> IABGs or directly under 25 Mech Div?


In the IABG that is most probably under 25 mech, Malir.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## GriffinsRule

Jf-17 block 3 said:


> Ukraine should be a lesson to all Muslim countries like Pakistan tho. Sending weapons to Rohingya or to any other Muslim group resisting occupation isn’t wrong. If west can support Ukrainians against Russia and openly send weapons then why can’t we against an irrelevant state like Burma? This is the perfect time as well because world won’t care about such irrelevant states and won’t even care to stop us.
> 
> BIG lesson for Muslim states. NO ONE IS YOUR ALLY EXCEPT YOUR SELVES. STOP SUCKING WEST’S D*ck and grow some balls and stand for what you believe in!
> 
> No one will come defend us, no one will help us , no one will care about us. Only people who will help us are our Muslim brothers. Quit the crying sanctions and help our Muslim brothers around the world.
> 
> PDFers crying there’s no ummah. Man the whites are more united then you. Look at the whites “ummah” work. A white nation was attacked all came to its defence yet y’all want to continue fighting your brothers.
> 
> @PanzerKiel you tell me your self, what is the difference between Ukraine and say Palestine or Kashmir or Rohingyas etc? You said your self rn others are behind this. Why shall we muslim countries and Muslim armies stay quiet and see our Muslim brothers get massacred mercilessly around the world? Where’s our ghairat? Where’s the only Muslim nuclear power in the world? Where’s the largest Muslim army in the world why can’t we provide atgms and manpads to our fellow Muslim brothers or our own people our jugular view Kashmir? Why don’t we have Javid Nasir’s or Hameed Gul’s in our army anymore?
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1498488294413373448
> 40 miles long 😳


In case you forgot, we rather send those weapons to Burma instead of Rohingyas.

Reminds me of a verse...kawwa chala hans ki chal, apni bhi bhool giya.

Before trying to emulate the European powers, that can openly send weapons to groups that help them with their strategic goals (not out of brotherly feelings or religion) make yourself capable first and rise to their level. Talk is cheap otherwise.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Signalian

Double minded whether Russian convoy is stalled coz of supply, break down, resistance or are Russians waiting for a strategic political point in time to occur.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Tipu7

Signalian said:


> Double minded whether Russian convoy is stalled coz of supply, break down, resistance or are Russians waiting for a strategic political point in time to occur.



My 2cents:

Russians have dominance over the battlefield. They can concentrate their forces as they perceive no threat from Ukraine - atleast in that war theater.
Plus,
Russians are avoiding muddy routes for movement of wheeled vehicles. There have been incidents where wheeled vehicles have been trapped and eventually abandoned by Russians.
The convoy, IMO, is there waiting for next decision to be made. Till then, it's 'posturing war strength'.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Signalian

Tipu7 said:


> My 2cents:
> 
> Russians have dominance over the battlefield. They can concentrate their forces as they perceive no threat from Ukraine - atleast in that war theater.
> Plus,
> Russians are avoiding muddy routes for movement of wheeled vehicles. There have been incidents where wheeled vehicles have been trapped and eventually abandoned by Russians.
> The convoy, IMO, is there waiting for next decision to be made. Till then, it's 'posturing war strength'.


End of feb was a good time in regards to weather. No more snow hopefully. Going in towards summers from now on.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

Signalian said:


> End of feb was a good time in regards to weather. No more snow hopefully. Going in towards summers from now on.


Which is another reason to target convoys that just staying on the roads. They are not spread out left and right in the fields.


----------



## Signalian

@PanzerKiel 

For M-113, its the the driver and the commander in the driver’s compartment and 10 men in the personnel compartment. Can additional five troops be seated on the floor between the personnel compartment troop seats ?

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Pappa Alpha

Does Pakistan have any top down attack anti tank weapons like Javelin or MBT LAW? 
If not then why? Is there no suitable Chinese equivalent?

PS: Sorry if this is not relevant to the thread.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Signalian said:


> @PanzerKiel
> 
> For M-113, its the the driver and the commander in the driver’s compartment and 10 men in the personnel compartment. Can additional five troops be seated on the floor between the personnel compartment troop seats ?


Total complement is 13 including driver and commander. They are already very cramped, because apart from their integral weapons they are having the first line ammo of all these weapons and communication sets as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Signalian

PanzerKiel said:


> Total complement is 13 including driver and commander. They are already very cramped, because apart from their integral weapons they are having the first line ammo of all these weapons and communication sets as well.


M-59 had this capacity. It's width was 3.26m compared to M-113 with width 2.68m. Length and height was bit more too.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Signalian said:


> M-59 had this capacity. It's width was 3.26m compared to M-113 with width 2.68m. Length and height was bit more too.
> 
> 
> View attachment 820963


We however choose M113 somehow. Possible reasons can be..

-range of M59 is 150-190 kms, while for M113 is 480 kms.
- M59 is petrol driven, two engines, while M113 has a single diesel engine
-M59 top speed is 32 miles/hour, while M113 is 42 miles / hour

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Signalian

PanzerKiel said:


> We however choose M113 somehow. Possible reasons can be..
> 
> -range of M59 is 150-190 kms, while for M113 is 480 kms.
> - M59 is petrol driven, two engines, while M113 has a single diesel engine
> -M59 top speed is 32 miles/hour, while M113 is 42 miles / hour


and when will PA transition beyond M-113  

say towards an IFV

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Signalian said:


> and when will PA transition beyond M-113
> 
> say towards an IFV


I was exactly thinking yesterday night on this subject, deep thoughts.....once i saw the news that an IDF Namer had turned turtle, injuring its complement.

Transitioning towards equipment is one thing, logically our doctrine must first change, following which the equipment required to enable that doctrine on battlefield should be procured. Thats how logically it should go ahead.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
3


----------



## Joe Shearer

bananarepublic said:


> Look look, we've got a logistics nerd.
> Don't you know big tank and big gun win wars.


I don't understand this reaction. Logistics wins wars. Logistics loses wars.

Oh, perhaps you are being heavily sarcastic, and agreeing with that dictum.



Signalian said:


> @bananarepublic
> 
> And when u have answered the above, why don’t you tell us why every cantonment had a station commander and what’s his primary role ?
> 
> Secondly, why has PA made the post of LOG AREA Commander and what’s his role ?


Take it easy, champ, that has to have been sarcasm.



Signalian said:


> Here is a MCQ for you. A vehicle is stuck in sand. Who is the best driver option to get the vehicle out ? And why ?
> 
> A. Armour regiment driver
> B. Motorised infantry battalion driver
> C. ASC driver
> D. Ordnance unit drive


I suppose you'd have me perma-banned if I said, NOTA; Calcutta Taxi Driver?



Inception-06 said:


> @Signalian is blasting away the naiv Members of PDF without mercy, all the birds have gone stealth, when such discussion are taking form and dynamic ! Keep on !


Birds?

I'm a branch, swaying in the wind.

Reactions: Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## PanzerKiel

Signalian said:


> End of feb was a good time in regards to weather. No more snow hopefully. Going in towards summers from now on.


Onset of rasputitsa is there. End March. Same happened with my division in 1943 in this area, near Kharkov. All ops had to be postponed till Citadel was launched in July 1943. The mud around here, which is about to come, has unimaginable viscosity.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
3


----------



## Signalian

PanzerKiel said:


> Onset of rasputitsa is there. End March. Same happened with my division in 1943 in this area, near Kharkov. All ops had to be postponed till Citadel was launched in July 1943. The mud around here, which is about to come, has unimaginable viscosity.
> 
> View attachment 820965
> View attachment 820966
> View attachment 820967


Russians are staying on the roads at least, not venturing left and right, however, Russian trucks have come a long way since WW2. Hp of tank engines has increased.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Signalian said:


> Russians are staying on the roads at least, not venturing left and right, however, Russian trucks have come a long way since WW2. Hp of tank engines has increased.


Mud is still the biggest worry....i have seen our tanks stuck in Punjab plains, and here the mud is nowhere near to what Ukraine has. At that time, a team of 20 horses couldnt move a single field artillery piece an inch....same for wheeled vehicles....

Mud also increases the fuel consumption....estimate of our times was multiplied by three....strain of logistics.....

Then if its cold as well, mud used to freeze, and in the morning it took us alot of blow torches to get them free....

Nasty times.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Signalian

Joe Shearer said:


> I don't understand this reaction. Logistics wins wars. Logistics loses wars.
> 
> Oh, perhaps you are being heavily sarcastic, and agreeing with that dictum.
> 
> 
> Take it easy, champ, that has to have been sarcasm.
> 
> 
> I suppose you'd have me perma-banned if I said, NOTA; Calcutta Taxi Driver?
> 
> 
> Birds?
> 
> I'm a branch, swaying in the wind.
> 
> View attachment 820964


Somebody jumps in, proves his sarcastic abilities and vanishes without giving an iota of information. Not fair.  

And yes, Lahori Rickshaw driver's navigation and terrain negotiation ability would land them the top ranking  

Once upon a time, a Signal's driver landed Brigade Commander's jeep in a similar position. ASC driver from one of the vehicles following them threw the Siignal-man from the driver's seat and jumped in to bring the jeep on path. In the end it was a valiant officer (Major) who saved the day.



PanzerKiel said:


> Mud is still the biggest worry....i have seen our tanks stuck in Punjab plains, and here the mud is nowhere near to what Ukraine has. At that time, a team of 20 horses couldnt move a single field artillery piece an inch....same for wheeled vehicles....
> 
> Mud also increases the fuel consumption....estimate of our times was multiplied by three....strain of logistics.....
> 
> Then if its cold as well, mud used to freeze, and in the morning it took us alot of blow torches to get them free....
> 
> Nasty times.
> 
> View attachment 820972


I have respect for 80UDs and even the 85UGs. 99% of armored combat is driving, the other 1% would be following orders  

Lucky for us, RVFC thrives through Mona depot.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Oldman1

Army Considering Anti-Idle Technology For JLTV Follow-On Production Deal​








Army Considering Anti-Idle Technology For JLTV Follow-On Production Deal - Defense Daily


NORFOLK, Va. — The Army is considering integrating anti-idle technology as part of its next Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) production contract, which




defensedaily.com




NORFOLK, Va. — The Army is considering integrating anti-idle technology as part of its next Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) production contract, which a lead program official told Defense Daily could serve as a key step toward reduced fuel consumption and…


----------



## Joe Shearer

Signalian said:


> Somebody jumps in, proves his sarcastic abilities and vanishes without giving an iota of information. Not fair.


I did find that a bit annoying.

Reactions: Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Signalian

PanzerKiel said:


> Total complement is 13 including driver and commander. They are already very cramped, because apart from their integral weapons they are having the first line ammo of all these weapons and communication sets as well.


Back to S&T

A truck company of S&T Battalion is supposed to transport 1200 troops in one go, with 75% vehicle availability and roughly 20 troops per vehicle capacity and using trailers for carrying a bit of cargo.

How close is PA's S&T Batts in that ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Signalian said:


> Back to S&T
> 
> A truck company of S&T Battalion is supposed to transport 1200 troops in one go, with 75% vehicle availability and roughly 20 troops per vehicle capacity and using trailers for carrying a bit of cargo.
> 
> How close is PA's S&T Batts in that ?


A normal truck company has 25-27 trucks, with 22 seating capacity, makes around 600 men capacity.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## bananarepublic

Joe Shearer said:


> I don't understand this reaction. Logistics wins wars. Logistics loses wars.
> 
> Oh, perhaps you are being heavily sarcastic, and agreeing with that dictum.
> 
> 
> Take it easy, champ, that has to have been sarcasm.
> 
> 
> I suppose you'd have me perma-banned if I said, NOTA; Calcutta Taxi Driver?
> 
> 
> Birds?
> 
> I'm a branch, swaying in the wind.
> 
> View attachment 820964


Off topic: you should see the amount of posts mods have deleted because they thought I was trolling and not "sarcasm"


----------



## Joe Shearer

bananarepublic said:


> Off topic: you should see the amount of posts mods have deleted because they thought I was trolling and not "sarcasm"


Looks like we share a common osteological condition.

We have fractured funny bones and those get us into trouble.

My solution (suggested to you, that's all): deadpan serious fun; NEVER let it be remotely suspected that you are anything but serious.



bananarepublic said:


> Off topic: you should see the amount of posts mods have deleted because they thought I was trolling and not "sarcasm"


However, on this one, you jumped right into a minefield.

Never take panga with a serving soldier on military matters. It doesn't compute.

Reactions: Haha Haha:
3


----------



## Zulfiqar

Some thoughts by someone from relevant field w.r.t Russian mobility issues.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1499164245250002944

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## bananarepublic

Joe Shearer said:


> Looks like we share a common osteological condition.
> 
> We have fractured funny bones and those get us into trouble.
> 
> My solution (suggested to you, that's all): deadpan serious fun; NEVER let it be remotely suspected that you are anything but serious.
> 
> 
> However, on this one, you jumped right into a minefield.
> 
> Never take panga with a serving soldier on military matters. It doesn't compute.


Have you ever sat among military officers in a meeting? 
I have, they are dead serious and any form of remarks gets you the death stare.

Reactions: Love Love:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

bananarepublic said:


> Have you ever sat among military officers in a meeting?
> I have, they are dead serious and any form of remarks gets you the death stare.


Yes, I have. Air Force, mostly; rarely Army and Navy. Behaviour is hugely different. Fighter pilots have zero sense of humour; they are always in conquistador mode. They are formed into a permanent clique, and other branches - transport, rotary wing, engineering - are not welcome. Higher up, they tend to relax and behave human again.

Army, upto Major, they are scrupulously polite and very particular that you stay in the mess, keep drinking, and stay out of their formation's way. In an armoured regiment, you can, on special request, get into a tank, but it is hugely not advisable on Russian tanks. Those are meant for specially grown midgets bred at the Saharanpur stud. Gunners talk loudly to you, because they can't hear you, or themselves. Infantry are normal human beings, but during official meetings, unless you are a subject matter expert, you get that impassive look that has a thought balloon attached that is so easy to read - "How long is this civilian going to keep on sitting here?" Again, Brigadier up are relaxed people, largely because one got to meet them socially.

Navy, good and bad. The old lot, all dead now, trained at Dartmouth and knew what a pink gin was. The new lot are - different. The new lot are spoilt; when I was trying to introduce fingerprint recognition devices to the Navy through WESEE, seven of their kids, very young MTech from the best institutes, sat impassively through our off-base presentation, asked searching questions, then invited us over the next day to meet their boss, a Cdre. We had to pass through seven of those devices that we had presented the previous day. We found ourselves very silent at the meeting.

To sum up, in all three, junior officers are scrupulously polite, but if you don't know what you're talking about, their eyes glaze over, and the clearly wish you were somewhere else. Seniors are more relaxed, except during an official meeting, when they revert to type, glassy eyes and everything.

Reactions: Love Love:
3 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Signalian

Joe Shearer said:


> Yes, I have. Air Force, mostly; rarely Army and Navy. Behaviour is hugely different. Fighter pilots have zero sense of humour; they are always in conquistador mode. They are formed into a permanent clique, and other branches - transport, rotary wing, engineering - are not welcome. Higher up, they tend to relax and behave human again.
> 
> Army, upto Major, they are scrupulously polite and very particular that you stay in the mess, keep drinking, and stay out of their formation's way. In an armoured regiment, you can, on special request, get into a tank, but it is hugely not advisable on Russian tanks. Those are meant for specially grown midgets bred at the Saharanpur stud. Gunners talk loudly to you, because they can't hear you, or themselves. Infantry are normal human beings, but during official meetings, unless you are a subject matter expert, you get that impassive look that has a thought balloon attached that is so easy to read - "How long is this civilian going to keep on sitting here?" Again, Brigadier up are relaxed people, largely because one got to meet them socially.
> 
> Navy, good and bad. The old lot, all dead now, trained at Dartmouth and knew what a pink gin was. The new lot are - different. The new lot are spoilt; when I was trying to introduce fingerprint recognition devices to the Navy through WESEE, seven of their kids, very young MTech from the best institutes, sat impassively through our off-base presentation, asked searching questions, then invited us over the next day to meet their boss, a Cdre. We had to pass through seven of those devices that we had presented the previous day. We found ourselves very silent at the meeting.
> 
> To sum up, in all three, junior officers are scrupulously polite, but if you don't know what you're talking about, their eyes glaze over, and the clearly wish you were somewhere else. Seniors are more relaxed, except during an official meeting, when they revert to type, glassy eyes and everything.


How about a class of IA S&T setup for armor/mech forces logistics, for dummies.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

Desert Fox 1 said:


> I was pondering over the issue of logistics in our desert sectors which inhibits actions in these region for both the armies. Whenever we discuss these regions the first and foremost issue that arises is of logistical support; that is how will either army (especially the one who attacks first and has deeper objectives) sustain its mech forces because when any force, no matter how successful it has been, out runs its logistics, will ultimately have to withdraw leaving all of its initial successes behind or will suffer severe loses if not utter destruction. In deserts, especially ours which are deep and soft, there are few roads through which wheeled logistics can move,thus hampering any broad manoeuvres.
> What I want to propose is that we induct some sort of mechanised (not armoured) logistics vehicles which can move in all types of terrains as the tanks and APCs, hence ensuring basic supplies. Although economy of our scale might not be able to sustain this mechanisation on a larger scale however, limited number of these vehicles for our two mech divs(26,25) can be inducted which can atleast carry basic supplies such as ammunition and food etc. These mech supply vehs will sustain the frontline troops until a stable supply line has been established. Also, if and when we tend to retire our M113s we can take the armour out of them(except for the crew compartment) and convert them in such vehicles. Again this will be small in numbers but alteast they will provide the bare minimum. If we implement this, we can increase our axis of advance, avenues of approach and will increase the flexibility for our command.


@Signalian , on your post about Al-Qaswa.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

Desert Fox 1 said:


> @Signalian , on your post about Al-Qaswa.


Reading this was not a good feeling!

Of course, the reflection that there are other ways of conducting operations in these areas brought some consolation, but using those ways will be a one-time use. As we have seen, each side adopts - or counters - clever wrinkles brought in by the other as quickly as possible.

For now, soft-skinned, armour-reduced/removed APCs (with maybe a 0.50 HMG or two mounted on top to give a false sense of safety if needed) is the way I'd hope to see being done on the other side of the Thar.


Signalian said:


> How about a class of IA S&T setup for armor/mech forces logistics, for dummies.


I might get shot.
I might get reported.
I might get listened to, by the wrong people.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Joe Shearer said:


> Reading this was not a good feeling!
> 
> Of course, the reflection that there are other ways of conducting operations in these areas brought some consolation, but using those ways will be a one-time use. As we have seen, each side adopts - or counters - clever wrinkles brought in by the other as quickly as possible.
> 
> For now, soft-skinned, armour-reduced/removed APCs (with maybe a 0.50 HMG or two mounted on top to give a false sense of safety if needed) is the way I'd hope to see being done on the other side of the Thar.
> 
> I might get shot.
> I might get reported.
> I might get listened to, by the wrong people.










HIT-Products



What's wrong in converting an APC into a logistics supply veh that can carry 6tonnes?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Signalian

Joe Shearer said:


> I might get shot.
> I might get reported.
> I might get listened to, by the wrong people.


If you won't do it then I will need to dig in. I have a life and I live it. So as a favor please give your views and info.

Reactions: Love Love:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

Desert Fox 1 said:


> View attachment 821225
> 
> 
> 
> HIT-Products
> 
> 
> 
> What's wrong in converting an APC into a logistics supply veh that can carry 6tonnes?


Nothing wrong, but two comments come to mind.

One, it is vulnerable (as is all logistical, unarmed transport).

Two, the discussion started with logistics methods suitable for the desert dividing our two countries. Both sides found traversing the fine-grained deeply-banked sand dunes to be a terrible experience. Z. A. Khan has a graphic description, except that he was by then already pissed off about the state of repair of his vehicles, and mentioned the sand and the clogging of vehicle air-breathing parts as only a glancing blow.

The vehicle above will get into serious trouble in the deep desert; it might do fine on the dry outskirts.

Let me hint.

Except for the extra-professional interest of certain quarters in focussing on Russian tanks, the Arjuna was actually better suited for desert warfare in this desert than any other armoured vehicle. There was a very specific, very technical reason for that, without roots in any nationalist sentiment.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Joe Shearer said:


> Nothing wrong, but two comments come to mind.
> 
> One, it is vulnerable (as is all logistical, unarmed transport).
> 
> Two, the discussion started with logistics methods suitable for the desert dividing our two countries. Both sides found traversing the fine-grained deeply-banked sand dunes to be a terrible experience. Z. A. Khan has a graphic description, except that he was by then already pissed off about the state of repair of his vehicles, and mentioned the sand and the clogging of vehicle air-breathing parts as only a glancing blow.
> 
> The vehicle above will get into serious trouble in the deep desert; it might do fine on the dry outskirts.
> 
> Let me hint.
> 
> *Except for the extra-professional interest of certain quarters in focussing on Russian tanks, the Arjuna was actually better suited for desert warfare in this desert than any other armoured vehicle. There was a very specific, very technical reason for that, without roots in any nationalist sentiment.*


I would change that to “better suited for desert *movement*”, which might be true.

Desert Warfare (or warfare in general) is not the Arjuns strong suit given the uncooled thermals and NVs, relatively poor T/W (but good weight distribution), poor armor coverage (an issue that plagues literally every tank in South Asia apart from maybe the T90S which itself is getting old) and most importantly the poor gun and ammo. 

Agree with the rest though, these M113 platforms will not last in the kind of terrain we have on the border, even with the engineers giving them a good path to drive on (which itself is hard to make in the terrain), the sand wreaks havoc in the working parts of the vehicles.



Desert Fox 1 said:


> View attachment 821225
> 
> 
> 
> HIT-Products
> 
> 
> 
> What's wrong in converting an APC into a logistics supply veh that can carry 6tonnes?


I would assume PA does not use these for frontline logistics supply, it might be more useful delivering supplies to a safer back-line or rear-HQ from where it can be distributed to the front in safer ways.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

iLION12345_1 said:


> I would change that to “better suited for desert *movement*”, which might be true.


Yes, that is the correct wording.



iLION12345_1 said:


> Desert Warfare (or warfare in general) is not the Arjuns strong suit given the uncooled thermals and NVs, relatively poor T/W (but good weight distribution), poor armor coverage (an issue that plagues literally every tank in South Asia apart from maybe the T90S which itself is getting old) and most importantly the poor gun and ammo.


I didn't get every point here.

What did you mean uncooled thermals? and NVs? and T/W?

The armour coverage requires a complete overhaul, that can't be done without a certain amount of cooperation from the users. The same for the gun and ammo. This programme has an opportunity to use 130 mm guns that have proved extremely efficient in the field, but it has no godfather at the moment.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## iLION12345_1

Zulfiqar said:


> Some thoughts by someone from relevant field w.r.t Russian mobility issues.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1499164245250002944


I believe it was also ascertained that they were using cheap Chinese tires instead of proper military grade ones. Tires have been causing quite some issues in Ukraine for the Russian forces.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## iLION12345_1

Joe Shearer said:


> Yes, that is the correct wording.
> 
> 
> I didn't get every point here.
> 
> What did you mean uncooled thermals? and NVs? and T/W?
> 
> The armour coverage requires a complete overhaul, that can't be done without a certain amount of cooperation from the users. The same for the gun and ammo. This programme has an opportunity to use 130 mm guns that have proved extremely efficient in the field, but it has no godfather at the moment.


Thermal sights produce a lot of heat. There are both uncooled and cooled thermals used in tanks. Examples of the latter are the Catherine and MATIS series used in Al-Khalid, Al-Zarrar, Indian T90S etc. examples of the former are the systems in Arjun and (at least initially) in the Chinese VT-4. 

Uncooled thermals in tanks meant specifically for desert warfare is not an ideal decision, it might be related to availability and cost, then again I’m not an expert on thermals, maybe they’ve improved enough for uncooled ones to be as viable as cooled ones in desert warfare. It definitely wasn’t always the case. 

T/W is Power to weight ratio (I realize thrust may not have been the right word). The Arjun MK-1A weighs nearly 68 tons but uses the same engine as the 10 ton lighter Arjun MK-1 (a fairly mobile tank). T/W drops from 24.5HP/Ton to 20.5HP/Ton and the maximum speed drops by nearly 10-15KpH, how will that translate to performance in desert sand?

I don’t blame them for the bad armor coverage, it seems no one in Asia knows that tank armor should extend beyond the front. While Russian and Western designs focus more and more on larger armor arcs (extending all the way to the sides of tanks), we’re still stuck with protection arcs that barely cover the front (this includes Pakistan, India, China and even South Korea), even in new designs like the VT-4. If anything hits them head on, they’ll be fine, even a slight angle to the side, and it’s just basic armored steel. I believe Arjun has a better frontal armor arc than any Pakistani tank, but it isn’t being put to good use (no add-on armor).

The point about the gun is fair too, if one is to follow the developmental cycle of the Arjun as well as the Pro-Soviet/Russian bias of the people making the purchases, it starts to make sense. India totally has the capability to fix all of these faults, the only question in my mind now is wether they’ll actually do that or not, because I don’t expect any more orders for the Arjun after the current 114 MK1As on order. It seems they want to move to an entirely new platform (local or imported) to replace their T72s now (that’s what the RFI released by the IA suggests).

Reactions: Love Love:
2


----------



## RAMPAGE

Joe Shearer said:


> Nothing wrong, but two comments come to mind.
> 
> One, it is vulnerable (as is all logistical, unarmed transport).
> 
> Two, the discussion started with logistics methods suitable for the desert dividing our two countries. Both sides found traversing the fine-grained deeply-banked sand dunes to be a terrible experience. Z. A. Khan has a graphic description, except that he was by then already pissed off about the state of repair of his vehicles, and mentioned the sand and the clogging of vehicle air-breathing parts as only a glancing blow.
> 
> The vehicle above will get into serious trouble in the deep desert; it might do fine on the dry outskirts.
> 
> Let me hint.
> 
> Except for the extra-professional interest of certain quarters in focussing on Russian tanks, the Arjuna was actually better suited for desert warfare in this desert than any other armoured vehicle. There was a very specific, very technical reason for that, without roots in any nationalist sentiment.


Giant Boston Dynamics mules? Terrain hugging, load-bearing quadcopters? Design ammunition/supply crates such that they can be hooked onto these quadcopters?

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

RAMPAGE said:


> Giant Boston Dynamics mules? Terrain hugging, load-bearing quadcopters? Design ammunition/supply crates such that they can be hooked onto these quadcopters?


Stop, STOP.

Where have you been hiding? I thought the coast was clear.


----------



## Joe Shearer

iLION12345_1 said:


> Thermal sights produce a lot of heat. There are both uncooled and cooled thermals used in tanks. Examples of the latter are the Catherine and MATIS series used in Al-Khalid, Al-Zarrar, Indian T90S etc. examples of the former are the systems in Arjun and (at least initially) in the Chinese VT-4.
> 
> Uncooled thermals in tanks meant specifically for desert warfare is not an ideal decision, it might be related to availability and cost, then again I’m not an expert on thermals, maybe they’ve improved enough for uncooled ones to be as viable as cooled ones in desert warfare. It definitely wasn’t always the case.
> 
> T/W is Power to weight ratio (I realize thrust may not have been the right word). The Arjun MK-1A weighs nearly 68 tons but uses the same engine as the 10 ton lighter Arjun MK-1 (a fairly mobile tank). T/W drops from 24.5HP/Ton to 20.5HP/Ton and the maximum speed drops by nearly 10-15KpH, how will that translate to performance in desert sand?
> 
> I don’t blame them for the bad armor coverage, it seems no one in Asia knows that tank armor should extend beyond the front. While Russian and Western designs focus more and more on larger armor arcs (extending all the way to the sides of tanks), we’re still stuck with protection arcs that barely cover the front (this includes Pakistan, India, China and even South Korea), even in new designs like the VT-4. If anything hits them head on, they’ll be fine, even a slight angle to the side, and it’s just basic armored steel. I believe Arjun has a better frontal armor arc than any Pakistani tank, but it isn’t being put to good use (no add-on armor).
> 
> The point about the gun is fair too, if one is to follow the developmental cycle of the Arjun as well as the Pro-Soviet/Russian bias of the people making the purchases, it starts to make sense. India totally has the capability to fix all of these faults, the only question in my mind now is wether they’ll actually do that or not, because I don’t expect any more orders for the Arjun after the current 114 MK1As on order. It seems they want to move to an entirely new platform (local or imported) to replace their T72s now (that’s what the RFI released by the IA suggests).


I spent a few minutes catching up with 'usually reliable sources', one in development and one a serving officer, both slightly remote people, because most of my mates are retired or retired and dead. The answers were a mixed bag, some comforting, some disquieting.

With some editing due to the nature of this forum, whatever I could glean in very short conversations follows.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Joe Shearer

iLION12345_1 said:


> Thermal sights produce a lot of heat. There are both uncooled and cooled thermals used in tanks. Examples of the latter are the Catherine and MATIS series used in Al-Khalid, Al-Zarrar, Indian T90S etc. examples of the former are the systems in Arjun and (at least initially) in the Chinese VT-4.
> 
> Uncooled thermals in tanks meant specifically for desert warfare is not an ideal decision, it might be related to availability and cost, then again I’m not an expert on thermals, maybe they’ve improved enough for uncooled ones to be as viable as cooled ones in desert warfare. It definitely wasn’t always the case.


Two opposite reactions. The boffin was very angry, and said that the equipment fitted onto the Arjun did not give off infra-red or heat detection system signatures, and was thermally uncooled precisely to be invisible to such sensors. The soldier was nonchalant and said, rather airily, that there was nothing to fuss about, as all the good features of the Arjun's electronic capability had been incorporated into the indigenous modifications of the T90, so why was everybody getting so excited? He was dismissive about the heat-detection avoiding capabilities of the thermal uncooled sight, saying something to the effect of it being so small against the general heat signature that it didn't matter. When asked about performance under desert conditions, he said it hadn't been in desert service long enough to conclude anything.

This pattern, the scientist angry about every point, the soldier amused and dismissive, continued on every point.



iLION12345_1 said:


> I don’t blame them for the bad armor coverage, it seems no one in Asia knows that tank armor should extend beyond the front. While Russian and Western designs focus more and more on larger armor arcs (extending all the way to the sides of tanks), we’re still stuck with protection arcs that barely cover the front (this includes Pakistan, India, China and even South Korea), even in new designs like the VT-4. If anything hits them head on, they’ll be fine, even a slight angle to the side, and it’s just basic armored steel. I believe Arjun has a better frontal armor arc than any Pakistani tank, but it isn’t being put to good use (no add-on armor).


I was told specifically that the Arjun was protected by reactive armour.

Perhaps it calls for digging around a little more.



iLION12345_1 said:


> T/W is Power to weight ratio (I realize thrust may not have been the right word). The Arjun MK-1A weighs nearly 68 tons but uses the same engine as the 10 ton lighter Arjun MK-1 (a fairly mobile tank). T/W drops from 24.5HP/Ton to 20.5HP/Ton and the maximum speed drops by nearly 10-15KpH, how will that translate to performance in desert sand?


Both agreed that a minimum of 1500 HP, preferably 1800 HP, was needed. Apparently this is to be indigenous, and will fitted on to the Future Main Battle Tank.

There are no plans to retrofit a larger engine onto the Arjun.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Joe Shearer

iLION12345_1 said:


> The point about the gun is fair too, if one is to follow the developmental cycle of the Arjun as well as the Pro-Soviet/Russian bias of the people making the purchases, it starts to make sense. India totally has the capability to fix all of these faults, the only question in my mind now is wether they’ll actually do that or not, because I don’t expect any more orders for the Arjun after the current 114 MK1As on order. It seems they want to move to an entirely new platform (local or imported) to replace their T72s now (that’s what the RFI released by the IA suggests).


About the gun, the original plan was to fit a 155 mm gun into the next FMBT turret. 

It was not simply a new development from the ground up, there was discussion about the possibility of fitting either the Denel, or an indigenous build. Dhanush has been suggested, and ATAGS; currently, I am told that Dhanush (a re-build of the Bofors from transfer of technology papers acquired at the time of the original Bofors deal) is held up due to defective ammunition supplied by the then Ordnance Factories Board; the gun itself has been found, after detailed enquiry, and trial, to be quite satisfactory. ATAGS was a DRDO ground up design, to have been manufactured by Bharat Force. This was the famous case where a prototype was seriously damaged, and on investigation it was found that the cheapest solution approach had been followed. The East Asian parts used were defective and caused a serious set-back.

However, another suggestion has been doing the rounds, but it has no backing at the moment.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## iLION12345_1

Joe Shearer said:


> Two opposite reactions. The boffin was very angry, and said that the equipment fitted onto the Arjun did not give off infra-red or heat detection system signatures, and was thermally uncooled precisely to be invisible to such sensors. The soldier was nonchalant and said, rather airily, that there was nothing to fuss about, as all the good features of the Arjun's electronic capability had been incorporated into the indigenous modifications of the T90, so why was everybody getting so excited? He was dismissive about the heat-detection avoiding capabilities of the thermal uncooled sight, saying something to the effect of it being so small against the general heat signature that it didn't matter. When asked about performance under desert conditions, he said it hadn't been in desert service long enough to conclude anything.
> 
> This pattern, the scientist angry about every point, the soldier amused and dismissive, continued on every point.
> 
> 
> I was told specifically that the Arjun was protected by reactive armour.
> 
> Perhaps it calls for digging around a little more.
> 
> 
> Both agreed that a minimum of 1500 HP, preferably 1800 HP, was needed. Apparently this is to be indigenous, and will fitted on to the Future Main Battle Tank.
> 
> There are no plans to retrofit a larger engine onto the Arjun.


All modern tanks have reactive armor. The reactive armor on the Arjun is not too impressive compared to what’s on the Pakistani VT-4s. It is likely Better than or comparable to reactive armor used on Pakistani T80UDs, Al-Khalids and Indian T90S. Reactive armor is one part of a tanks total armor. There’s the base armor, there’s the composite layer on top of that, and then the reactive armor on top of that. Arjun, like all modern tanks, has all three, the vulnerability lies in the coverage of this armor, my complaint was that there’s little to no armor on the sides of the Arjun (especially the MK-1, the 1A makes some minor improvements in this regard), leaving it vulnerable to any attack that isn’t directly from the front (again, this is an issue with all the above mentioned tanks apart from the T90S which at least has some side protection due to its Russian origin, the others just have their rather thin base armor on the sides).
Otherwise Arjuns armor isn’t impressive in general for its size, with large weak spots on the turret and the hull (the latter was fixed in MK-1A, former wasn’t). Then again, the Al-Khalid has rather poor armor too. The only tanks I’d consider to be well armored in the sub-continent are the T90S and the VT-4s. However india does have much older ammunition on all its tanks, ammo that likely cannot penetrate all but the weakest of Pakistani tanks (Type 85s, Al-Zarrars, Type 59 and 69s). I’ve talked about this stuff at length on the forum before, it’s all technical details that are rather boring unless you’re into numbers and like to geek out over tanks.

Good to know they don’t think the uncooled sight is an issue, I would assume that modern ones aren’t as bad in that regard as older ones. Arjun does have rather good sights, they comparable to newer Al-Khalids and VT-4s, better than the T90S, T80UD etc. Arjun (MK1A specifically) is also pretty good in regards to its Fire control and other electronic systems. However as mentioned earlier it fails at the basics of tank design; mobility, firepower, armor.

That being said, the number of Arjuns in the IA is so minuscule that it will barely have an effect on the overall Indian offensives. I’ve always argued that the entire Indian armored fleet in general is not impressive (technologically) when compared to Pakistani tanks. They do make up for it in numbers somewhat, but their real strength lies in how strong the supporting elements of the IA are (gunships, SHORADs, artillery, ATGMs etc), they more than easily make up for any shortcomings in the armor department, tanks aren’t the biggest threat to tanks, they are infantry support. 

The biggest threat to tanks are drones, infantry with ATGMs and gunships, and india certainly isn’t lacking in 2/3 of those departments right now. The biggest losses of armored vehicles on either sides in a Pak-India conflict will be to troops with AT-rocket launchers and ATGMs, and these losses will be massive.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Reichmarshal

PanzerKiel said:


> Mud is still the biggest worry....i have seen our tanks stuck in Punjab plains, and here the mud is nowhere near to what Ukraine has. At that time, a team of 20 horses couldnt move a single field artillery piece an inch....same for wheeled vehicles....
> 
> Mud also increases the fuel consumption....estimate of our times was multiplied by three....strain of logistics.....
> 
> Then if its cold as well, mud used to freeze, and in the morning it took us alot of blow torches to get them free....
> 
> Nasty times.
> 
> View attachment 820972



so let me get this right, you fought in ww2 on the Russian front for the nazis n then again found urself in Punjab on the side of PA

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
3 | Haha Haha:
5


----------



## Joe Shearer

iLION12345_1 said:


> All modern tanks have reactive armor. The reactive armor on the Arjun is not too impressive compared to what’s on the Pakistani VT-4s. It is likely Better than or comparable to reactive armor used on Pakistani T80UDs, Al-Khalids and Indian T90S. Reactive armor is one part of a tanks total armor. There’s the base armor, there’s the composite layer on top of that, and then the reactive armor on top of that. Arjun, like all modern tanks, has all three, the vulnerability lies in the coverage of this armor, my complaint was that there’s little to no armor on the sides of the Arjun (especially the MK-1, the 1A makes some minor improvements in this regard), leaving it vulnerable to any attack that isn’t directly from the front (again, this is an issue with all the above mentioned tanks apart from the T90S which at least has some side protection due to its Russian origin, the others just have their rather thin base armor on the sides).
> Otherwise Arjuns armor isn’t impressive in general for its size, with large weak spots on the turret and the hull (the latter was fixed in MK-1A, former wasn’t). Then again, the Al-Khalid has rather poor armor too. The only tanks I’d consider to be well armored in the sub-continent are the T90S and the VT-4s. However india does have much older ammunition on all its tanks, ammo that likely cannot penetrate all but the weakest of Pakistani tanks (Type 85s, Al-Zarrars, Type 59 and 69s). I’ve talked about this stuff at length on the forum before, it’s all technical details that are rather boring unless you’re into numbers and like to geek out over tanks.


This is invaluable. I'm more than two to three years out of date about current developments. My professional interest was making simulators for the Army to give its gunners enough practice, and that worked, sort of, in that we did provide something around the time I left.



iLION12345_1 said:


> However india does have much older ammunition on all its tanks, ammo that likely cannot penetrate all but the weakest of Pakistani tanks (Type 85s, Al-Zarrars, Type 59 and 69s). I’ve talked about this stuff at length on the forum before, it’s all technical details that are rather boring unless you’re into numbers and like to geek out over tanks.


So this gives me the cue. I'm looking up all your old posts over the next couple of days.



iLION12345_1 said:


> Good to know they don’t think the uncooled sight is an issue, I would assume that modern ones aren’t as bad in that regard as older ones. Arjun does have rather good sights, they comparable to newer Al-Khalids and VT-4s, better than the T90S, T80UD etc. Arjun (MK1A specifically) is also pretty good in regards to its Fire control and other electronic systems.


Apparently there are raw spots on various egos. The boffin (Gr D, so one from the top) was really upset and it didn't seem appropriate to keep him engaged in conversation. But yes, he was an electronics guy, and he did insist they had done a great deal for the systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Joe Shearer

iLION12345_1 said:


> However as mentioned earlier it fails at the basics of tank design; mobility, firepower, armor.


OK, on this, the short answer I got was that the Army had given specs originally that favoured mobility and firepower over protection, they got it, then they themselves and nobody else ("...not the <expletive deleted> <neighbouring country on our west>, not the <expletive deleted> <neighbouring country to our north>...") went and shot themselves in the foot, and insisted on nearly a hundred changes that added over 15% weight. So they got protection, and lost mobility, and due to the efflux of time, any advantage in firepower that they should have had.

It really was not the sort of conversation that was encouraging.

Other references, taken up after these two and their horribly opposite responses, seemed to side with the boffin a lot more, but those were not service people.



iLION12345_1 said:


> That being said, the number of Arjuns in the IA is so minuscule that it will barely have an effect on the overall Indian offensives. I’ve always argued that the entire Indian armored fleet in general is not impressive (technologically) when compared to Pakistani tanks


Completely agree.

Twice, we have had an advantage in having simpler systems that gave us firepower and good ammunition rather than speed, with a fair amount of protection, and it seems that the Armoured Corps just doesn't have much of an institutional memory. It seems in hindsight (always 20-20 accurate) that we should have stuck to this formula. This without the benefit of stacking up such a fictional prototype against actual Pakistani armour, and trying to evaluate the consequences.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Joe Shearer

iLION12345_1 said:


> They do make up for it in numbers somewhat, but their real strength lies in how strong the supporting elements of the IA are (gunships, SHORADs, artillery, ATGMs etc), they more than easily make up for any shortcomings in the armor department, tanks aren’t the biggest threat to tanks, they are infantry support.


To be honest, it does not seem that there was a single engagement where either side showed superiority in handling armour in mass at high speed. Besides Chawinda (and what one merciless commentary calls the Gadag Gallop), and the utter failure of 1st Armoured Div. to overcome resistance (from one regiment!), and the debacle after Khem Karan, by the other side, only the fiasco at Longewal and the brutal resistance by Tajammul Malik against vastly superior numbers are available. People get taken up in the apparent outline of the story of the Longewal resistance (purely bogus, from the Army pov) and forget that the thrust was intended to paralyse Khambatta's own effort. That was achieved almost completely.

The only single instance I can think of was Eftekhar Janjua's totally out of character (wrt south Asian standards) effort, that died with the commander. I think it was M. J. Akbar who said that God was always on the side of India.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## jhungary

Signalian said:


> @PanzerKiel
> 
> For M-113, its the the driver and the commander in the driver’s compartment and 10 men in the personnel compartment. Can additional five troops be seated on the floor between the personnel compartment troop seats ?


8 men in a Bradley and the inside stink like high heaven, I can't imagine what 13 men inside a M113 would be like. ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
4


----------



## Raja Porus

Joe Shearer said:


> The vehicle above will get into serious trouble in the deep


It'll operate where the APCs will operate.



iLION12345_1 said:


> they are infantry support


Guderian wrote a complete book on this... If he saw this he would've hung himself



Joe Shearer said:


> utter failure of 1st Armoured Div. to overcome resistance (from one regiment


19 Lancers and Guides also deserve a mention.



Joe Shearer said:


> To be honest, it does not seem that there was a single engagement where either side showed superiority in handling armour in mass at high speed. Besides Chawinda (and what one merciless commentary calls the Gadag Gallop), and the utter failure of 1st Armoured Div. to overcome resistance (from one regiment!), and the debacle after Khem Karan, by the other side, only the fiasco at Longewal and the brutal resistance by Tajammul Malik against vastly superior numbers are available. People get taken up in the apparent outline of the story of the Longewal resistance (purely bogus, from the Army pov) and forget that the thrust was intended to paralyse Khambatta's own effort. That was achieved almost completely.
> 
> The only single instance I can think of wa Eftekhar Janjua's totally out of character (wrt south Asian standards) effort, that died with the commander. I think it was M. J. Akbar who said that God was always on the side of India.


What I've noticed is that in Subcontinent, Armour gets all the discussions; Infantry gets all the medals while Artillery (most often) which saves them all is sidelined.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
2 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## iLION12345_1

Joe Shearer said:


> This is invaluable. I'm more than two to three years out of date about current developments. My professional interest was making simulators for the Army to give its gunners enough practice, and that worked, sort of, in that we did provide something around the time I left.
> 
> 
> *So this gives me the cue. I'm looking up all your old posts over the next couple of days.*


That to me is high praise, look for my posts in the threads related to Pakistani armor (this one, The one about Al-Khalid and the one about VT-4). If you have trouble finding the posts, I can link them for you later. 

I’m not well versed on tactics or war history, so every time someone mentions something I go look it up on google, I’m more of a technical person, I find those easier to talk about than hypothetical war scenarios 



Desert Fox 1 said:


> It'll operate where the APCs will operate.
> 
> 
> Guderien wrote a complete book on this... If he saw this he would've hung himself
> 
> 
> 19 Lancers and Guides also deserve a mention.
> 
> 
> What I've noticed is that in Subcontinent, Armour gets all the discussions; Infantry gets all the medals while Artillery (most often) which saves them all is sidelined.


Sorry Mr Guderien 



Joe Shearer said:


> This is invaluable. I'm more than two to three years out of date about current developments. *My professional interest was making simulators for the Army to give its gunners enough practice, and that worked, sort of, in that we did provide something around the time I left.*


Now that is certainly something. Maybe I’ll ask you more about those someday, if you’re allowed to talk about it of course. 
Until you’ll find me trying to push numbers and technology into debates about tactics.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

Desert Fox 1 said:


> It'll operate where the APCs will operate.


Umm, well, you have a point, in that, if an APC can handle it, this vehicle can handle it.

I'm saying that both will be in trouble in the Thar.



Desert Fox 1 said:


> Guderian wrote a complete book on this... If he saw this he would've hung himself


He's lucky, he went along with the Commando Order and he headed the court martial for those in the von Stauffenberg attempt, he could quite possibly have been hanged by the Allies.

That is not to deny his role in creating armoured formations that operated on a different principle from anything seen before. We are coming up for the centenary of that concept being put up and implemented.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

Desert Fox 1 said:


> 19 Lancers and Guides also deserve a mention.


Of course.

I was dramatising the encounter.



Desert Fox 1 said:


> What I've noticed is that in Subcontinent, Armour gets all the discussions; Infantry gets all the medals while Artillery (most often) which saves them all is sidelined.


...right down to rig. 

I don't know if you have these little bits of one-upmanship in Pakistan, but cavalry officers and men in the Indian Army tend to wear their uniform olive green trousers slightly, ever so slightly slimmer than the PBI. Nobody looks to see what the gunner is wearing, of course.



jhungary said:


> 8 men in a Bradley and the inside stink like high heaven, I can't imagine what 13 men inside a M113 would be like. ...


Have you never been in a barracks dorm?



iLION12345_1 said:


> That to me is high praise, look for my posts in the threads related to Pakistani armor (this one, The one about Al-Khalid and the one about VT-4). If you have trouble finding the posts, I can link them for you later.


It's a confession. I know nothing about these devices, except being popped into a T90 by my boisterous friend, who was getting us both a very grand time because he was Panag's batch-mate. When they poured me into that narrow space, that was my epiphanic moment - I'd write about tanks, from a very safe distance.

Russian tanks are incredibly cramped. They are also bloody unsafe.



iLION12345_1 said:


> Sorry Mr Guderien


???
You got it right the first time!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Joe Shearer

iLION12345_1 said:


> That to me is high praise, look for my posts in the threads related to Pakistani armor (this one, The one about Al-Khalid and the one about VT-4). If you have trouble finding the posts, I can link them for you later.
> 
> I’m not well versed on tactics or war history, so every time someone mentions something I go look it up on google, I’m more of a technical person, I find those easier to talk about than hypothetical war scenarios
> 
> 
> Sorry Mr Guderien
> 
> 
> Now that is certainly something. Maybe I’ll ask you more about those someday, if you’re allowed to talk about it of course.
> Until you’ll find me trying to push numbers and technology into debates about tactics.


It was twenty years ago, so I don't see that anything harmful can happen. We did most of our simulator work on aircraft, actually, only two on terrestrial vehicles, one of them a firing simulator for the T90, the other, a lorry simulator, that we thought we could persuade the Army, the ASC, to take up as a substitute for crashing vehicles while teaching kids how to drive. They were having none of it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

Joe Shearer said:


> don't know if you have these little bits of one-upmanship in Pakistan, but cavalry officers and men in the Indian Army tend to wear their uniform olive green trousers slightly, ever so slightly slimmer than the PBI. Nobody looks to see what the gunner is wearing, of course


Black Dungaree, Black berret, leather cross belt, chain mails, toshdan and golden stripes...they have developed an aura that officers of other corps themselves feel inferior. I think this bravado is more rampant in PA.
The armour boys look down upon others and others admit it as well.
They still think that they are riding their steeds, charging at the enemy and smashing into their lines..
Unfortunately, much of this culture has died down due to WoT, since the army has become cash strapped ( highly saddening for someone like me who is deeply into regimental histories).
Still, most infantry and armour regts are trying to keep this tradition alive.

As far as the gunners are concerned they have tried to make themselves fashionable by bringing in blue lanyards, leather waist belts, red cindy

@PanzerKiel , don't you think we should bring back the "Qamarbands". Apart from being fashionable (esp on mess kit) they also kept the bush jackets in place whenever someone saluted.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Black Dungaree, Black berret, leather cross belt, chain mails, toshdan and golden stripes...they have developed an aura that officers of other corps themselves feel inferior. I think this bravado is more rampant in PA.
> The armour boys look down upon others and others admit it as well.
> They still think that they are riding their steeds, charging at the enemy and smashing into their lines..
> Unfortunately, much of this culture has died down due to WoT, since the army has become cash strapped ( highly saddening for someone like me who is deeply into regimental histories).
> Still, most infantry and armour regts are trying to keep this tradition alive.
> 
> As far as the gunners are concerned they have tried to make themselves fashionable by bringing in blue lanyards, leather waist belts, red cindy
> 
> @PanzerKiel , don't you think we should bring back the "Qamarbands". Apart from being fashionable (esp on mess kit) they also kept the bush jackets in place whenever someone saluted.


The Germans romanticised it. That genie will never get back into the bottle.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Joe Shearer said:


> The Germans romanticised it.


So do many..but the British with the tint of the Raj took it to a whole another level.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Black Dungaree, Black berret, leather cross belt, chain mails, toshdan and golden stripes...they have developed an aura that officers of other corps themselves feel inferior. I think this bravado is more rampant in PA.
> The armour boys look down upon others and others admit it as well.
> They still think that they are riding their steeds, charging at the enemy and smashing into their lines..
> Unfortunately, much of this culture has died down due to WoT, since the army has become cash strapped ( highly saddening for someone like me who is deeply into regimental histories).
> Still, most infantry and armour regts are trying to keep this tradition alive.
> 
> As far as the gunners are concerned they have tried to make themselves fashionable by bringing in blue lanyards, leather waist belts, red cindy
> 
> @PanzerKiel , don't you think we should bring back the "Qamarbands". Apart from being fashionable (esp on mess kit) they also kept the bush jackets in place whenever someone saluted.


The Germans romanticised it. That genie will never get back into the bottle.


Desert Fox 1 said:


> Black Dungaree, Black berret, leather cross belt, chain mails, toshdan and golden stripes...they have developed an aura that officers of other corps themselves feel inferior. I think this bravado is more rampant in PA.
> The armour boys look down upon others and others admit it as well.
> They still think that they are riding their steeds, charging at the enemy and smashing into their lines..
> Unfortunately, much of this culture has died down due to WoT, since the army has become cash strapped ( highly saddening for someone like me who is deeply into regimental histories).
> Still, most infantry and armour regts are trying to keep this tradition alive.
> 
> As far as the gunners are concerned they have tried to make themselves fashionable by bringing in blue lanyards, leather waist belts, red cindy
> 
> @PanzerKiel , don't you think we should bring back the "Qamarbands". Apart from being fashionable (esp on mess kit) they also kept the bush jackets in place whenever someone saluted.


I thought cummerbunds are only with mess kit?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Joe Shearer said:


> The Germans romanticised it. That genie will never get back into the bottle.
> 
> I thought cummerbunds are only with mess kit?


We had golden ones with red stripes worn with both mess kits as well as SD(ceremonial Khaki), but they were discontinued during Raheel Shareef's tenure. I don't know why.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Tipu7

RAMPAGE said:


> Giant Boston Dynamics mules? Terrain hugging, load-bearing quadcopters? Design ammunition/supply crates such that they can be hooked onto these quadcopters?


Welcome Back pal.



Joe Shearer said:


> Stop, STOP.
> 
> Where have you been hiding? I thought the coast was clear.


Welcome back Sir ...

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

The Russian vs Ukraine fight has shown importance of having proper *Mechanized ground force* , the speed at which Russia entered into Ukraine caused it to feel full impact of incursion

A person commented on usage of UAV for anti Tank role , yes the tool can help in certain situation but every battlefield has different counter units. So a well balanced approach is needed

> Units using , manual , anti air machines , are a bit outdated , they won't be able to counter a fast moving Jet or Missile

Modernization certainly is important aspect.

Considering Ukraine does manufactures lot of ground units and certain weaponry their fall so quickly is quite astonishing

The introduction Modern assets are vital to keeping Pakistani Army moving in right direction

a) *VT4s* introduction
b) *T-129 to Z-10 *introduction
c) Appropriate number of *UAV machines* to Supplement


----------



## Signalian

jhungary said:


> 8 men in a Bradley and the inside stink like high heaven, I can't imagine what 13 men inside a M113 would be like. ...







17:00 onwards. Not getting too cozy.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## jhungary

Signalian said:


> 17:00 onwards. Not getting too cozy.


I think at least I can say this in a Bradley

"I know which one of you farted....."

I don't think you will ever know if you are in a M113.....

Is this a valid assessment?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

If world's largest exporter is facing complications in supplying fuel to its mechanised forces then what will happen to the largest importers.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Signalian

jhungary said:


> I think at least I can say this in a Bradley
> 
> "I know which one of you farted....."
> 
> I don't think you will ever know if you are in a M113.....
> 
> Is this a valid assessment?


Wouldn’t the combat doctrine of IFV differ from APC in the sense that PA M-113s are battle taxis, while M2 Bradley is a proper IFV, therefore M-113 will try to unload soldiers ASAP and reverse to assembly area whereas Bradley will keep carrying soldiers longer while engaging head on with enemy in direct combat.

What has actually upset me now is as follows :

1. US army infantry division operates IFVs while PA Mechanised formations still operate APCs.

2. M-113 is frontline weapon system for PA.



Desert Fox 1 said:


> If world's largest exporter is facing complications in supplying fuel to its mechanised forces then what will happen to the largest importers.


You are talking about stalling of Russian forces north of Kyiv ? The long convoy ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Oldman1

Signalian said:


> Wouldn’t the combat doctrine of IFV differ from APC in the sense that PA M-113s are battle taxis, while M2 Bradley is a proper IFV, therefore M-113 will try to unload soldiers ASAP and reverse to assembly area whereas Bradley will keep carrying soldiers longer while engaging head on with enemy in direct combat.
> 
> What has actually upset me now is as follows :
> 
> 1. US army infantry division operates IFVs while PA Mechanised formations still operate APCs.
> 
> 2. M-113 is frontline weapon system for PA.


Bradleys are IFVs, not tanks, so the doctrine will not allow them to go an engage the enemy in direct combat, hence combine with tanks. So with M113s, you work with your tanks. Just like tanks need infantry to clear buildings instead of being sent into urban combat with armor alone.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Signalian

Oldman1 said:


> Bradleys are IFVs, not tanks, so the doctrine will not allow them to go an engage the enemy in direct combat, hence combine with tanks. So with M113s, you work with your tanks. Just like tanks need infantry to clear buildings instead of being sent into urban combat with armor alone.


Bradley has tank kills and AFV Kills. Don’t expect that from PA’s M-113 which dismount soldiers for combat. 

I think Bradley has firing ports too ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Oldman1

Signalian said:


> Bradley has tank kills and AFV Kills. Don’t expect that from PA’s M-113 which dismount soldiers for combat.
> 
> I think Bradley has firing ports too ?


Don't think so.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Signalian said:


> You are talking about stalling of Russian forces north of Kyiv ? The long convoy


No, the many Russian AD systems and tanks left behind because of low fuel.


Signalian said:


> Bradley has tank kills and AFV Kills. Don’t expect that from PA’s M-113 which dismount soldiers for combat.
> 
> I think Bradley has firing ports too ?


Bradley has only two rear firing ports، rest were removed.

How about BSWS.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mrc

Signalian said:


> Bradley has tank kills and AFV Kills. Don’t expect that from PA’s M-113 which dismount soldiers for combat.
> 
> I think Bradley has firing ports too ?




I hope every one has seen videos of American supplied ifv in Afghanistan and what simple rocket launchers did to them

Ifv or apc will never b as armored as an mbt so better to keep them in role of battle taxis with limited support role

Dismounted infantry with modern shoulder fired weapons is far more dangerous than a single shooting turret of an ifv plus far less would b killed in a single shot than if a packed ifv gets hit 

US has just not faced a competent enemy for a while that's it

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jhungary

Signalian said:


> Wouldn’t the combat doctrine of IFV differ from APC in the sense that PA M-113s are battle taxis, while M2 Bradley is a proper IFV, therefore M-113 will try to unload soldiers ASAP and reverse to assembly area whereas Bradley will keep carrying soldiers longer while engaging head on with enemy in direct combat.
> 
> What has actually upset me now is as follows :
> 
> 1. US army infantry division operates IFVs while PA Mechanised formations still operate APCs.
> 
> 2. M-113 is frontline weapon system for PA.
> 
> 
> You are talking about stalling of Russian forces north of Kyiv ? The long convoy ?


We don't have a traditional APC role anymore after we move on from the M113, M2 Bradley is a IFV while M3 Bradley is a scout vehicle.

The doctrine different is mostly on how to advance alongside your Ironside (Armor) With Bradley, we move ALONG with the Abrams, either in a mix/match which mean we will have 2 M1 up front and 2 Bradley on either side, or in a phase line operation, which mean M1 is going to roll first, Bradley follow and brought up the troop. Bradley is being used as screen and security for Armor formation and its infantry are used as dismounted mechanised infantry.

Tradition APC doctrine is to bring in troop after the area is secured by any firepower you have. Basically it's the same as inserting infantry in any other way (like Air Assault or bring in with Truck) In today US Military, that roles goes to M1126 Stryker, it can carry similar troop configuration (IIRC it's 9) and we called them Infantry carrier, they are used for Infantry Assault when you bring in 9 Stryker (45 men, a platoon), Which mean APC is used for Infantry Support, while Bradley used more like mechanized infantry and used for Armor support.

M113 would probably used in PA the same way we use Stryker. I supposed.

I am not familiar with how PA Armor regiment work, but conventionally, you would want something more heavily armed and armoured to travel with your tank and act as Mech Infantry to provide support and security of Armor, but you will also need troop carrier that can deliver troop safely and exploit any gain with your armor regiment..

In short, if PA don't have a designated IFV, you probably need to get one.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PanzerKiel

Signalian said:


> Wouldn’t the combat doctrine of IFV differ from APC in the sense that PA M-113s are battle taxis, while M2 Bradley is a proper IFV, therefore M-113 will try to unload soldiers ASAP and reverse to assembly area whereas Bradley will keep carrying soldiers longer while engaging head on with enemy in direct combat.
> 
> What has actually upset me now is as follows :
> 
> 1. US army infantry division operates IFVs while PA Mechanised formations still operate APCs.
> 
> 2. M-113 is frontline weapon system for PA.


Thousands of M113s are still being used by IDF. Its all about our respective doctrines. If doctrine requires IFVs, we will get IFVs. M113s are supposed to dismount troops away from enemy's anti armor weapons. Otherwise, they are toast.



Signalian said:


> Bradley has tank kills and AFV Kills. Don’t expect that from PA’s M-113 which dismount soldiers for combat.


BSWS /TOW mounted carriers have the potential though.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Joe Shearer

jhungary said:


> I think at least I can say this in a Bradley
> 
> "I know which one of you farted....."
> 
> I don't think you will ever know if you are in a M113.....
> 
> Is this a valid assessment?


I WOULDN'T like to know, or to be in a position where I might like to know.



Signalian said:


> What has actually upset me now is as follows :
> 
> 1. US army infantry division operates IFVs while PA Mechanised formations still operate APCs.
> 
> 2. M-113 is frontline weapon system for PA.


What would upset your friends across the Radcliffe - you do have some - would be that these tin boxes run faster than 10 km/hour on good roads. They would like to see some speed governors put in where they might do the most good.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## jhungary

Joe Shearer said:


> I WOULDN'T like to know, or to be in a position where I might like to know.
> 
> 
> What would upset your friends across the Radcliffe - you do have some - would be that these tin boxes run faster than 10 km/hour on good roads. They would like to see some speed governors put in where they might do the most good.


I would want to know.......But then, I was in charge, so I can dish it and I don't need to take it...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TsAr

PanzerKiel said:


> Onset of rasputitsa is there. End March. Same happened with my division in 1943 in this area, near Kharkov. All ops had to be postponed till Citadel was launched in July 1943. The mud around here, which is about to come, has unimaginable viscosity.
> 
> View attachment 820965
> View attachment 820966
> View attachment 820967


Best time to attack was in Jan when it was cold, when temperature tends to get warmer the snow starts to melt that leads to muddy terrain.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Mumm-Ra

Cuirassier said:


> IABGs or directly under 25 Mech Div?


Yr your tweets are a class apart from the rest on history of various individuals and formations of PA. Hope you post here more regularly.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
3


----------



## Inception-06



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> View attachment 823196


So 23 Inf div also has T59s. I think it's the only div of 10corps having an armd regt or bde. Considering the importance of the sector it defends it also has a HAT company.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> So 23 Inf div also has T59s. I think it's the only div of 10corps having an armd regt or bde. Considering the importance of the sector it defends it also has a HAT company.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
11


----------



## Raja Porus

The Mailed Fist, adopted as the insignia of Pakistan's premier strike formation- The 1st Armoured division; was inspired by Liaqut Ali khan's famous clenched fist that he raised during a public rally in 1951 following Indian army's concentration along the border.
(Khaki Shadows-LTG K.M Arif)

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> View attachment 824067
> 
> 
> The Mailed Fist, adopted as the insignia of Pakistan's premier strike formation- The 1st Armoured division; was inspired by Liaqut Ali khan's famous clenched fist that he raised during a public rally in 1951 following Indian army's concentration along the border.
> (Khaki Shadows-LTG K.M Arif)
> View attachment 824068
> View attachment 824069
> View attachment 824071

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> View attachment 824369
> View attachment 824370


Allama Iqbal did his F.A from Murray college.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Great Janjua

Desert Fox 1 said:


> So 23 Inf div also has T59s. I think it's the only div of 10corps having an armd regt or bde. Considering the importance of the sector it defends it also has a HAT company.


Yep, just the other day saw a couple of T59s heading towards Jhelum from Kharian gt road they were completely barebone, No ERA, no extra protection straight from the 1970s.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Great Janjua said:


> Yep, just the other day saw a couple of T59s heading towards Jhelum from Kharian gt road they were completely barebone, No ERA, no extra protection straight from the 1970s.


@PanzerKiel I guess the Type-59 which are left in service are there for training purposes or attached to Infantry formations as direct fire support ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Great Janjua

Inception-06 said:


> @PanzerKiel I guess the Type-59 which are left in service are there for training purposes or attached to Infantry formations as direct fire support ?


Only @PanzerKiel can answer.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Super Falcon

This is the best Pakistan can get after war in Ukraine Russian option are not available neither any western

There is some news that pak army may order few Arma 8x8 or 6x6 Turkish Arma infantry fighting vehicles after seeing war in Ukraine these will protect troops from direct enemy fire we have few old us made APC but those are tracked we didn't have any wheeled IFV seems like better prospect


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> @PanzerKiel I guess the Type-59 which are left in service are there for training purposes or attached to Infantry formations as direct fire support ?


Yeo only with infantry divs such as 23,14, 10 etc.

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Yeo only with infantry divs such as 23,14, 10 etc.



What do you suggest for the Rest of the Type-59 Fleet with all their ammunition, spare, parts and built infrastructure?

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Great Janjua

Inception-06 said:


> What do you suggest for the Rest of the Type-59 Fleet with all their ammunition, spare, parts and built infrastructure?


Put them on loc like India did as cheap bunker busters they seriously caused a lot of destruction when loc was hot. India decimated a few of our posts with them as stationary cannons.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Inception-06

Great Janjua said:


> Put them on loc like India did as cheap bunker busters they seriously caused a lot of destruction when loc was hot. India decimated a few of our posts with them as stationary cannons.


You are right, that’s a good suggestion, we have done that with retired SPG-9 and 105 mm recoilless rifle, also the Bakthar Shikan has taken the role as bunker artillery. And yes during „peace time“ specialised units of Type-59 could be attached to the LOC Theater. While during war time, they should be attached to Infantry formations, to utilise their long range gun and mobility packed in a armour, while Pakistan can’t afford a expensive, maintenance and training intensive Mobile Gun System like the Stryker *M1128 or the Chinese ZTL-11 (Type 11) Assault Gun. 


The Type-59/69 fleet could be transferred to provide direct fire support for infantry battalions and engage enemy light vehicles and stationary targets such as bunkers. *

And more:


Armoured reconnaissance
Armoured support
Flanking security

*Historycall proven successful: Assault guns are designed to provide direct fire support for infantryattacks, especially against other infantry or fortified positions.




*

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Inception-06

History:

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Inception-06

„Nearly all armoured regiments have been rotated in the coin war in Pakistan, mainly the crews of course“:According to Major General S.A. Hamid.



Inception-06 said:


> What do you suggest for the Rest of the Type-59 Fleet with all their ammunition, spare, parts and built infrastructure?


@PanzerKiel woow ja matlab - Woow means I either I am wrong and there’s not much left of the Type-59 Fleet to discuss or it’s already planned for Reserve formations .

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> What do you suggest for the Rest of the Type-59 Fleet with all their ammunition, spare, parts and built infrastructure?


Remember in 65 we raised new armoured regts such as 34 TDU that were used to great effect in Sulemanke.
Similarly we raised new Inf Bns such as 22PR, 23 FF. They along with Hurs and Rangers captured Kishangarh salient, Ghotaru and Sadhewala were taken. The new regiments helped retain these inroads and this proved so effective that they allowed a full-return to original borders at Tashkent, despite the fact that IA had captured more territory.

Although PA will now refrain from ad-hocism still it may be tempted to bring out its T59s/69s(especially those with NVs). They can be used for attrition of enemy forces for preservation of ones own(like changez force in 71), flank protection, inf support, protection of gun positions/tac-hqs, limited counter offenses to off-set/foil enemy attacks, screening or to immediately capture any opportunity before the Infantry arrives.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Signalian

Inception-06 said:


> History:
> 
> View attachment 824775
> View attachment 824776
> View attachment 824777
> View attachment 824774


1st pic: I was always curious of camo set up time.
Love the urdu wording of "Guided" and "TOW".

3rd Pic: Check the starch on that uniform, should be " Starchy Stinger"

4th pic: All three definitely seem from Punjab Regiment, two of them even seem twins. Did you notice this ones a left hand drive, CJ series perhaps?



Inception-06 said:


> You are right, that’s a good suggestion, we have done that with retired SPG-9 and 105 mm recoilless rifle, also the Bakthar Shikan has taken the role as bunker artillery. And yes during „peace time“ specialised units of Type-59 could be attached to the LOC Theater. While during war time, they should be attached to Infantry formations, to utilise their long range gun and mobility packed in a armour, while Pakistan can’t afford a expensive, maintenance and training intensive Mobile Gun System like the Stryker *M1128 or the Chinese ZTL-11 (Type 11) Assault Gun.
> 
> 
> The Type-59/69 fleet could be transferred to provide direct fire support for infantry battalions and engage enemy light vehicles and stationary targets such as bunkers. *
> 
> And more:
> 
> 
> Armoured reconnaissance
> Armoured support
> Flanking security
> 
> *Historycall proven successful: Assault guns are designed to provide direct fire support for infantryattacks, especially against other infantry or fortified positions.
> View attachment 824767
> *
> View attachment 824769
> View attachment 824778
> View attachment 824781
> View attachment 824782


Walk with T-59s, so convenient.

Try running along AKs and T-80s in semi desert.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
3


----------



## Raja Porus

Signalian said:


> 4th pic: All three definitely seem from Punjab Regiment, two of them even seem twins. Did you notice this ones a left hand drive, CJ series perhaps?


Yep clean shave save mustache, typical of the men of Punjab. If you visit a Punjab regiment of today, you'll still think that these same men have been transported forward to the future. Their grit, physique, accent hasn't changed.
I often think about how much Punjab has given to defence of Indus and how many have been returned to its soil while doing so..



Signalian said:


> 3rd Pic: Check the starch on that uniform, should be " Starchy Stinger


The unit dhobi must be an honest man.

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Great Janjua

I mean not to be repetitive but we are lacking a good IFV. M113s are fine as battle taxis. But modern IFVs can do much more whilst being battle taxis.

Our modernisation focus should be especially on mechanised infantry the backbone of victory.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Inception-06

@iLION12345_1
What’s the difference between this two M-113 from the front they look differently, I guess one is Pakistani made and other is imported ?

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Signalian

Inception-06 said:


> @iLION12345_1
> What’s the difference between this two M-113 from the front they look differently, I guess one is Pakistani made and other is imported ?
> View attachment 826729


VCC i think, Italian ones

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dreamer.

Inception-06 said:


> @iLION12345_1
> What’s the difference between this two M-113 from the front they look differently, I guess one is Pakistani made and other is imported ?
> View attachment 826729


The one in the front (no.5) is Pak made version known as Al Talha APC (it's based on M-113).
The base vehicle is Al Talha but it may also have a custom name based on the weapon it carries. This one would be 'Maaz' if i am not wrong.


The one on the back (no.4) is standard M-113 APC, this one is carrying TOW missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PanzerKiel

Inception-06 said:


> @iLION12345_1
> What’s the difference between this two M-113 from the front they look differently, I guess one is Pakistani made and other is imported ?
> View attachment 826729


Number 5 is Talha, standard issue for LAT, number 4 is M 113P model, Pak made, standard issue for HAT.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Cuirassier said:


> IABGs or directly under 25 Mech Div?


AK1 are also with 18 Inf div, Hyderabad.







Inception-06 said:


> @iLION12345_1
> What’s the difference between this two M-113 from the front they look differently, I guess one is Pakistani made and other is imported ?
> View attachment 826729





PanzerKiel said:


> Number 5 is Talha, standard issue for LAT, number 4 is M 113P model, Pak made, standard issue for HAT.


So 26 mech div has a LAT as well as HAT.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Inception-06

PanzerKiel said:


> Number 5 is Talha, standard issue for LAT, number 4 is M 113P model, Pak made, standard issue for HAT.



Then there must two Versions then, because Thala was called this one with beveled sides and firing ports. Maybe the M113P is the 1990s made Model while the one with firing Port’s is the model afterwards, or they decided to stay with M113P without firing ports.


----------



## Tipu7

Inception-06 said:


> Then there must two Versions then, because Thala was called this one with beveled sides and firing ports. Maybe the M113P is the 1990s made Model while the one with firing Port’s is the model afterwards, or they decided to stay with M113P without firing ports.
> 
> View attachment 826816


M-113P is HIT assembled M-113A2. M-113A2 Kits were brought from USA in 90s and Chinese 12.7mm was mounted separately.
Other one is Italian VCC-1 purchased second hand couple of years ago.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Inception-06

Tipu7 said:


> M-113P is HIT assembled M-113A2. M-113A2 Kits were brought from USA in 90s and Chinese 12.7mm was mounted separately.
> Other one is Italian VCC-1 purchased second hand couple of years ago.



I know that but compare the pictures which I have posted, you will notice the one on parade doesn’t have firing ports on the sides ! Did you notice it ?

Reactions: Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Dreamer.

Inception-06 said:


> I know that but compare the pictures which I have posted, you will notice the one on parade doesn’t have firing ports on the sides ! Did you notice it ?


Because it's anti-tank version with the Baktar Shikan mounted on top. It's role is not of standard APC (i.e. troop carrier), therefore it doesn't need slanted sides with firing ports.

The other one which does have the firing ports has no other mounted weapon other than a machine gun. It's a troop carrier hence the firing ports.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Defence of RYK, Punjab is the responsibility of 16ID(Pano Aqil, sindh).
Perhaps just a single inf bde of 16inf div is deployed there, permanently.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Signalian

Which Pakistan army Armored formations are facing these Indian army independent Armored brigades ?


2nd (I) Armoured Brigade - Mamun (FLEUR DE LIS Brigade) 3rd (I) Armoured Brigade - Ratnuchak (SABRE Brigade) IX Corps - Yol (RISING STAR)4th (I) Armoured Brigade - Bhatinda (BLACK MACE Brigade) XII Corps - Jodhpur (KONARK CORPS) 6th (I) Armoured Brigade - Suratgarh (SAND VIPERS Brigade) X Corps-Bhatinda (CHETAK CORPS)14th (I) Armoured Brigade - Bhatinda (BLACK CHARGERS Brigade) I Corps - Mathura16th (I) Armoured Brigade - Mamun (BLACK ARROW Brigade)23rd (I) Armoured Brigade - Amritsar (FLAMING ARROW Brigade) XI Corps - Jalandhar (VAJRA CORPS)

IA Independent Armored Brigades have 3 x Armored Regiments, 1 x Mechanized Infantry Regiment, 1 x Medium Regiment (Arty), and other supporting troops

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

Signalian said:


> IA Independent Armored Brigades have 3 x Armored Regiments, 1 x Mechanized Infantry Regiment, 1 x Mediu


While on paper it may seem impressive, isn't it too armour heavy. The Infantry component is too minimal. What will they do with so much tanks lacking infantry support? Provide reinforcements to other formations. I don't think they can perform independently. Moreover arty support is also inadequate.
Paksitani IABGS having 2+1, 1+1 or 1+2 composition seem to be far more composite and manageable.


Signalian said:


> 2nd (I) Armoured Brigade - Mamun (FLEUR DE LIS Brigade)


Possible against 6th amoured div advance to Pathankot.


Signalian said:


> 3rd (I) Armoured Brigade - Ratnuchak (SABRE Brigade) IX Corps - Yol (RISING STAR)


Again, either against 6th armoured div's thrust or to pre-empt any such attack. May also be used against 23 inf div.


Signalian said:


> 4th (I) Armoured Brigade - Bhatinda (BLACK MACE Brigade) XII Corps - Jodhpur (KONARK CORPS)


Against a Paksitani offense by 1st armoured div or 14 inf div in Fazilka. may also come up against 26 mech if it supports PA's II corps advance. Similarly considering the fact that these formations have 3 armd regts it may bud of one or two regts for an Indian offence along Ganganagar axis by 21 Corps. Same for 6th armd bde.


Signalian said:


> 14th (I) Armoured Brigade - Bhatinda (BLACK CHARGERS Brigade) I Corps - Mathura


Most likely act as corps reserves for strike corps. Will face 26 mech/1st armd div.


Signalian said:


> 16th (I) Armoured Brigade - Mamun (BLACK ARROW


Same as 2nd bde.


Signalian said:


> 23rd (I) Armoured Brigade - Amritsar (FLAMING ARROW Brigade) XI Corps - Jalandhar (VAJRA CORPS)


May come up against 10 or 11 inf div. However if this sector remains insignificant it can be sent either North or South.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Desert Fox 1 said:


> While on paper it may seem impressive, isn't it too armour heavy. The Infantry component is too minimal. What will they do with so much tanks lacking infantry support? Provide reinforcements to other formations. I don't think they can perform independently. Moreover arty support is also inadequate.
> Paksitani IABGS having 2+1, 1+1 or 1+2 composition seem to be far more composite and manageable.
> 
> Possible against 6th amoured div advance to Pathankot.
> 
> Again, either against 6th armoured div's thrust or to pre-empt any such attack. May also be used against 23 inf div.
> 
> Against a Paksitani offense by 1st armoured div or 14 inf div in Fazilka. may also come up against 26 mech if it supports PA's II corps advance. Similarly considering the fact that these formations have 3 armd regts it may bud of one or two regts for an Indian offence along Ganganagar axis by 21 Corps. Same for 6th armd bde.
> 
> Most likely act as corps reserves for strike corps. Will face 26 mech/1st armd div.
> 
> Same as 2nd bde.
> 
> May come up against 10 or 11 inf div. However if this sector remains insignificant it can be sent either North or South.


Forgot to add, iss post ko @PanzerKiel ki pohanch se dur Rakhein.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
7


----------



## Signalian

Desert Fox 1 said:


> While on paper it may seem impressive, isn't it too armour heavy. The Infantry component is too minimal. What will they do with so much tanks lacking infantry support? Provide reinforcements to other formations. I don't think they can perform independently. Moreover arty support is also inadequate.
> Paksitani IABGS having 2+1, 1+1 or 1+2 composition seem to be far more composite and manageable.
> 
> Possible against 6th amoured div advance to Pathankot.
> 
> Again, either against 6th armoured div's thrust or to pre-empt any such attack. May also be used against 23 inf div.
> 
> Against a Paksitani offense by 1st armoured div or 14 inf div in Fazilka. may also come up against 26 mech if it supports PA's II corps advance. Similarly considering the fact that these formations have 3 armd regts it may bud of one or two regts for an Indian offence along Ganganagar axis by 21 Corps. Same for 6th armd bde.
> 
> Most likely act as corps reserves for strike corps. Will face 26 mech/1st armd div.
> 
> Same as 2nd bde.
> 
> May come up against 10 or 11 inf div. However if this sector remains insignificant it can be sent either North or South.


A bigger formation has its plus and minuses but in Pakistan case there is lack of equipment versus India. Tanks, APC, artillery etc are less. This means formations are lesser too. 2 vs 3 armoured divs. Mech vs RAPIDS. 

PA can increase tanks numbers to counter balance. Then instead of forming new formations either put them in reserve like developed countries do or form new armor brigades in infantry divs. 

Reserve idea could be better since numbers will come close but expenditure will remain less by not increasing numbers of active formations. Losses replaced easily in war or ad hoc formations in war. 

If numbers become close, this will create new threat matrix for India. Consider PA 3500 MBT to IA 4000+ MBT. Gap closing.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Signalian said:


> Reserve idea could be better since numbers will come close but expenditure will remain less by not increasing numbers of active formations. Losses replaced easily in war or ad hoc formations in war.


Don't you think that the initial days/week will be the decisive ones and after that both sides might settle to a slogging match. Moreover due to the nuclear threshold, no significant permanent territorial gains would be made.
In the end like 27th feb, the one with whom the initiative would rest and the side which would maintain ascendency would be considered the victor. That's why I think raising sustainable formations (bdes) would be better with limited reserves so that we are able to throw in more forces initially instead of waiting for stabilizing of fixed front lines and then using the same resources (which could have been used to a greater effect if employed as separate force) for replenishment of own forces .

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PanzerKiel

Desert Fox 1 said:


> While on paper it may seem impressive, isn't it too armour heavy. The Infantry component is too minimal. What will they do with so much tanks lacking infantry support? Provide reinforcements to other formations. I don't think they can perform independently. Moreover arty support is also inadequate.


They are armor heavy, much more than us, that is what they are trained for, and that is what their doctrine requires. How come can you say that they lack infantry support? Try doing some analysis by comparing the equipment and manpower of our MIB and their MIR / R&S units....you will get your answer.


Desert Fox 1 said:


> Possible against 6th amoured div advance to Pathankot.
> 
> Again, either against 6th armoured div's thrust or to pre-empt any such attack. May also be used against 23 inf div.
> 
> Against a Paksitani offense by 1st armoured div or 14 inf div in Fazilka. may also come up against 26 mech if it supports PA's II corps advance. Similarly considering the fact that these formations have 3 armd regts it may bud of one or two regts for an Indian offence along Ganganagar axis by 21 Corps. Same for 6th armd bde.
> 
> Most likely act as corps reserves for strike corps. Will face 26 mech/1st armd div.
> 
> Same as 2nd bde.
> 
> May come up against 10 or 11 inf div. However if this sector remains insignificant it can be sent either North or South.


Try forming these IA brigades into IBGs. Then you will find something new. You are doing it on paper that our division against theirs based on their peacetime locations. Tell me, would you like to waste your armored reserves against Indian armored brigades? What then you will have for your own offensives into India, who will face the three Indian Strike Corps?

Reactions: Like Like:
5 | Love Love:
3


----------



## iLION12345_1

Inception-06 said:


> I know that but compare the pictures which I have posted, you will notice the one on parade doesn’t have firing ports on the sides ! Did you notice it ?


Talha itself had some design variations, some models were seen with firing ports, some with beveled sides, some with both, some with neither, these are relatively minor changes that sometimes do no get a model number or change in name. I believe the one on the left is an Italian VCC-2, that’s what they called it in the parade as well, while the other is M113P. However the descriptions given by PK may also be accurate.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Signalian

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Forgot to add, iss post ko @PanzerKiel ki pohanch se dur Rakhein.





Desert Fox 1 said:


> Don't you think that the initial days/week will be the decisive ones and after that both sides might settle to a slogging match. Moreover due to the nuclear threshold, no significant permanent territorial gains would be made.
> In the end like 27th feb, the one with whom the initiative would rest and the side which would maintain ascendency would be considered the victor. That's why I think raising sustainable formations (bdes) would be better with limited reserves so that we are able to throw in more forces initially instead of waiting for stabilizing of fixed front lines and then using the same resources (which could have been used to a greater effect if employed as separate force) for replenishment of own forces .


What’s PA MBT inventory. Type and numbers

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Joe Shearer

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Forgot to add, iss post ko @PanzerKiel ki pohanch se dur Rakhein.


Too late. He's seen it and was last seen on the floor, helpless and weak. I strongly recommend a trip to Nepal. Great weather now. I'd join youse guys if my health permitted.



Signalian said:


> This means formations are lesser too. 2 vs 3 armoured divs. Mech vs RAPIDS.


Dying to comment, but not good for a forum like this.


----------



## Joe Shearer

PanzerKiel said:


> They are armor heavy, much more than us, that is what they are trained for, and that is what their doctrine requires. How come can you say that they lack infantry support? Try doing some analysis by comparing the equipment and manpower of our MIB and their MIR / R&S units....you will get your answer.
> 
> Try forming these IA brigades into IBGs. Then you will find something new. You are doing it on paper that our division against theirs based on their peacetime locations. Tell me, would you like to waste your armored reserves against Indian armored brigades? What then you will have for your own offensives into India, who will face the three Indian Strike Corps?


True enough at the moment.

Out of 39 Indian divisions, around 12 (9 in the east across 3 Corps level formations, an indeterminate number with the recent changes in east Ladakh with XIV Corps) are tasked against the PLA. 4 more are committed to higher level formations, including 3 artillery divisions. Effectively, there are 23 Indian divisions facing 25 Pakistani, of course, with significant Pakistani commitment to the western frontier. However, the space involved is so narrow that re-deployment (for the PA) is a question of a couple of weeks (worst case; best case, even down to a week). 

This is fine to hold off a Pakistani attack, even against the incredible concentrations built up around certain spots that have always given the PA fruitful results. Unless someone, somewhere is willing to train battle leaders capable of leading armoured brigades (preferably armour-rich mechanised infantry brigades), there will never be an effective Indian attack into Pakistan. 

There is also the steep deficiency in artillery. Unless there is substantial productions of the ATAGS-type howitzer, and unless there is commensurate production of ammunition completely outside the clutches of those homicidal maniacs in the public sector units that were making them, India will have only tanks acting as self-propelled artillery.

Finally, we have been finessed by the PLA, that seems to have decided that they will move in formations when they like, at very high speed of deployment, and not leave standing formations on the ground. The Indian Army finds itself maintaining huge numbers on the ground, on difficult, hostile terrain, at the end of extended logistics lines serviced by a logistics organisation that is tightly stretched. Efforts at expanding road networks have stumbled in the very delicate mountain environment that does not support heavy logistics activity.

That means that sooner or later, the Indian infantry divisions will be diverted, during moments of high stress, from plains deployment to high altitude deployment. The cost in sickness and neutralisation of non-acclimatised troops is already known. 

That leaves very robust IBGs as the only card left to play for the Indian Army, and even that will break down south of Sri Ganganagar, where the IA has to deploy across vast stretches of mechanically destructive terrain, against an opposition sitting on the lip of the desert. In this stretch, only defensive operations are realistic, and therefore, multiple independent armoured brigades, that may - MAY - be effective if mixed with additional equipment that gives them teeth in the air as well as on land.

Who's joining me in Nepal?

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
3


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> How come can you say that they lack infantry support? Try doing some analysis by comparing the equipment and manpower of our MIB and their MIR / R&S units....you will get your answer


1 MIR= 52-58×BMPs

So about 52 bmps for 150+ tanks. Or a single infantry regt for three armd regts. So isn't it unbalanced?


PanzerKiel said:


> forming these IA brigades into IBGs. Then you will find something new. You are doing it on paper that our division against theirs based on their peacetime locations. Tell me, would you like to waste your armored reserves against Indian armored brigades? What then you will have for your own offensives into India, who will face the three Indian Strike Corps?


I was using the Indian IBGs against Paksitani offenses and not the other way round. Because of the reasons mentioned by Joe I was using the the Indian bdes for defence.


PanzerKiel said:


> They are armor heavy, much more than us, that is what they are trained for, and that is what their doctrine requires.


What I've inferred from this and Joe's post is that Indian doctrine requires their IABGs to be armor rich so that they are able to fight back/bog down a Paksitani attack without requiring further support and allowing the Indian armd divs to concentrate on a counter offense when they arrive.
Until the Indian strike formations reach their jump off points, these bdes will have blunted Paksitani attacks being completely independent.
Their being armour rich is because they'll be used as anvil?


Signalian said:


> What’s PA MBT inventory. Type and numbers


- 1,6 armd divs= 2×320=640
- 9×IABGS(incl those of mech div)=9(approx) ×88=792
- Armd bdes with inf divs (8,14,15,16,18,34,40)= 7×88=616
- Inf bdes having armd regts (10,11,23,37,17)= 5×88=220
- Corps reserve bdes(1,2,4,5,30,31corps)= 528
- Corps reserve regt, 12 coprs=44
- In addition there are multiple indp sqns as well with bdes.
(Moreover, I think that 15, 8 inf div have two bdes same might be the case with some other inf divs)
Also what about the indp infantry bdes, do they have any armd component?

Total > 2800

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Desert Fox 1 said:


> 1 MIR= 52-58×BMPs
> 
> So about 52 bmps for 150+ tanks. Or a single infantry regt for three armd regts. So isn't it unbalanced?
> 
> I was using the Indian IBGs against Paksitani offenses and not the other way round. Because of the reasons mentioned by Joe I was using the the Indian bdes for defence.
> 
> What I've inferred from this and Joe's post is that Indian doctrine requires their IABGs to be armor rich so that they are able to fight back/bog down a Paksitani attack without requiring further support and allowing the Indian armd divs to concentrate on a counter offense when they arrive.
> Until the Indian strike formations reach their jump off points, these bdes will have blunted Paksitani attacks being completely independent.
> Their being armour rich is because they'll be used as anvil?
> 
> - 1,6 armd divs= 2×320=640
> - 9×IABGS(incl those of mech div)=9(approx) ×88=792
> - Armd bdes with inf divs (8,14,15,16,18,34,40)= 7×88=616
> - Inf bdes having armd regts (10,11,23,37,17)= 5×88=220
> - Corps reserve bdes(1,2,4,5,30,31corps)= 528
> - Corps reserve regt, 12 coprs=44
> - In addition there are multiple indp sqns as well with bdes.
> (Moreover, I think that 15, 8 inf div have two bdes same might be the case with some other inf divs)
> Also what about the indp infantry bdes, do they have any armd component?
> 
> Total > 2800





Signalian said:


> What’s PA MBT inventory. Type and numbers


My estimates are based solely on delivery and production numbers and not regimental or service numbers, if anything it should be a general overview into the types and capabilities of the tanks, I would assume the numbers posted by Desert Fox are more accurate.

*Pakistan*:

VT-4P (3rd Gen+, post 2010s tech): Unknown number delivered (150+). 300 ordered, more planned.

Al-Khalid-I (3rd Gen, post 2010s tech): 110 in service, 110 on order. Al-Khalid-II production will begin shortly after Al-Khalid-I orders are complete, further 220+ Al-Khalid-II planned.

Al-Khalid (3rd Gen early 2000s tech): 400~ in service.

T80UD (3rd Gen, early 90s tech, modernized): 320 in service.

Type 85-UG (2nd Gen Modernized): 300 in service.

Al-Zarrar (2nd Gen Modernized): 600~ in service.

Type 69-IIM (1st Gen, obsolete): 200~ in service with both army and FC. To be replaced by VT-4P.

Type 59-IIM (1st Gen, obsolete): Around 700~ service. Some also In service with the FC. Few hundred more in storage. Being replaced by VT-4P.

*TOTAL: 2700-2800 in service + few hundred reserves (Pakistani reserves are mostly Type 59s)*

3rd/3rd+ Gen: 1100~ in service. With several hundred more on order.
(Note: VT-4P is being used to replace first generation tanks, while Al-Khalid-I and later Al-Khalid-II orders are being used to raise new regiments to increase fleet size)
2nd+ Gen: 900~ in service.
1st Gen: 800~ in service, will all be replaced by VT-4P, AK-I and AK-II.



*INDIA*:

T90S (3rd Gen, early 2000s tech): 1193 in service, 464 on order.

Arjun MK1A (3rd Gen) 1 tank in service. 118 on order.
Arjun MK1 (3rd Gen, performance closer to 2nd Gen): 124 in service.
T72 Improved Ajeya (2nd Gen Modernized): 950~ in service.
T72 (2nd Gen, obsolete): 850~ in active service, few hundred in storage.


*TOTAL: 3100~ tanks in service + several hundred reserves (Indian reserves are mostly T72s)*

3rd Gen: 1314 in service. 582 on order
2nd/2nd+ Gen: 1800~ in service.

No replacements planned in the Indian army till 2030 as per current information. I do realize that 3100 is too small to cover all the known Indian armored brigades and regiments, but the number of Arjun and T90S is 100% accurate, the only explanation might be that they have more of their stock T72s in service than is known. Which would mean lower reserves, but nonetheless, that’s the only explanation.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Ghost 125

Desert Fox 1 said:


> 1 MIR= 52-58×BMPs
> 
> So about 52 bmps for 150+ tanks. Or a single infantry regt for three armd regts. So isn't it unbalanced?
> 
> I was using the Indian IBGs against Paksitani offenses and not the other way round. Because of the reasons mentioned by Joe I was using the the Indian bdes for defence.
> 
> What I've inferred from this and Joe's post is that Indian doctrine requires their IABGs to be armor rich so that they are able to fight back/bog down a Paksitani attack without requiring further support and allowing the Indian armd divs to concentrate on a counter offense when they arrive.
> Until the Indian strike formations reach their jump off points, these bdes will have blunted Paksitani attacks being completely independent.
> Their being armour rich is because they'll be used as anvil?


IBGs are not Brigades

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Ghost 125 said:


> IBGs are not Brigades


Panzerkiel was asking me to use them as IBGs.
That's why I was thinking of them as brigade groups.
But now I get the point. You've cleared it for me.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

Desert Fox 1 said:


> Panzerkiel was asking me to use them as IBGs.
> That's why I was thinking of them as brigade groups.
> But now I get the point. You've cleared it for me.


No secrets are being given away; Pakistani military intelligence has our formations mapped down to below brigade level. The kinds of information interceptions made by our counter-intelligence show that our precise dispositions are known. It is a question of putting the pieces of the jigsaw puzzle together. 

For all that follows, some disclaimers:

Not all information provided is for the sake of information;
Nothing unethical in saying the above; those who need to plan already have the correct information, and its appreciation;
Peacetime and war-time are different.

Is it understood that Indian military stations are located far from our western and northern boundaries?
...that peacetime locations are not war-time locations?
...that resources can be added to peacetime formations, that have been exercised together elsewhere, elsewhen?
Have an enjoyable Sunday!

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
2


----------



## farooqbhai007

iLION12345_1 said:


> My estimates are based solely on delivery and production numbers and not regimental or service numbers, if anything it should be a general overview into the types and capabilities of the tanks, I would assume the numbers posted by Desert Fox are more accurate.
> 
> *Pakistan*:
> 
> VT-4P (3rd Gen+, post 2010s tech): Unknown number delivered (150+). 300 ordered, more planned.
> 
> Al-Khalid-I (3rd Gen, post 2010s tech): 110 in service, 110 on order. Al-Khalid-II production will begin shortly after Al-Khalid-I orders are complete, further 220+ Al-Khalid-II planned.
> 
> Al-Khalid (3rd Gen early 2000s tech): 400~ in service.
> 
> T80UD (3rd Gen, early 90s tech, modernized): 320 in service.
> 
> Type 85-UG (2nd Gen Modernized): 300 in service.
> 
> Al-Zarrar (2nd Gen Modernized): 600~ in service.
> 
> Type 69-IIM (1st Gen, obsolete): 200~ in service with both army and FC. To be replaced by VT-4P.
> 
> Type 59-IIM (1st Gen, obsolete): Around 700~ service. Some also In service with the FC. Few hundred more in storage. Being replaced by VT-4P.
> 
> *TOTAL: 2700-2800 in service + few hundred reserves (Pakistani reserves are mostly Type 59s)*
> 
> 3rd/3rd+ Gen: 1100~ in service. With several hundred more on order.
> (Note: VT-4P is being used to replace first generation tanks, while Al-Khalid-I and later Al-Khalid-II orders are being used to raise new regiments to increase fleet size)
> 2nd+ Gen: 900~ in service.
> 1st Gen: 800~ in service, will all be replaced by VT-4P, AK-I and AK-II.
> 
> 
> 
> *INDIA*:
> 
> T90S (3rd Gen, early 2000s tech): 1193 in service, 464 on order.
> 
> Arjun MK1A (3rd Gen) 1 tank in service. 118 on order.
> Arjun MK1 (3rd Gen, performance closer to 2nd Gen): 124 in service.
> T72 Improved Ajeya (2nd Gen Modernized): 950~ in service.
> T72 (2nd Gen, obsolete): 850~ in active service, few hundred in storage.
> 
> 
> *TOTAL: 3100~ tanks in service + several hundred reserves (Indian reserves are mostly T72s)*
> 
> 3rd Gen: 1314 in service. 582 on order
> 2nd/2nd+ Gen: 1800~ in service.
> 
> No replacements planned in the Indian army till 2030 as per current information. I do realize that 3100 is too small to cover all the known Indian armored brigades and regiments, but the number of Arjun and T90S is 100% accurate, the only explanation might be that they have more of their stock T72s in service than is known. Which would mean lower reserves, but nonetheless, that’s the only explanation.


IA also has limited numbers of T-55s in service with frontline units mainly fitted with counter mine devices , and im guessing several T55s in reserve as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Signalian

Joe Shearer said:


> Too late. He's seen it and was
> 
> Dying to comment, but not good for a forum like this.


What’s with you and dying lately ?

Spit it out already, like a chewed up pan.



iLION12345_1 said:


> My estimates are based solely on delivery and production numbers and not regimental or service numbers, if anything it should be a general overview into the types and capabilities of the tanks, I would assume the numbers posted by Desert Fox are more accurate.
> 
> *Pakistan*:
> 
> VT-4P (3rd Gen+, post 2010s tech): Unknown number delivered (150+). 300 ordered, more planned.
> 
> Al-Khalid-I (3rd Gen, post 2010s tech): 110 in service, 110 on order. Al-Khalid-II production will begin shortly after Al-Khalid-I orders are complete, further 220+ Al-Khalid-II planned.
> 
> Al-Khalid (3rd Gen early 2000s tech): 400~ in service.
> 
> T80UD (3rd Gen, early 90s tech, modernized): 320 in service.
> 
> Type 85-UG (2nd Gen Modernized): 300 in service.
> 
> Al-Zarrar (2nd Gen Modernized): 600~ in service.
> 
> Type 69-IIM (1st Gen, obsolete): 200~ in service with both army and FC. To be replaced by VT-4P.
> 
> Type 59-IIM (1st Gen, obsolete): Around 700~ service. Some also In service with the FC. Few hundred more in storage. Being replaced by VT-4P.
> 
> *TOTAL: 2700-2800 in service + few hundred reserves (Pakistani reserves are mostly Type 59s)*
> 
> 3rd/3rd+ Gen: 1100~ in service. With several hundred more on order.
> (Note: VT-4P is being used to replace first generation tanks, while Al-Khalid-I and later Al-Khalid-II orders are being used to raise new regiments to increase fleet size)
> 2nd+ Gen: 900~ in service.
> 1st Gen: 800~ in service, will all be replaced by VT-4P, AK-I and AK-II.
> 
> 
> 
> *INDIA*:
> 
> T90S (3rd Gen, early 2000s tech): 1193 in service, 464 on order.
> 
> Arjun MK1A (3rd Gen) 1 tank in service. 118 on order.
> Arjun MK1 (3rd Gen, performance closer to 2nd Gen): 124 in service.
> T72 Improved Ajeya (2nd Gen Modernized): 950~ in service.
> T72 (2nd Gen, obsolete): 850~ in active service, few hundred in storage.
> 
> 
> *TOTAL: 3100~ tanks in service + several hundred reserves (Indian reserves are mostly T72s)*
> 
> 3rd Gen: 1314 in service. 582 on order
> 2nd/2nd+ Gen: 1800~ in service.
> 
> No replacements planned in the Indian army till 2030 as per current information. I do realize that 3100 is too small to cover all the known Indian armored brigades and regiments, but the number of Arjun and T90S is 100% accurate, the only explanation might be that they have more of their stock T72s in service than is known. Which would mean lower reserves, but nonetheless, that’s the only explanation.


Which one can be built (not rebuild) cheaply/faster and thrown into reserve. 

The old ones still need replacement though. Then AZ will go to reserve, after that T-85 will go in reserve.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
4


----------



## iLION12345_1

Signalian said:


> What’s with you and dying lately ?
> 
> Spit it out already, like a chewed up pan.
> 
> 
> Which one can be built (not rebuild) cheaply/faster and thrown into reserve.
> 
> The old ones still need replacement though. Then AZ will go to reserve, after that T-85 will go in reserve.


India cannot produce Entirely T90S locally in case of a war, it will need to import parts of it from Russia.

While Pakistan doesn’t entirely produce Al-Khalid either, the power pack being the biggest exemption, it’s clearly been seen that they’re moving to a Chinese powerpack from the Ukrainian one and have tried to get ToT for said powerpack.
similarly, VT-4 supply to Pakistan will only increase in the case of a war, that’s definitely a strategic advantage because it means Pakistan might be able to procure more tanks in the case of an active war than india, which can build Arjun’s, but they’re not too useful. As for cost, Al-Khalid is the cheapest of the three, followed by T90S and then VT-4.

Moreover, Pakistans massive fleet of Type 59s can be upgraded to AZs in the case of a war as well, though I highly doubt such an option will be considered because the money would be better used elsewhere and they’d need to source foreign parts that were not buying in large amounts anymore.

That being said, india already has a larger armored reserve than Pakistan and said reserve has considerably better Tanks than Pakistans reserve (T72s versus Type 59s and Type 69s, however the Indian T55s are comparable to the Pakistani Type 59s), so we’re currently playing catch up in that regard.

(Pakistans active fleet has considerable technological superiority over the Indian fleet, but that’s just one cog in a massive machine of combined arms so I won’t comment on how useful that will be in the long run, if the supporting arms aren’t as good, then this technological advantage may not mean much)

It will take 5+ years to retire Type 59s and 69s to reserve, and maybe a further 5-10 years to retire AZs to reserve, by then india will start retiring T72s, but that’s all highly speculative.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1521470156668612608@PanzerKiel what radar is that in the background in the first picture , I'm guessing its a counter battery radar with PA. @Tps43

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

farooqbhai007 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1521470156668612608@PanzerKiel what radar is that in the background in the first picture , I'm guessing its a counter battery radar with PA. @Tps43


Could be a GSR as well. We operate quiet a few in this area.


----------



## Tipu7

farooqbhai007 said:


> IA also has limited numbers of T-55s in service with frontline units mainly fitted with counter mine devices , and im guessing several T55s in reserve as well.


Some T-55s are operational with Indian engineering corps.


----------



## farooqbhai007

PanzerKiel said:


> Could be a GSR as well. We operate quiet a few in this area.


Ahh yes GSR , that fits correctly now that I think of it , I was going for a bigger perspective that the radar antenna was much larger and deployed on the ground in the background behind the building rather then on the roof

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Tipu7 said:


> Some T-55s are operational with Indian engineering corps.


Some are in BLT role.


----------



## Raja Porus

LIDs are not light after all. They do have arty bdes(having more than the normal 2+1 composition). Moreover they have regular infantry bns as well.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1555259666485182470
It seems to be representation of Indian weapon systems. The tank seems to be Arjun (and that is perhaps what is written in the red circle), the "Chinese fighter" seems to be Mig29 and the heli an Apache.
@PanzerKiel

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

Where is this image from


----------



## Raja Porus

farooqbhai007 said:


> Where is this image from


Check 🐦


----------



## Signalian

iLION12345_1 said:


> India cannot produce Entirely T90S locally in case of a war, it will need to import parts of it from Russia.
> 
> While Pakistan doesn’t entirely produce Al-Khalid either, the power pack being the biggest exemption, it’s clearly been seen that they’re moving to a Chinese powerpack from the Ukrainian one and have tried to get ToT for said powerpack.
> similarly, VT-4 supply to Pakistan will only increase in the case of a war, that’s definitely a strategic advantage because it means Pakistan might be able to procure more tanks in the case of an active war than india, which can build Arjun’s, but they’re not too useful. As for cost, Al-Khalid is the cheapest of the three, followed by T90S and then VT-4.
> 
> Moreover, Pakistans massive fleet of Type 59s can be upgraded to AZs in the case of a war as well, though I highly doubt such an option will be considered because the money would be better used elsewhere and they’d need to source foreign parts that were not buying in large amounts anymore.
> 
> That being said, india already has a larger armored reserve than Pakistan and said reserve has considerably better Tanks than Pakistans reserve (T72s versus Type 59s and Type 69s, however the Indian T55s are comparable to the Pakistani Type 59s), so we’re currently playing catch up in that regard.
> 
> (Pakistans active fleet has considerable technological superiority over the Indian fleet, but that’s just one cog in a massive machine of combined arms so I won’t comment on how useful that will be in the long run, if the supporting arms aren’t as good, then this technological advantage may not mean much)
> 
> It will take 5+ years to retire Type 59s and 69s to reserve, and maybe a further 5-10 years to retire AZs to reserve, by then india will start retiring T72s, but that’s all highly speculative.


In the modern scenario, the use of UCAVs makes a significant difference as its an active threat to tanks and other armored vehicles. If complimented by gunships, this combination can become deadly as UCAVs to a great extent perform the role of a CAS aircraft with the armament they carry minus the cannon. While PAA may keep gunships in own airspace, UCAVs can/will cross the border in the event of a conflict. Isn't it a relief that PAF may not be required for CAS.

Then the ATGM support on the ground through TOW and BS equipped M-113s or 4x4 aided by infantry carrying M-113s. This combination of anti-tank capability and holding ground ability by infantry is crucial in capturing territory to consolidate the advance of armored forces. So far neither UCAV, nor gunship or infantry can blitz through enemy lines like a MBT. A UCAV can soften targets by tank plinking but to advance into enemy territory, tank and APCs are needed. 

There is another tactic. While UCAVs take out enemy armored vehicles, PA M-113s (ATGM/12.7mm) move in to sweep the remaining area for capturing and holding or chase the enemy. Although MBTs can chase better to cut off retreat but they do need back up by APCs. Some say MBTs are obsolete. In dense AAA and SAM areas, UCAVs may not survive for back to back sorties. UCAVs are more mobile than MBTs, but MBTs can have a high survival rate. In logistics, support, maintenance, the MBTs need a complete setup in the battlefield and mobile workshops.

The factor of artillery remains. Tubed and rocket. Guided, RAPs, anti-armor - all types of ammo. Different targets, ranges, ammunition logistics, OTH fire support. Artillery lies in support, not direct contact like other arms. 

We should be talking about wiped about armored regiments, 25%, 33%, 50%, 75%, massive losses, whether AK or T90s or VT4 or T72. Replacements for MBTs in PA are hopeless. Both armies can defend their territories, but its the attacking punch through the enemy lines which starts an offensive into enemy's territory. If the replacements are soggy T-59s then GHQ will throw in reserves. Crews train on T-59 but man VT-4 now, its such a downgrade to go back to T-59s. The slow speed is another bummer. No modern electronics. 

I think its the first thrust for armored regiments that matters the most, after that its a strength of replacements, logistics and support to continue an offensive. If the first ones a disaster, then that regiment will be sidelined for secondary tasks. A CV-90 or M2 Bradley like vehicle for cavalry could have an addition for back up if MBTs take bad losses but that 125mm gun wouldnt be there still and thin skin in direct contact may not be the best choice.

All in all, all these arms and weapon systems go hand in hand. MBTs with APCs, SP guns, UCAVs and gunships.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
2


----------



## arslank03

Signalian said:


> In the modern scenario, the use of UCAVs makes a significant difference as its an active threat to tanks and other armored vehicles. If complimented by gunships, this combination can become deadly as UCAVs to a great extent perform the role of a CAS aircraft with the armament they carry minus the cannon. While PAA may keep gunships in own airspace, UCAVs can/will cross the border in the event of a conflict. Isn't it a relief that PAF may not be required for CAS.
> 
> Then the ATGM support on the ground through TOW and BS equipped M-113s or 4x4 aided by infantry carrying M-113s. This combination of anti-tank capability and holding ground ability by infantry is crucial in capturing territory to consolidate the advance of armored forces. So far neither UCAV, nor gunship or infantry can blitz through enemy lines like a MBT. A UCAV can soften targets by tank plinking but to advance into enemy territory, tank and APCs are needed.
> 
> There is another tactic. While UCAVs take out enemy armored vehicles, PA M-113s (ATGM/12.7mm) move in to sweep the remaining area for capturing and holding or chase the enemy. Although MBTs can chase better to cut off retreat but they do need back up by APCs. Some say MBTs are obsolete. In dense AAA and SAM areas, UCAVs may not survive for back to back sorties. UCAVs are more mobile than MBTs, but MBTs can have a high survival rate. In logistics, support, maintenance, the MBTs need a complete setup in the battlefield and mobile workshops.
> 
> The factor of artillery remains. Tubed and rocket. Guided, RAPs, anti-armor - all types of ammo. Different targets, ranges, ammunition logistics, OTH fire support. Artillery lies in support, not direct contact like other arms.
> 
> We should be talking about wiped about armored regiments, 25%, 33%, 50%, 75%, massive losses, whether AK or T90s or VT4 or T72. Replacements for MBTs in PA are hopeless. Both armies can defend their territories, but its the attacking punch through the enemy lines which starts an offensive into enemy's territory. If the replacements are soggy T-59s then GHQ will throw in reserves. Crews train on T-59 but man VT-4 now, its such a downgrade to go back to T-59s. The slow speed is another bummer. No modern electronics.
> 
> I think its the first thrust for armored regiments that matters the most, after that its a strength of replacements, logistics and support to continue an offensive. If the first ones a disaster, then that regiment will be sidelined for secondary tasks. A CV-90 or M2 Bradley like vehicle for cavalry could have an addition for back up if MBTs take bad losses but that 125mm gun wouldnt be there still and thin skin in direct contact may not be the best choice.
> 
> All in all, all these arms and weapon systems go hand in hand. MBTs with APCs, SP guns, UCAVs and gunships.



Just be wary is all i will say. I suspect we are in for a nasty surprise with regards to UCAVs, the main reason being, we arent facing incompetent conscripts being deployed on SAM's. All of these recent conflicts have highlighted one thing, it is not the fact that these UAVs are impenetrable, it is the fact that there was no competent adversary. While i wont go ahead and say the Indians are on the forefront of training and expertise, i would expect their men to have more knowledge and experience on their systems than the Russians or Armenians. Ironically, Russian IADS is all but "I", it is highly disjointed, with no real functional IFF, no real c&c and no proper data sharing. I think we will see far greater attrition rates of drones in our theatre, simply because we are actually fighting a reasonably competent adversary. Though, this isnt to say the psychological impact of them, or tbh, even the additional numbers they bring wont be beneficial, but what it is to say is, i wouldnt put it past Indian AD operators who are protecting these forward formations to do a decent job of protecting them. But then again, does also depend on what systems they are given, naturally, Osa etc is basically useless as it cant reach at the altitudes these drones operate at anyway.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

arslank03 said:


> Just be wary is all i will say. I suspect we are in for a nasty surprise with regards to UCAVs, the main reason being, we arent facing incompetent conscripts being deployed on SAM's. All of these recent conflicts have highlighted one thing, it is not the fact that these UAVs are impenetrable, it is the fact that there was no competent adversary. While i wont go ahead and say the Indians are on the forefront of training and expertise, i would expect their men to have more knowledge and experience on their systems than the Russians or Armenians. Ironically, Russian IADS is all but "I", it is highly disjointed, with no real functional IFF, no real c&c and no proper data sharing. I think we will see far greater attrition rates of drones in our theatre, simply because we are actually fighting a reasonably competent adversary. Though, this isnt to say the psychological impact of them, or tbh, even the additional numbers they bring wont be beneficial, but what it is to say is, i wouldnt put it past Indian AD operators who are protecting these forward formations to do a decent job of protecting them. But then again, does also depend on what systems they are given, naturally, Osa etc is basically useless as it cant reach at the altitudes these drones operate at anyway.


Tanks are not obsolete, they can survive in modern battlefield against drones, which is why they havent been disbanded by Armies around the globe. Its the replacement of tanks in Pakistan Army's arsenal that is a major issue. Up-gradation of one type of tank is cost effective like AK or VT-4. While one can argue on having commonality of parts, all upgrade projects are different, even engines are different. 
1.Upgrades of T-59 to T 59 II, then to AZ. 
2. Upgrade of T-85 II towards III and UG. 
3. Upgrade of T-80 UDs. 
4. Upgrade of AK to AK-1. 
5. Now there will be upgrades of VT-4. 

USA Army upgrades its M1 to M1A1, then M1A2, then SEP among others and maybe to M1A3. Same with Leo2A1 to Leos2A6 and A7.

Then the talk of an IFV. With an IFV like CV-90, M2 Bradley or BMP3, even with a heavier gun like 100mm of BMP3 or 120 mm of CV-90-120T, the concept of WW2 destroyed comes to mind, big gun on a lightly armored chassis. Although, now the HE round is good against infantry and bunkers, while the ATGM can take care of tanks, while retaining troop carrying capacity. PA retains its 12.7 mm cannon (or ack ack) and a shield for gunner, no turret but an ATGM version of M-113 with other 12.7mm equipped M-113s to protect the formation from tanks. An IFV cannot really replace a MBT. IFV and APCs are amphibious though, which means destroyed bridges won't hold them back. 

As for drones, the EW systems on them for protection could make them costlier but will enhance their survivability on the modern battle field. Their size has increased for weapon carrying capacity, reducing 2 x ATGMS for sake of two EW protection pods isn't a big compromise. A UCAV should return to base and go after enemy again rather than take out 8 x MBTs and get shot down. The crew is safe and the drone is cheaper than a helicopter.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## arslank03

Signalian said:


> Tanks are not obsolete, they can survive in modern battlefield against drones, which is why they havent been disbanded by Armies around the globe. Its the replacement of tanks in Pakistan Army's arsenal that is a major issue. Up-gradation of one type of tank is cost effective like AK or VT-4. While one can argue on having commonality of parts, all upgrade projects are different, even engines are different.
> 1.Upgrades of T-59 to T 59 II, then to AZ.
> 2. Upgrade of T-85 II towards III and UG.
> 3. Upgrade of T-80 UDs.
> 4. Upgrade of AK to AK-1.
> 5. Now there will be upgrades of VT-4.
> 
> USA Army upgrades its M1 to M1A1, then M1A2, then SEP among others and maybe to M1A3. Same with Leo2A1 to Leos2A6 and A7.
> 
> Then the talk of an IFV. With an IFV like CV-90, M2 Bradley or BMP3, even with a heavier gun like 100mm of BMP3 or 120 mm of CV-90-120T, the concept of WW2 destroyed comes to mind, big gun on a lightly armored chassis. Although, now the HE round is good against infantry and bunkers, while the ATGM can take care of tanks, while retaining troop carrying capacity. PA retains its 12.7 mm cannon (or ack ack) and a shield for gunner, no turret but an ATGM version of M-113 with other 12.7mm equipped M-113s to protect the formation from tanks. An IFV cannot really replace a MBT. IFV and APCs are amphibious though, which means destroyed bridges won't hold them back.
> 
> As for drones, the EW systems on them for protection could make them costlier but will enhance their survivability on the modern battle field. Their size has increased for weapon carrying capacity, reducing 2 x ATGMS for sake of two EW protection pods isn't a big compromise. A UCAV should return to base and go after enemy again rather than take out 8 x MBTs and get shot down. The crew is safe and the drone is cheaper than a helicopter.




Im not disagreeing with you, im just specifically highlighting that i dont expect drones to perform as well as expected, their performance elsewhere IMO cant really be extrapolated here

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

arslank03 said:


> Im not disagreeing with you, im just specifically highlighting that i dont expect drones to perform as well as expected, their performance elsewhere IMO cant really be extrapolated here


I would be inclined to agree with this statement, but only if the SAMs and other AA platforms perform as expected. Russia-Ukraine should have shown us how effective drones really were in a SAM-heavy environment where they also face aerial threats, but the Russian army so incompetent that we didn’t get to see it. So far we’ve only send the effectiveness of drones in environments where they have either completely or relatively clear skies. 

That doesn’t mean drones won’t be useful, just that they’re not more useful than say a tank or a gunship, which brings us back to signalians point, every weapon on the battlefield is only as good as the one next to it. If the one next to it is used poorly, then your weapon won’t be of much use either, that’s the thing about combined arms, if everything works, then it’s a brilliant strategy, if one part fails, it all fails.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Raja Porus

Today's war is going to between system of systems. Thus while one weapon system may play a dominant role it may not be completely decisive.
One system must exploit the result of another in order to succeed. We must realise that drones may not achieve similar achievements in Indo-Pak environment as they have previously in other conflicts, considering that India has one of the most modern ADS with a large airforce and EW systems to back it.

Consider a scenario in which PAF and arty is able to successfully conduct DEAD ops and suppression of airbases. Only then will the UCAVs be able to make some mark on the battlefield. Now, if we believe that the UCAVs have done their job and caused maximum attrition to enemy mechanised forces... Then what? Until now, no political objective has been achieved and nothing of strategic importance has been inflicted... This can be done only be going into enemy territory and capturing some vital areas; And for that you need something that has sufficient firepower, protection and most importantly mobility, which means simply, A Tank. Thus only by using a tank (or any other such veh) were we able to exploit the success of systems. If tanks were not used to capture territory or UCAVs weren't used to cause attrition then all previous efforts were in vain.

Also, from the above scenario can we conclude that the Indian tanks which were destroy by UCAVs, are obsolete, just because they weren't employed well? Or if Pak used UCAVs without DEAD ops and they ended up suffering attrition from enemy ADS.. will the UAVs become redundant?

All systems constitute a chain and a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Thus we can not afford to spend heavily on one system and forsake the other.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Super Falcon

Korkut short range air defence system may be bought by army for cheap drones neutrality


----------



## Signalian

Super Falcon said:


> Korkut short range air defence system may be bought by army for cheap drones neutrality


Looking a bit ahead of drones since IAF itself is a big threat due to CAS Jaguar and M2Ks, a more robust and mobile MR-SAM than HQ-17. SHORADs are there already along with AAA guns.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

Al-Zarrar and a pair of curious looking talha based sakbs (one has mast as well). Also the steel thingy around the apc as panzerkiel had said was being implemented fleet wide.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Reichmarshal

farooqbhai007 said:


> Al-Zarrar and a pair of curious looking talha based sakbs (one has mast as well). Also the steel thingy around the apc as panzerkiel had said was being implemented fleet wide.


The steel thingy is usually filled with bags who in turn are filled with sand/soil/cement etc , its a cheap n effective armor reinforcing method. Its effective protection uptill rpg

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1565010639403245571
I've hoping for such a system for our mech formations.
@Signalian what do you think?

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

Raja Porus said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1565010639403245571
> I've hoping for such a system for our mech formations.
> @Signalian what do you think?


In future when Indian Army acquires QR-SAM this will likely be purchased to maintain power balance.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Signalian

Raja Porus said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1565010639403245571
> I've hoping for such a system for our mech formations.
> @Signalian what do you think?


Something that keeps drones, Jaguars. M2k and SU-30 at bay from PA Armored formations.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## farooqbhai007

Raja Porus said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1565010639403245571
> I've hoping for such a system for our mech formations.
> @Signalian what do you think?








Yeh lovey dovey eyes ka kya matlab samjhain hum ? System in trials or maybe trials in future 👀

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

farooqbhai007 said:


> View attachment 875363
> 
> Yeh lovey dovey eyes ka kya matlab samjhain hum ? System in trials or maybe trials in future 👀


Yep, exactly what I thought.
His love reactions often bear the semblance of "She said Yes".

Reactions: Love Love:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567901702958768131@Signalian


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567904154500370446

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Raja Porus said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567901702958768131@Signalian
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567904154500370446



Imagine doing that storm assault with that here:

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Signalian

Raja Porus said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567901702958768131@Signalian
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567904154500370446


8:50 and then 10:00, your trusty old friend comes to the rescue. 

the amazing TIN CAN with 0.5 cal.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

_



_Me, after Ukraine's mouth watering gains against Russia, to those who said the tanks have become "obsolete" on modern battlefield because of UCAVs

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Jango

Raja Porus said:


> _
> View attachment 878975
> _Me, after Ukraine's mouth watering gains against Russia, to those who said the tanks have become "obsolete" on modern battlefield because of UCAVs



The propaganda was in full swing in the early days!

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Jango said:


> The propaganda was in full swing in the early days!


Especially after that unequal Azer- Arm conflict.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## CLUMSY

Wish our mechanized divisions inducted IFVs, APCs like m113 are getting old. Need something which can carry troops and deliver fire support simultaneously. Would be a vital asset.


----------



## Metal 0-1

Raja Porus said:


> _
> View attachment 878975
> _Me, after Ukraine's mouth watering gains against Russia, to those who said the tanks have become "obsolete" on modern battlefield because of UCAVs


I hate those drones apologist


----------



## Inception-06



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> View attachment 881476


Excellent camo for, especially of the infantry.
Btw, that is LTG Shaheen. So what's I corps doing with T59s?
Can you please share the source?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Raja Porus said:


> Excellent camo for, especially of the infantry.
> Btw, that is LTG Shaheen. So what's I corps doing with T59s?
> Can you please share the source?


I think those are AZs, I can see a flatter turret and the silhouette of a Gunners Sight Box. But the picture is too blurry to really tell.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Inception-06

View attachment 881476



iLION12345_1 said:


> I think those are AZs, I can see a flatter turret and the silhouette of a Gunners Sight Box. But the picture is too blurry to really tell.



You are right.



Raja Porus said:


> Excellent camo for, especially of the infantry.
> Btw, that is LTG Shaheen. So what's I corps doing with T59s?
> Can you please share the source?


ISPR Hilal- section- Urdu news !

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Raja Porus said:


> Excellent camo for, especially of the infantry.
> Btw, that is LTG Shaheen. So what's I corps doing with T59s?
> Can you please share the source?











کمانڈر منگلا کور کا کور لیول اسالٹ اکراس مائن فیلڈ مشق کا معائنہ


گزشتہ دنوں کور لیول اسالٹ اکراس مائن فیلڈ ( Assault Across Mine Field )مشق کا کھاریاں کے قریب گلیانہDCB (Ditch Cum Bund) میں عملی مظاہرہ کیا گیا۔ مظاہرے میں مسلح افواج کے باروی سُرنگوں سے گزر کر دشمن کے علاقے میں پہنچنے کا بہترین عملی مظاہرہ پیش کیا گیاجس میں انفنٹری، کور آف انجینئرز اوررسالے کی...




www.hilal.gov.pk


----------



## Super Falcon

War is around the corner if EU gets in war there will be a war in Asia too


----------



## Signalian

Raja Porus said:


> So what's I corps doing with T59s?


Length of 125 mm gun Vs L-7 105 mm gun.


----------



## Raja Porus

Signalian said:


> Length of 125 mm gun Vs L-7 105 mm gun.





iLION12345_1 said:


> I think those are AZs, I can see a flatter turret and the silhouette of a Gunners Sight Box. But the picture is too blurry to really tell.


Yep, they are AZs. And since it's Kharian, then these will be of either 17 or 37.. PAVOs perhaps.

@iLION12345_1 , wdy think, will the AZs being replaced by VT4s be used to in turn replace the T59s of 30 Corps? While T59s of 16,14 and perhaps 35 will be replaced directly by VT4?


@Signalian ,. Having so many T59/69 or perhaps AZs as reserves would be a very interesting thing and I believe PA cmdrs will be tempted too. Just like the 34TDU at Sulemanke



Super Falcon said:


> War is around the corner if EU gets in war there will be a war in Asia too


EU is not that stupid. They won't risk anyth over Ukraine or perhaps even Poland

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Signalian

Raja Porus said:


> @Signalian ,. Having so many T59/69 or perhaps AZs as reserves would be a very interesting thing and I believe PA cmdrs will be tempted too. Just like the 34TDU at Sulemanke


Reserve should be the tanks in front line use like AK and VT-4 considering they are the mainstay of the PA armor in the future. Even putting T-85s after 2 decades and T-80s after 3 decades in reserve wouldn't mean much. A regiment losing 10-15 AKs while the replacements show up as T-59s. Its just numbers to fill in, T-59 is not a solid tank for the desert. We haven't seen AZ operating in the desert regularly too. Its more worrisome for the 1st Armored Div losing T-80UDs.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Raja Porus said:


> Yep, they are AZs. And since it's Kharian, then these will be of either 17 or 37.. PAVOs perhaps.
> 
> @iLION12345_1 , wdy think, will the AZs being replaced by VT4s be used to in turn replace the T59s of 30 Corps? While T59s of 16,14 and perhaps 35 will be replaced directly by VT4?
> 
> 
> @Signalian ,. Having so many T59/69 or perhaps AZs as reserves would be a very interesting thing and I believe PA cmdrs will be tempted too. Just like the 34TDU at Sulemanke
> 
> 
> EU is not that stupid. They won't risk anyth over Ukraine or perhaps even Poland


Given PAs record, I think both the Type 59s and any Retiring AZs will be kept in cold storage for a long time to come to be activated as reserves. At least a decade, depending on how much space there is. 
If the VT-4s replace AZs anywhere, those AZs will likely be transferred to replace Type 59s and 69s elsewhere depending on their condition. 

As for having them in reserve, I agree with the above. The type 59s and 69s don’t deserve to be in there. The Al-Zarrars can stay simply because they’re quite a bit better than what the Indian reserve holds at the moment (Stock T72s). Obviously the reserve is only really good if it has the same tanks as the frontline however.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Raja Porus

Signalian said:


> Reserve should be the tanks in front line use like AK and VT-4 considering they are the mainstay of the PA armor in the future. Even putting T-85s after 2 decades and T-80s after 3 decades in reserve wouldn't mean much. A regiment losing 10-15 AKs while the replacements show up as T-59s. Its just numbers to fill in, T-59 is not a solid tank for the desert. We haven't seen AZ operating in the desert regularly too. Its more worrisome for the 1st Armored Div losing T-80UDs.


I doubt replacing tanks that a regt operates with another type would be prudent. Training, ammo, maint etc. Even in 65 we didn't do such things (apart from the ones which had different tanks since peacetime). For example, at Chawinda the Pattons of the Guides were given to 19 Lancers while Guides were completely equipped with Shermans.
Also, by using reserves I meant raising new formations( Especially squadron lvl) for rear activities such as defending gun positions, tac hqs instead of using newer tanks for these purposes.


Signalian said:


> T-80s after 3 decades in reserve wouldn't mean much


This I highly doubt.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Signalian

Raja Porus said:


> I doubt replacing tanks that a regt operates with another type would be prudent. Training, ammo, maint etc. Even in 65 we didn't do such things (apart from the ones which had different tanks since peacetime). For example, at Chawinda the Pattons of the Guides were given to 19 Lancers while Guides were completely equipped with Shermans.
> Also, by using reserves I meant raising new formations( Especially squadron lvl) for rear activities such as defending gun positions, tac hqs instead of using newer tanks for these purposes.
> 
> This I highly doubt.


A regiment losing a full squadron of T-80UDs (15 x tanks). It lost 33.33% of its fighting power, what will happen to that regiment like how will it be used in war next ?



Raja Porus said:


> Also, by using reserves I meant raising new formations( Especially squadron lvl) for rear activities such as defending gun positions, tac hqs instead of using newer tanks for these purposes.


Tanks are offensive weapons, not well suited for defensive Ops mostly sitting ducks or dug in. There are better defensive options such as ATGMs or lighter handheld AT weapons. Gun positions are defended with own security echelon of the regiment.



Raja Porus said:


> This I highly doubt.


I hope we are alive by that time.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## CLUMSY

Signalian said:


> A regiment losing a full squadron of T-80UDs (15 x tanks). It lost 33.33% of its fighting power, what will happen to that regiment like how will it be used in war next ?
> 
> 
> Tanks are offensive weapons, not well suited for defensive Ops mostly sitting ducks or dug in. There are better defensive options such as ATGMs or lighter handheld AT weapons. Gun positions are defended with own security echelon of the regiment.
> 
> 
> I hope we are alive by that time.


Tanks can be very useful in defensive warfare, just a matter of employment.


----------



## Reichmarshal

If u knew how long our armor div. Are suppose to last according to PA war games, then u would get the shock of ur life

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Signalian said:


> Tanks are offensive weapons, not well suited for defensive Ops mostly sitting ducks or dug in


Sure. But there's ambiguity in this. Tanks are excellent for mobile defence. Chawinda?
It may sound attractive at tactical level but not at operational. For example if a holding corps commander employes his armour for counter attack or even a spoiling attack, it would be be counted as an attack only at tactical level, because the operational objective is still defence. What do you think is the purpose of armd bdes with Inf div?

Also, I don't support ad-hocism etc and I'm speaking only as someone sitting in GHQ would feel during war time. Imagine yourself as a CC 31 Corps, defending for example Bahawalpur. Now if GHQ gives you newly raised reservist inf and tank regts, you and your GOC can start taking some risks, perhaps throw another bde to the frontline or even counter attack because you have your main objective is somewhat secure.



Reichmarshal said:


> If u knew how long our armor div. Are suppose to last according to PA war games, then u would get the shock of ur life


It would be interesting. Nice thing that army is preparing for the worst. But I believe a good GOC will always make his formation available after handing captured territory to inf.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Signalian

Raja Porus said:


> Sure. But there's ambiguity in this. Tanks are excellent for mobile defence. Chawinda?
> It may sound attractive at tactical level but not at operational. For example if a holding corps commander employes his armour for counter attack or even a spoiling attack, it would be be counted as an attack only at tactical level, because the operational objective is still defence. What do you think is the purpose of armd bdes with Inf div?
> 
> Also, I don't support ad-hocism etc and I'm speaking only as someone sitting in GHQ would feel during war time. Imagine yourself as a CC 31 Corps, defending for example Bahawalpur. Now if GHQ gives you newly raised reservist inf and tank regts, you and your GOC can start taking some risks, perhaps throw another bde to the frontline or even counter attack because you have your main objective is somewhat secure.
> 
> 
> It would be interesting. Nice thing that army is preparing for the worst. But I believe a good GOC will always make his formation available after handing captured territory to inf.


I think you and I are not on the same page maybe or I didnt get you.

CO 25 Cav was attacking in Chawinda scenario, he wasn't defensive. If you are thinking of pitting Pattons against T-72 or T-90, it's not a good idea. It's better to hand them over to FC based on examples of Turkish usage of M-60 Pattons in their war against insurgents, but eventually Turks had to bring in Leo2A4s too. 

Secondly, in 1965, India also didnt have a MBT to maneuver freely in the desert for long distance engagements and the infrastructure to support it though Centurion would have fared well with an excellent logistics support and a spirited commander like Rommel to threaten Sindh cut off from Punjab. This hold true today with T-90.

Thirdly, India hadnt exercised war games of Division and Corps level in desert to throw Centurions in the desert under its armored divisions. Today, its different, India can pitch a Corps level armored offensive in the desert region from Badin to south of Okara (Bahawalnagar) , and protection of that corridor by T-59s and M-48s even as reserve is impossible. You need highly mobile forces (MBTs with big engines/filters/logistics as well as Gunships and UCAVs which can cover distance with in minutes, not hours ).

Fourthly, even if you put defensive lines of M48s and T-59s, Indian armored forces will be more mobile than them and just like 1971, they will by-pass strong points and attack from rear or flanks to decimate these forces.

Fifth, intel wasnt strong in 1965. India didnt know that only a lone regiment divided in 3 x squadrons is blocking an entire division. That fog of war is not there anymore. India has very good satellite, intel and recon capabilities today.

Sixth, M-48s used to bog down and so do T-59s in different terrain, even in Northern Punjab. So if you think they will make a difference in the desert, its difficult to ascertain. PA will start with a force of 100 MBTs of each type and in the end 75 or 80 will be deployed due to bogging and breakdowns. This is not expected from modern MBTs.



CLUMSY said:


> Tanks can be very useful in defensive warfare, just a matter of employment.


If they are AKs and VT-4 yes, but not M48s and T-59s.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Reichmarshal

The threat to tanks has increased many folds specially in the last decade, from atgm with top attack capability, to ucav, loitering munitions, precidion guided rockets, just to name a few. 
For tanks to operate freely in a battlefield they need very favorable conditions, which in a contested battle field between to equally matched enemies or at the very least two well equipped enemies has become increasingly unlikely.
So tough days ahead for tanks

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Signalian

Reichmarshal said:


> The threat to tanks has increased many folds specially in the last decade, from atgm with top attack capability, to ucav, loitering munitions, precidion guided rockets, just to name a few.
> For tanks to operate freely in a battlefield they need very favorable conditions, which in a contested battle field between to equally matched enemies or at the very least two well equipped enemies has become increasingly unlikely.
> So tough days ahead for tanks


This is why sending MBTs without AD cover is disastrous and why the combines arms doctrine is useful as all arms protect and compliment each other.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

Signalian said:


> This is why sending MBTs without AD cover is disastrous and why the combines arms doctrine is useful as all arms protect and compliment each other.


Yea PA was supposed to get korkuts as well since they trialed em, any update on that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Reichmarshal

Signalian said:


> This is why sending MBTs without AD cover is disastrous and why the combines arms doctrine is useful as all arms protect and compliment each other.


AD is over rated.
More then any things the tactics to employ armor need to be over hauled n need to be brought in accordance with the challenges of 21st century as right now in the 21st century battle field tactics of armor thrust n mass movement of armor n armor holding terrority have become tricky to say the least.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Reichmarshal said:


> AD is over rated.
> More then any things the tactics to employ armor need to be over hauled n need to be brought in accordance with the challenges of 21st century as right now in the 21st century battle field tactics of armor thrust n mass movement of armor n armor holding terrority have become tricky to say the least.


Evolution of any weapon system will always bring a counter for it. How effectively that counter is deployed is up to the user.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Reichmarshal

Signalian said:


> Evolution of any weapon system will always bring a counter for it. How effectively that counter is deployed is up to the user.


One I can think of is an emp device small enough to protect a tank.
But before they come on line n become effective better tactics can go a long way in the extending the lease on life of a tank in the modern battlefield


----------



## CLUMSY

There are already man portable anti drone devices. A well organized force would set up proper air defence for armor while advancing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Signalian said:


> think you and I are not on the same page maybe or I didnt get you.
> 
> CO 25 Cav was attacking in Chawinda scenario, he wasn't defensive. If you are thinking of pitting Pattons against T-72 or T-90, it's not a good idea. It's better to hand them over to FC based on examples of Turkish usage of M-60 Pattons in their war against insurgents, but eventually Turks had to bring in Leo2A4s too.


I think we both are discussing two different levels of command, you are talking about tactical while I'm, operational.



Signalian said:


> CO 25 Cav was attacking in Chawinda scenario, he wasn't defensive. If you are thinking of pitting Pattons against T-72 or T-90, it's not a good idea. It's better to hand them over to FC based on examples of Turkish usage of M-60 Pattons in their war against insurgents, but eventually Turks had to bring in Leo2A4s too.


Col Nisar's attack was a tactical level attack. What was the operational objective of 6AD?



Signalian said:


> Thirdly, India hadnt exercised war games of Division and Corps level in desert to throw Centurions in the desert under its armored division


Neither India nor Pak was capable of doing such things back then. Moreover ig wouldn't have gone unnoticed. We would've come up with a response. Jacobabad airbase also comes to mind.
Moreover, desert would've been where our Pattons would've finally been able to use their superiority in range, laser range finder and FCS. Alot different to the sugarcane fields of Khem Kharan.


Signalian said:


> Fourthly, even if you put defensive lines of M48s and T-59s, Indian armored forces will be more mobile than them and just like 1971, they will by-pass strong points and attack from rear or flanks to decimate these forces


Where did the M48s come in from? In fact I started this discussion with respect to AZs and upgunned T69s with NV. AZs in reserve would be excellent. Better than T72s.
Also who uses reserve Tanks for frontline? I'm talking about rear activities and city defence. A commander who is able to free up regular troops would become a bit more aggressive. He can even counter attack because now he has more regular troops.
For example in 65 when Rajinder Singh (GOC 1st armd div) asked for 9 Deccan horse and 3 Cav, which were lying idle at Lahore front, to be sent to Chawinda; he was refused because they were kept back for safety of Amritsar. What would've happened had they been moved.. thank God we don't know.


farooqbhai007 said:


> Yea PA was supposed to get korkuts as well since they trialed em, any update on that.


I don't think SPAAGs are of much use nowadays.

Reactions: Love Love:
2


----------



## farooqbhai007

Raja Porus said:


> I think we both are discussing two different levels of command, you are talking about tactical while I'm, operational.
> 
> 
> Col Nisar's attack was a tactical level attack. What was the operational objective of 6AD?
> 
> 
> Neither India nor Pak was capable of doing such things back then. Moreover ig wouldn't have gone unnoticed. We would've come up with a response. Jacobabad airbase also comes to mind.
> Moreover, desert would've been where our Pattons would've finally been able to use their superiority in range, laser range finder and FCS. Alot different to the sugarcane fields of Khem Kharan.
> 
> Where did the M48s come in from? In fact I started this discussion with respect to AZs and upgunned T69s with NV. AZs in reserve would be excellent. Better than T72s.
> Also who uses reserve Tanks for frontline? I'm talking about rear activities and city defence. A commander who is able to free up regular troops would become a bit more aggressive. He can even counter attack because now he has more regular troops.
> For example in 65 when Rajinder Singh (GOC 1st armd div) asked for 9 Deccan horse and 3 Cav, which were lying idle at Lahore front, to be sent to Chawinda; he was refused because they were kept back for safety of Amritsar.
> 
> I don't think SPAAGs are of much use nowadays.


spaag are very effective , afaik even the ukranians released a press release in which they said that their kharkhiv offensive was succesfull partially due to a handfull weapons which changed their tide of war which was the artillery systems and the gepard.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Reichmarshal

CLUMSY said:


> There are already man portable anti drone devices. A well organized force would set up proper air defence for armor while advancing.


How about a saturation attack with multiple suicide drones or with cluster munitions like the cbu 105 or a salvo of gps guided rockets from multiple launchers.
Things are looking frighteningly bad for tank


----------



## Signalian

Raja Porus said:


> I think we both are discussing two different levels of command, you are talking about tactical while I'm, operational.
> 
> 
> Col Nisar's attack was a tactical level attack. What was the operational objective of 6AD?
> 
> 
> Neither India nor Pak was capable of doing such things back then. Moreover ig wouldn't have gone unnoticed. We would've come up with a response. Jacobabad airbase also comes to mind.
> Moreover, desert would've been where our Pattons would've finally been able to use their superiority in range, laser range finder and FCS. Alot different to the sugarcane fields of Khem Kharan.
> 
> Where did the M48s come in from? In fact I started this discussion with respect to AZs and upgunned T69s with NV. AZs in reserve would be excellent. Better than T72s.
> Also who uses reserve Tanks for frontline? I'm talking about rear activities and city defence. A commander who is able to free up regular troops would become a bit more aggressive. He can even counter attack because now he has more regular troops.
> For example in 65 when Rajinder Singh (GOC 1st armd div) asked for 9 Deccan horse and 3 Cav, which were lying idle at Lahore front, to be sent to Chawinda; he was refused because they were kept back for safety of Amritsar. What would've happened had they been moved.. thank God we don't know.
> 
> I don't think SPAAGs are of much use nowadays.


99% of armored warfare is "getting there" which means driving to reach a destination. The T-59s and T69s are inadequate for that purpose in modern warfare where as T-80UD, AK and VT-4 are perfect, while T-85 is good. I mentioned M-48s along with T-59s as they are available options. The attrition rate of T-59s will be higher against modern MBTs of IA which means you are not just losing MBTs but experienced crews also.

I also mentioned operational use of older MBTs in previous posts, not just at tactical level. Lets suppose that there is a reserve brigade of T-59s 5under 5-Corps and another under 31-Corps. Indian Army makes a breakthrough and there is a large armored force of T-90s and BMPs. What will you pitch against this force from Pakistan's arsenal ?

1. T-59 armored brigade of 90 MBTs and 50 APCs (12-15 are ATGM equipped) ?
or
2. UCAVs and Gunships
or
3. LATs/HATs (4x4 and APC mounted ATGM)
or
4. Dismounted/dug in infantry with ATGM/LAW/Mines backed with towed artillery 
or
5. PAF's CAS aircrafts.

Or a combination of the above. What would be a sensible option.



Reichmarshal said:


> How about a saturation attack with multiple suicide drones or with cluster munitions like the cause 105 or a salvo of gps guided rockets from multiple launchers.
> Things are looking frighteningly bad for tank











Pakistan Army - AIR DEFENCE CORPS - Formation, Structure, Weapons


I have been asked repeatedly to create a thread on Army AIR DEFENCE and every time I had to paste a post that i wrote earlier in a thread so now i am creating a new topic. Army AD formations hold confidential information in terms of TOE, deployment, weaponry and Radar systems. I will give a...



defence.pk





PA AD formations are mix of AAA and Tubed weapons to tackle air threats and then there are tactics/strategies to avoid falling into a trap.



farooqbhai007 said:


> spaag are very effective , afaik even the ukranians released a press release in which they said that their kharkhiv offensive was succesfull partially due to a handfull weapons which changed their tide of war which was the artillery systems and the gepard.


SPAAGs with radar like Giraffe and also Tubed weapons like SAMs for guidance with/without radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
2


----------



## CLUMSY

Reichmarshal said:


> How about a saturation attack with multiple suicide drones or with cluster munitions like the cause 105 or a salvo of gps guided rockets from multiple launchers.
> Things are looking frighteningly bad for tank


Loitering munitions can be shot down with proper coverage, counter artillery also exists. Tanks wont be obsolete, they will just change. My assumption is that internationally tanks will start being lighter with better electronic countermeasures and hardkill systems. Proper CRAM would be very good against suicide drones.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Signalian

CLUMSY said:


> Loitering munitions can be shot down with proper coverage, counter artillery also exists. Tanks wont be obsolete, they will just change. My assumption is that internationally tanks will start being lighter with better electronic countermeasures and hardkill systems. Proper CRAM would be very good against suicide drones.


Dismal deployment of MBTs in various conflicts - Syria, Azerbaijan, Ukraine- by various countries have led to MBTs getting their turrets shot in to the sky.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Reichmarshal

As drones become readily available across the board...we will see more n more usage of small suicide drones in saturation attacks.....eg let's say a brigade level armor attack is targeted by 100 suicide drones in a saturation attack or that mater a large armor formation is attacked by multiple ucavs or ac with cbu 105, the formation stands no chance.
All this with tech thsts been available for some time now


----------



## Signalian

Reichmarshal said:


> the formation stands no chance.


If such was the case then many countries would disband their armored formations. 
Post#1318

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## CLUMSY

Signalian said:


> 99% of armored warfare is "getting there" which means driving to reach a destination. The T-59s and T69s are inadequate for that purpose in modern warfare where as T-80UD, AK and VT-4 are perfect, while T-85 is good. I mentioned M-48s along with T-59s as they are available options. The attrition rate of T-59s will be higher against modern MBTs of IA which means you are not just losing MBTs but experienced crews also.
> 
> I also mentioned operational use of older MBTs in previous posts, not just at tactical level. Lets suppose that there is a reserve brigade of T-59s 5under 5-Corps and another under 31-Corps. Indian Army makes a breakthrough and there is a large armored force of T-90s and BMPs. What will you pitch against this force from Pakistan's arsenal ?
> 
> 1. T-59 armored brigade of 90 MBTs and 50 APCs (12-15 are ATGM equipped) ?
> or
> 2. UCAVs and Gunships
> or
> 3. LATs/HATs (4x4 and APC mounted ATGM)
> or
> 4. Dismounted/dug in infantry with ATGM/LAW/Mines backed with towed artillery
> or
> 5. PAF's CAS aircrafts.
> 
> Or a combination of the above. What would be a sensible option.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pakistan Army - AIR DEFENCE CORPS - Formation, Structure, Weapons
> 
> 
> I have been asked repeatedly to create a thread on Army AIR DEFENCE and every time I had to paste a post that i wrote earlier in a thread so now i am creating a new topic. Army AD formations hold confidential information in terms of TOE, deployment, weaponry and Radar systems. I will give a...
> 
> 
> 
> defence.pk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PA AD formations are mix of AAA and Tubed weapons to tackle air threats and then there are tactics/strategies to avoid falling into a trap.
> 
> 
> SPAAGs with radar like Giraffe and also Tubed weapons like SAMs





Signalian said:


> 99% of armored warfare is "getting there" which means driving to reach a destination. The T-59s and T69s are inadequate for that purpose in modern warfare where as T-80UD, AK and VT-4 are perfect, while T-85 is good. I mentioned M-48s along with T-59s as they are available options. The attrition rate of T-59s will be higher against modern MBTs of IA which means you are not just losing MBTs but experienced crews also.
> 
> I also mentioned operational use of older MBTs in previous posts, not just at tactical level. Lets suppose that there is a reserve brigade of T-59s 5under 5-Corps and another under 31-Corps. Indian Army makes a breakthrough and there is a large armored force of T-90s and BMPs. What will you pitch against this force from Pakistan's arsenal ?
> 
> 1. T-59 armored brigade of 90 MBTs and 50 APCs (12-15 are ATGM equipped) ?
> or
> 2. UCAVs and Gunships
> or
> 3. LATs/HATs (4x4 and APC mounted ATGM)
> or
> 4. Dismounted/dug in infantry with ATGM/LAW/Mines backed with towed artillery
> or
> 5. PAF's CAS aircrafts.
> 
> Or a combination of the above. What would be a sensible option.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pakistan Army - AIR DEFENCE CORPS - Formation, Structure, Weapons
> 
> 
> I have been asked repeatedly to create a thread on Army AIR DEFENCE and every time I had to paste a post that i wrote earlier in a thread so now i am creating a new topic. Army AD formations hold confidential information in terms of TOE, deployment, weaponry and Radar systems. I will give a...
> 
> 
> 
> defence.pk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PA AD formations are mix of AAA and Tubed weapons to tackle air threats and then there are tactics/strategies to avoid falling into a trap.
> 
> 
> SPAAGs with radar like Giraffe and also Tubed weapons like SAMs for guidance with/without radar.


If its a shock attack with no prior warning UCAVs and aircraft with anti tank infantry equipped with ATGMs and RPGs on the flanks.


----------



## Signalian

CLUMSY said:


> If its a shock attack with no prior warning UCAVs and aircraft with anti tank infantry equipped with ATGMs and RPGs on the flanks.


1. Why would the radars of AD regiments be switched off as they are accompanying the armored forces?
2. Why wouldn't intel know of imminent attack knowing the UCAVs strengths and bases in the area ?
3. Why would recon elements not warn the main body of the armored force about the direction of attack ?
4. Why wouldn't Signals Battalions EW equipment accompany armored forces for EW, signal interception, jamming and other electronic capabilities ?
5. Why wouldn't PAF's AWACs pick up the movement if its in the zone ?
6. Why would armored regiments leave out their AD contingent behind even if they are 2-4 x SAM launchers with 2-4 x AAA cannons, apart from Corps and Div Level AD regiments providing cover ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## CLUMSY

Signalian said:


> 1. Why would the radars of AD regiments be switched off as they are accompanying the armored forces?
> 2. Why wouldn't intel know of imminent attack knowing the UCAVs strengths and bases in the area ?
> 3. Why would recon elements not warn the main body of the armored force about the direction of attack ?
> 4. Why wouldn't Signals Battalions EW equipment accompany armored forces for EW, signal interception, jamming and other electronic capabilities ?
> 5. Why wouldn't PAF's AWACs pick up the movement if its in the zone ?
> 6. Why would armored regiments leave out their AD contingent behind even if they are 2-4 x SAM launchers with 2-4 x AAA cannons, apart from Corps and Div Level AD regiments providing cover ?


Oh i didnt know you were also counting in other supporting elements. I guess in this scenario i would mostly rely on guided rocket artillery and cluster munitions to bog down advancing elements and possibly target AD infrastructure. What level of SAMs are we talking about here?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Signalian said:


> also mentioned operational use of older MBTs in previous posts, not just at tactical level. Lets suppose that there is a reserve brigade of T-59s 5under 5-Corps and another under 31-Corps. Indian Army makes a breakthrough and there is a large armored force of T-90s and BMPs. What will you pitch against this force from Pakistan's arsenal ?
> 
> 1. T-59 armored brigade of 90 MBTs and 50 APCs (12-15 are ATGM equipped) ?
> or
> 2. UCAVs and Gunships
> or
> 3. LATs/HATs (4x4 and APC mounted ATGM)
> or
> 4. Dismounted/dug in infantry with ATGM/LAW/Mines backed with towed artillery
> or
> 5. PAF's CAS aircrafts.
> 
> Or a combination of the above. What would be a sensible option.


What type of commander will fight such a battle!
All levels of command prepare for such contingencies. Why aren't there any local reserves with the GOCs? Or why aren't there any theatre reserves! Who defends without a regular reserve. Relying on third line reservists?

Still if there's no regular reserve and the reservist brigade is defending bahwalnagar city, then;
-Use PAF and UCAVs for max attrition of breakout force.
-2×LAT coys deployed as forward defence, will do a fighting retreat.
-Will use terrain and deploy my main force where enemy has minimum options of flanking and axes of advance, i.e to narrow down his advance.
-Main defence line would include, 1×Armd regt and 2×Inf coys, 1× LAT coy, arty and mines.
- 1×armd regt+ 2× Inf coys as reserve.
- 1-2× LAT pltns on either flank of the main defence.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Signalian

Raja Porus said:


> Relying on third line reservists?


CORO get administrative tasks in HQs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

CLUMSY said:


> Oh i didnt know you were also counting in other supporting elements. I guess in this scenario i would mostly rely on guided rocket artillery and cluster munitions to bog down advancing elements and possibly target AD infrastructure. What level of SAMs are we talking about here?


Why would a formation go to war without supporting elements ? Coz thats what you saw in Syrian, Ukrainian conflict etc ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## CLUMSY

Signalian said:


> Why would a formation go to war without supporting elements ? Coz thats what you saw in Syrian, Ukrainian conflict etc ?


I assumed it was a what if scenario


----------



## Raja Porus

Signalian said:


> CORO get administrative tasks in HQs.


Didn't get you

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Signalian

Raja Porus said:


> Didn't get you


Reservists are retired personnel who are called during war for service. They get admin/clerical jobs in HQs during war time while all active military personnel are taken away from desk jobs and sent to combat.

all retired officers are part of CORO, Corps of Reserve officers.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Reichmarshal

Signalian said:


> If such was the case then many countries would disband their armored formations.
> Post#1318


Let their be a proper war n u will see just that


----------



## farooqbhai007

Reichmarshal said:


> Let their be a proper war n u will see just that


Abey bhai meray pehley Armenia vs Azerbaijan war hogai , phir Russia vs Ukraine war hogai agar yeh wars proper nahi hain phir aap kya chathey ho 😂

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## CLUMSY

I do not see why anyone would be in favor of disbanding armor. Having a big boom boom gun with metal armor that is mobile will ALWAYS be useful.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Reichmarshal said:


> Let their be a proper war n u will see just that


What’s a proper war ?

Reactions: Love Love:
2


----------



## Reichmarshal

farooqbhai007 said:


> Abey bhai meray pehley Armenia vs Azerbaijan war hogai , phir Russia vs Ukraine war hogai agar yeh wars proper nahi hain phir aap kya chathey ho 😂


Wt u have seen are battles n skirmishs not war.

Indian army just issued a tender for loitering munitions n swarm drones.
Guess they are reading my posts 🙂


----------



## Signalian

Reichmarshal said:


> Wt u have seen are battles n skirmishs not war.
> 
> Indian army just issued a tender for loitering munitions n swarm drones.
> Guess they are reading my posts 🙂


1. How many armies in the world have disbanded their armored formations in recent years ?

2. How many international active orders of MBTs and IFVs have been cancelled ?



farooqbhai007 said:


> Abey bhai meray pehley Armenia vs Azerbaijan war hogai , phir Russia vs Ukraine war hogai agar yeh wars proper nahi hain phir aap kya chathey ho 😂


We can keep USA aside, as USAF dominates the skies before US Army enters the zone, but apart from that which other country can counter the UCAV/UAV threat effectively (90-100%) through its AF in war ?

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Let's look at it like this:



India: S400, Barak-8, Akash NG, SPYDER, QRSAM, Strela, Osa, Kub, Shilka, Tunguska, Modernized L-70, Igla, Stinger, anti drone rifle that India bought, Soft and Hard kill APS in the future.

Paksitan: HQ-9, LY-80, HQ-7, Orelikon guns(especially sith AHEAD ammo), Giraffe radar with RBS-70 and Anza, Possible Korkut (or any other SPAAG), Pantsir type system (possibly FK-2000), Soft and Hard kill APS in the future.

Will drones be able to get through this protection?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## CLUMSY

Raja Porus said:


> Let's look at it like this:
> 
> 
> 
> India: S400, Barak-8, Akash NG, SPYDER, QRSAM, Strela, Osa, Kub, Shilka, Tunguska, Modernized L-70, Igla, Stinger, anti drone rifle that India bought, Soft and Hard kill APS in the future.
> 
> Paksitan: HQ-9, LY-80, HQ-7, Orelikon guns(especially sith AHEAD ammo), Giraffe radar with RBS-70 and Anza, Possible Korkut (or any other SPAAG), Pantsir type system (possibly FK-2000).
> 
> Will drones be able to get through this protection?


Nope not initially. Would take massive SEAD/DEAD campaigns to make it possible.


----------



## farooqbhai007

Raja Porus said:


> Let's look at it like this:
> 
> 
> 
> India: S400, Barak-8, Akash NG, SPYDER, QRSAM, Strela, Osa, Kub, Shilka, Tunguska, Modernized L-70, Igla, Stinger, anti drone rifle that India bought, Soft and Hard kill APS in the future.
> 
> Paksitan: HQ-9, LY-80, HQ-7, Orelikon guns(especially sith AHEAD ammo), Giraffe radar with RBS-70 and Anza, Possible Korkut (or any other SPAAG), Pantsir type system (possibly FK-2000), Soft and Hard kill APS in the future.
> 
> Will drones be able to get through this protection?


Exclude S400 and Akash NG from this as those are for IAF only.
Additionally the Osa's have been almost phased out as well and Kub only last few regiments are left as well which likely won't be there in future.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

farooqbhai007 said:


> Exclude S400 and Akash NG from this as those are for IAF only.
> Additionally the O


Sattar bhai, they'll still be providing AD(especially S400) to IA against PAF and HALE/MALE UAVs

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

Raja Porus said:


> Sattar bhai, they'll still be providing AD(especially S400) to IA against PAF and HALE/MALE UAVs


Yea but you didnt include PAF's AD inventory so I thought it was a IA AD vs PA AD comparison.
If IAF AD is included then we might as well as include PAF's HQ9Bs, Spada, while fot future that indigenous SAM project, Crotale modernization project, HQ17A and several other types of SHORADs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

farooqbhai007 said:


> indigenous SAM project


More explanation please.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Hakikat ve Hikmet

Signalian said:


> Dismal deployment of MBTs in various conflicts - Syria, Azerbaijan, Ukraine- by various countries have led to MBTs getting their turrets shot in to the sky.


It takes two for a tango. TB2s are the tango partners here, thanks to the engineers' astute observation and meticulous implementation.....

*Top high school grads in Turkey join her engineering departments, and top engineering grads join her defense industries. Merit matters.



Signalian said:


> *Why would a formation go to war without supporting elements ?* Coz thats what you saw in Syrian, Ukrainian conflict etc ?


A trillion$ observation. For a reason the Turkish defense industries are spending billions to get that armored supporting elements in terms of armed drones of all sorts (micro to mega), mobile AD of all sorts (including anti-drones), EW, active protection etc. Not to mention calling chopper or fighter support like taxis....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## CLUMSY

Raja Porus said:


> Sattar bhai, they'll still be providing AD(especially S400) to IA against PAF and HALE/MALE UAVs


Given Indias record, wouldnt be surprised if IAF SAMs provide cover against IAF as well...

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Primus

Raja Porus said:


> Let's look at it like this:
> 
> 
> 
> India: S400, Barak-8, Akash NG, SPYDER, QRSAM, Strela, Osa, Kub, Shilka, Tunguska, Modernized L-70, Igla, Stinger, anti drone rifle that India bought, Soft and Hard kill APS in the future.
> 
> Paksitan: HQ-9, LY-80, HQ-7, Orelikon guns(especially sith AHEAD ammo), Giraffe radar with RBS-70 and Anza, Possible Korkut (or any other SPAAG), Pantsir type system (possibly FK-2000), Soft and Hard kill APS in the future.
> 
> Will drones be able to get through this protection?


As per Ukraine, the TB2 has been effective at hunting down Russian medium and short range SAMs despite the threat of the S400 SAM system. Whilst the Chinese SAMs have not been combat tested, drones and GMLRS have done a number on the Russians during this war. Bearing in mind, Russia has a much much stronger IADS network than India.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## CSAW

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1562998564321914880

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567353713752252418

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567008313329549317

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1568149458726125568

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1568125825135906819

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1571471984659431426
https://twitter.com/zspcl/status/1574208727997349889

https://twitter.com/zspcl/status/1574206713489756161

https://twitter.com/zspcl/status/1567005427371577346


----------



## Raja Porus

A Vs B.
Armoured, Punjab,FF along with HAT regts of AK... That's a straight A.
Plus support by aviation and maint by EME, everything seems to be balanced except for lack of air defence.

B can only be saved by arty, mines of Engrs and LATs of Baluch regt.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Signalian

Raja Porus said:


> View attachment 883778
> A Vs B.
> Armoured, Punjab,FF along with HAT regts of AK... That's a straight A.
> Plus support by aviation and maint by EME, everything seems to be balanced except for lack of air defence.
> 
> B can only be saved by arty, mines of Engrs and LATs of Baluch regt.


How would you make a "recon in force" org from this above structure ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Reichmarshal

Raja Porus said:


> View attachment 883778
> A Vs B.
> Armoured, Punjab,FF along with HAT regts of AK... That's a straight A.
> Plus support by aviation and maint by EME, everything seems to be balanced except for lack of air defence.
> 
> B can only be saved by arty, mines of Engrs and LATs of Baluch regt.


Current form makes no sense...needs further elobration....e.g engs are always first in a battle n last to leave......so should be common for all

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Saw combat footage of US Army 3rd Infantry Div having AH-64 and M1 Abrams leading the assault, something PA infantry Divisions might never have- a dedicated Gunship squadron and top tier tank.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Signalian said:


> How would you make a "recon in force" org from this above structure ?


Aren't LATs or HATs trained for that.. just asking.
Btw it would depend on the amount of information I already have about the enemy, terrain and what type if attack I want to put in after it.


Signalian said:


> top tier tank.


16, 18, 35 etc

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Raja Porus said:


> Aren't LATs or HATs trained for that.. just asking.
> Btw it would depend on the amount of information I already have about the enemy, terrain and what type if attack I want to put in after it.


Although this is a 20 years old war, yet these weapons and tech are still used today. The "recon in force" comes into effect in this case when assaulting a defended urban area, through use of firepower in recon elements (MBTs/IFV etc) to cause destruction instead of just gathering intel.

23:00 onwards

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## RAMPAGE

CSAW said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1562998564321914880
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567353713752252418
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567008313329549317
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1568149458726125568
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1568125825135906819
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1571471984659431426
> https://twitter.com/zspcl/status/1574208727997349889
> 
> https://twitter.com/zspcl/status/1574206713489756161
> 
> https://twitter.com/zspcl/status/1567005427371577346


The correct name is Al-Khalid Fairy-Fart II.

Active Protection System, my a$$.

Reactions: Angry Angry:
3


----------



## Signalian

Raja Porus said:


> 16, 18, 35 etc


Some Divs are lucky, however, a US Army infantry Div is much more heavier in terms of formations, mobility and firepower when compared with PA Inf Divs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## CSAW

RAMPAGE said:


> The correct name is Al-Khalid Fairy-Fart II.
> 
> Active Protection System, my a$$.


You seem to have a problem with the post or its a Chronic digestive issue. In any case - the comment is non - appropriate to say the least .


----------



## Av8er

Whats the point of buying all the equipment for a country on the verge of bankruptcy, thanks to the Army leadership support of the most vile bunch of crooks ever to walk this earth? What are these slaves going to protect us against??

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1


----------



## PakFactor

Raja Porus said:


> 16, 18, 35 etc



That wouldn't get you far


----------



## Reichmarshal

Av8er said:


> Whats the point of buying all the equipment for a country on the verge of bankruptcy, thanks to the Army leadership support of the most vile bunch of crooks ever to walk this earth? What are these slaves going to protect us against??


Preparing for the time when we won't be on the verge of bankruptcy n being led by competent leaders
That would be a dangerous time for our enemies

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Primus

Signalian said:


> Some Divs are lucky, however, a US Army infantry Div is much more heavier in terms of formations, mobility and firepower when compared with PA Inf Divs.


They have the economy to do that though. Had the zadaris and sharifs not been in power after Musharraf, then the economy would've been much stronger. It wouldn't have been plundered like it was.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1577660884020736002

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## truthseeker2010

Primus said:


> They have the economy to do that though. Had the zadaris and sharifs not been in power after Musharraf, then the economy would've been much stronger. It wouldn't have been plundered like it was.



Don't worry there are DHA's and Fauji foundation to run the military. Economy is for poor. **** mil industrial complex is immune to all the corruption and politics.


----------



## Inception-06



Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
2


----------



## ghazi52

.,.,..,

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1585210407450710016

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Some views on M-901 ITV.

Can used in the scouts to recon the forward positions. In the defense, the vehicle is normally dug into the ground deep enough that only the tubes showed, and when providing over watch, the height helped with the location with far away targets up to 4 Km away. The vehicle could be taken out with 50 cal and larger. Firing 7.62 at an M113 doesnt penetrate it. These are extremely venerable to land mines. M-901 has 12 missiles on board and could dig in more missiles under the vehicle. The thermal sights are excellent and all battlefield smoke and prosperous could be seen through. The prosperous would blind you at first but it would settle down fairly quickly. If the system is in the "Stow" position, it will take forever to reload it. If the system is pointed directly to the front, it can be reloaded under two minutes. 

The loader has to get both missiles up in one minute. The gunner has to bring the turret into the load position. The loader has expelled the empty missile containers, and he has to shove the missiles upward in an 45 degree angle. The gunner returns the launcher into the firing position. The gunner puts a cross-hair from the sight on to a target, ant the missile follows it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Raja Porus

@PanzerKiel heard from an engrs officer that the M47 AVLBs are very unreliable and breakdown often especially around areas such as bahwalpur since they are air-cooled.
Imagine 3rd gen AKs getting delayed because of 50s M47s.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Raja Porus said:


> Imagine 3rd gen AKs getting delayed because of 50s M47s.


There are alot many items from 50s and 60s we are still using. Try imagining them. But then, we have to make the most of it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> There are alot many items from 50s and 60s we are still using. Try imagining them. But then, we have to make the most of it.


Arty, perhaps has the highest percentage of that, but then there isn't much difference. M109 is proving to be more successful and reliable than the much more modern German and Polish SPH.
In case of AVLBs I don't think you can afford a breakdown. The outcome of a battle does not depend as much on any other system as these AVLBs.
Imagine 26 mech not being able to deploy its AKs because of M47s. All those YouTube spec comparisons will have to wait then 

I'd rather convert one year's AK production to the AVLB version and I believe one batch would be almost enough.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

PanzerKiel said:


> There are alot many items from 50s and 60s we are still using. Try imagining them. But then, we have to make the most of it.


btw panzerkiel bro any updates on shorads u would like to share.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

farooqbhai007 said:


> btw panzerkiel bro any updates on shorads u would like to share.


Nothing with me as yet. Let's see.

Reactions: Love Love:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

Are the A100s moving with the tanks?

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
2


----------



## PanzerKiel

Raja Porus said:


> Are the A100s moving with the tanks?
> View attachment 892648


Nopes. They are their static positions from where to give fire support to the armor going for breakthrough.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Princeps Senatus

Raja Porus said:


> Are the A100s moving with the tanks?
> View attachment 892648


Is this recent? Where is it from?


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> Nopes. They are their static positions from where to give fire support to the armor going for breakthrough.


What is that tank doing with the A100s? Providing protection?


Princeps Senatus said:


> Is this recent? Where is it from?


Yes, from Gujranwala

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Raja Porus said:


> What is that tank doing with the A100s? Providing protection?
> 
> Yes, from Gujranwala


Protecting artillery gun areas and fire support bases once they are inside captured enemy territory.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
3


----------



## Raja Porus

PanzerKiel said:


> Protecting artillery gun areas and fire support bases once they are inside captured enemy territory.


@Signalian , here's where the reservist tanks (upgraded T69s) can come into play, as I stated earlier, instead of using frontline eqpt.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Haha Haha:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Raja Porus said:


> @Signalian , here's where the reservist tanks (upgraded T69s) can come into play, as I stated earlier, instead of using frontline eqpt.



I support your Idea ! While I demand more machine guns on Tanks and APC with gun shields.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Raja Porus said:


> @Signalian , here's where the reservist tanks (upgraded T69s) can come into play, as I stated earlier, instead of using frontline eqpt.


Count the numbers of machine guns !
@Beny Karachun why Israeli Tanks have so many machine guns installed on Tanks, does it benefit to suppress enemy’s infantry more then a single one ? What’s the main reason ?


----------



## Beny Karachun

Inception-06 said:


> Count the numbers of machine guns !
> @Beny Karachun why Israeli Tanks have so many machine guns installed on Tanks, does it benefit to suppress enemy’s infantry more then a single one ? What’s the main reason ?
> View attachment 892768


There's also a 60mm internal mortar.

Yes, it's very good for suppressing fire. The more machineguns the better lol, that's the conclusion our tankers had.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SQ8

Beny Karachun said:


> There's also a 60mm internal mortar.
> 
> Yes, it's very good for suppressing fire. The more machineguns the better lol, that's the conclusion our tankers had.


Also because the Merkava is more a highly armored IFV along with being a Tank so it usually does have more personnel going along with it - hence all the need for it being like a mini fortress.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beny Karachun

SQ8 said:


> Also because the Merkava is more a highly armored IFV along with being a Tank so it usually does have more personnel going along with it - hence all the need for it being like a mini fortress.


Nah, it's capable of hosting some passengers but at the expense spare shells. Usually this doesn't happen.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SQ8

Beny Karachun said:


> Nah, it's capable of hosting some passengers but at the expense spare shells. Usually this doesn't happen.


But that capability does exist and hence the additional firepower. Also is the need to be able to switch to different fields of fire instead of rotating a swivel around.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Beny Karachun

SQ8 said:


> But that capability does exist and hence the additional firepower. Also is the need to be able to switch to different fields of fire instead of rotating a swivel around.


Israel has the Namer APC for that role, which is based on the Merkava, except it's even more armored.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SQ8

Beny Karachun said:


> Israel has the Namer APC for that role, which is based on the Merkava, except it's even more armored.


I thought the namer was based on the T-55.. or was the Achkarit(or something close)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

Inception-06 said:


> Count the numbers of machine guns !
> @Beny Karachun why Israeli Tanks have so many machine guns installed on Tanks, does it benefit to suppress enemy’s infantry more then a single one ? What’s the main reason ?
> View attachment 892768


Active protection or more MGs, what your take in preference ?

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

Signalian said:


> Active protection or more MGs, what your take in preference ?


Why not both.

Reactions: Love Love:
2


----------



## Inception-06

Signalian said:


> Active protection or more MGs, what your take in preference ?



More Machine guns against Infantry and a combination of a passive/active protection made in Pakistan against enemy ATGM.



Signalian said:


> Active protection or more MGs, what your take in preference ?


@iLION12345_1 why we can’t finde on any pictures the 7.62mm inside Pakistani made Tank series, it’s even not produced in Pakistan. Would you prefer a additional MG-3 on the turret of the AL-Zarrar Tank ?


I would also recommend smoke tubes,a additional MG-3 gun with gun shield on all M-113 series, do you agree ? Why most Pakistani M-113 don’t have smoke grenade launcher tubes ?
@Beny Karachun do you think it’s necessary to have gun shields for machine gun stations on the M133 APC, did it proved to be effective and sense wise, also I can count most of times 3x machine gun on Israeli APC series, what’s the purpose? ( I think I know it but I am asking for gathering public here).


----------



## Inception-06

@iLION12345_1 @PanzerKiel would recommend to make the mechanised Infantrymen more effective by giving the M-113 troops better fighting weapons, to transform it something like a storm infantrymen. The main focus lies on training and upgrading existing weapons. 

1.MG-3 should get a double drum magazine and a modernization Kitt that allow existing MG3 inventory to be upgraded. It adds picatinny rails for optics and accessories, an adjustable stock, improved sling and a very nifty fore grip that doubles as a carry handle.
2.The G-3 men or/designated marksman rifle should also get a upgrade kit for his rifle.
3.The rest of the Trooper which carries the Type-56 rifle should get the option install a grenade launcher on their rifle. 

Supplement to the RPG-7 or as a replacement the anti Tank tasked Trooper must get a modern and shoulder light ATGM such as the Alcotán-100. 

As I said before the M-113 should be transformed into fighting machines which supports the storm infantrymen with two board machine guns.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Signalian

farooqbhai007 said:


> Why not both.


How many MGs do you need 😅 
2,3,4 ?
Cost, reloading, turret aiming, targets etc all have to be consisted

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Inception-06

@iLION12345_1 @Raja Porus I would recommend to transform this 1980s Infantrymen to a true mechanised storm infantry.Pakistani infantrymen are I’ll equipped compared to what a brute force they have to face from the other side of the Border. That’s the actual show:




















Signalian said:


> How many MGs do you need 😅
> 2,3,4 ?
> Cost, reloading, turret aiming, targets etc all have to be consisted



The NATO military’s and Israeli seems to be stupid to have more machine guns.

Reactions: Love Love:
2


----------



## PanzerKiel

farooqbhai007 said:


> Why not both.


APS can play havoc with close infantry around the tank. Its splinters can be deadly to whoever is near the tank. That has to be taken care at all times once APS is activated and mechanized infantry is also near the tank.



Inception-06 said:


> More Machine guns against Infantry and a combination of a passive/active protection made in Pakistan against enemy ATGM.
> 
> 
> @iLION12345_1 why we can’t finde on any pictures the 7.62mm inside Pakistani made Tank series, it’s even not produced in Pakistan. Would you prefer a additional MG-3 on the turret of the AL-Zarrar Tank ?
> 
> 
> I would also recommend smoke tubes,a additional MG-3 gun with gun shield on all M-113 series, do you agree ? Why most Pakistani M-113 don’t have smoke grenade launcher tubes ?
> @Beny Karachun do you think it’s necessary to have gun shields for machine gun stations on the M133 APC, did it proved to be effective and sense wise, also I can count most of times 3x machine gun on Israeli APC series, what’s the purpose? ( I think I know it but I am asking for gathering public here).
> View attachment 892838
> View attachment 892844


It all comes down to the roles and our doctrine, that how we intend to use our M113s.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Inception-06

@Raja Porus The main focus lies on training and upgrading existing weapons. The Firing Squad of Pakistani M-113 is based on a 60mm mortar carrier team, MG-3 machine gun team, a dedicated sniper, a Signal trooper, the anti Tank team is equipped with a RPG-7, while this whole team can expect a little fire support from the M-113 12.7mm board gun. The weapons and infantrymen equipment are outdated and inferior compared to the Indian hordes.

I recommend NATO STANDARDS, which are effective, war proven, and economicall, because the current firing squad equipment and the APC just need some minor intelligent updates which can be done with the help of Pakistani defence industry.

See that’s the actual trend and show on the battlefield:

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Inception-06

PanzerKiel said:


> APS can play havoc with close infantry around the tank. Its splinters can be deadly to whoever is near the tank. That has to be taken care at all times once APS is activated and mechanized infantry is also near the tank.
> 
> 
> It all comes down to the roles and our doctrine, that how we intend to use our M113s.



I understand that, the doctrine says “ fast battle Taxi” I know, but the firing squad can be more effective trough minor infantry weapon and equipment upgrades. And battle taxi doctrine is outdated and would not survive against the Indian hordes. There needs to be a change, the Viper idea was not bad and is the right direction. Even the Germans in 75 years ago did know that the transport vehicle must support and fight with his dismounted infantrymen, otherwise it’s waste. That’s why Wehrmacht continued to upgrade its “battle taxis” and the equipment of the firing squads.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Tipu7

Inception-06 said:


> Count the numbers of machine guns !
> @Beny Karachun why Israeli Tanks have so many machine guns installed on Tanks, does it benefit to suppress enemy’s infantry more then a single one ? What’s the main reason ?
> View attachment 892768


Israel has developed its armor to suite variety of combat environment, from desert to urban. Higher number of machine guns of varying caliber means better fire converge against threats of varying type. Such requirement often emerge in urban conditions.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Tipu7 said:


> Israel has developed its armor to suite variety of combat environment, from desert to urban. Higher number of machine guns of varying caliber means better fire converge against threats of varying type. Such requirement often emerge in urban conditions.



And in Indian Pakistan war scenarios specifically in Punjab it suits very well, just analysis the geographic and count the Indian mechanised formations there.


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> have gun shields for machine gun stations on the M133 APC, did it proved to be effective and sense wise, also I can count most of times 3x machine gun on Israeli APC series, what’s the purpose? ( I think I know it but I am asking for gathering public here).


Transparent Gun Shields are effective. However, perhaps PA doesn't use them because it won't be employing the APCs as aggressively as the Israelis or the US in Vietnam.


Inception-06 said:


> 1.MG-3 should get a double drum magazine and a modernization Kitt that allow existing MG3 inventory to be upgraded. It adds picatinny rails for optics and accessories, an adjustable stock, improved sling and a very nifty fore grip that doubles as a carry handle


I was thinking the same. The current MG3 is perfect for SIB but cumbersome for mech inf. The time taken for dismounting and then employing it would be costly.


Inception-06 said:


> @iLION12345_1 @PanzerKiel would recommend to make the mechanised Infantrymen more effective by giving the M-113 troops better fighting weapons, to transform it something like a storm infantrymen. The main focus lies on training and upgrading existing weapons.
> 
> 1.MG-3 should get a double drum magazine and a modernization Kitt that allow existing MG3 inventory to be upgraded. It adds picatinny rails for optics and accessories, an adjustable stock, improved sling and a very nifty fore grip that doubles as a carry handle.
> 2.The G-3 men or/designated marksman rifle should also get a upgrade kit for his rifle.
> 3.The rest of the Trooper which carries the Type-56 rifle should get the option install a grenade launcher on their rifle.
> 
> Supplement to the RPG-7 or as a replacement the anti Tank tasked Trooper must get a modern and shoulder light ATGM such as the Alcotán-100.
> 
> As I said before the M-113 should be transformed into fighting machines which supports the storm infantrymen with two board machine guns.
> 
> 
> View attachment 892849
> View attachment 892850


Current MIB platoon is most likely:
1× SigO
1×RPG/Alcotan
1-2×MG
1×2IC
1×Cmdr(gunner)
5-6× riflemen

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Raja Porus said:


> Transparent Gun Shields are effective. However, perhaps PA doesn't use them because it won't be employing the APCs as aggressively as the Israelis or the US in Vietnam.
> 
> I was thinking the same. The current MG3 is perfect for SIB but cumbersome for mech inf. The time taken for dismounting and then employing it would be costly.
> 
> Current MIB platoon is most likely:
> 1× SigO
> 1×RPG/Alcotan
> 1-2×MG
> 1×2IC
> 1×Cmdr(gunner)
> 5-6× riflemen


What’s about the 60mm mortar? And why shouldn’t Pakistan Army use the APC aggressively as the hole world does it ? What I would recommend is to diversify the 5-6 rifle men in G-3 carrier and Type-56 carriers equipped with under-barrel grenade launchers. G-3 has his own advantages, it could be give the better marksman trooper’s. While the Sniper will have his Sig. @PanzerKiel what is the current status of a M-113 firing squad, is there really anything like the ALCOTAN for this crews reserved or still the RPG-7 and the 60mm Mortar and G-3 are this part of the firing squads ? What’s your thoughts any recommendations, compared to the Indian APC and firing squads?


----------



## Beny Karachun

SQ8 said:


> I thought the namer was based on the T-55.. or was the Achkarit(or something close)


Hahahahah no, it's a different type of beast.
Namer APC variant with Trophy and a RCWS 50cal:




IFV variant with Trophy, 30mm RCWS autocannon and 2 Spike missiles:












This is the Achzarit:

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Foinikas

Beny Karachun said:


> Hahahahah no, it's a different type of beast.
> Namer APC variant with Trophy and a RCWS 50cal:
> View attachment 892977
> 
> IFV variant with Trophy, 30mm RCWS autocannon and 2 Spike missiles:
> View attachment 892976
> 
> View attachment 892975
> View attachment 892974
> 
> 
> This is the Achzarit:
> View attachment 892978


I love both the Namer and the Achzarit. I think Israeli armored vehicles are some of the most beautiful in the world. I'm especially fond of the Merkava Mk.III but I also love all the rest of the local upgrades and versions of the M113 and other vehicles.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beny Karachun

Foinikas said:


> I love both the Namer and the Achzarit. I think Israeli armored vehicles are some of the most beautiful in the world. I'm especially fond of the Merkava Mk.III but I also love all the rest of the local upgrades and versions of the M113 and other vehicles.
> 
> 
> View attachment 893012


Honestly I'm disgusted by the Achzarit and the Puma we have, Namers are a dream.

They're too old. Relatively armored, but too old.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Foinikas

Beny Karachun said:


> Honestly I'm disgusted by the Achzarit and the Puma we have, Namers are a dream.
> 
> They're too old. Relatively armored, but too old.


Achzarit was very good back in the '90s and throughout the 2000s,but now Hamas etc. have heavier AA weapons and probably use different tactics. Probably. Because,generally,their way of fighting hasn't changed much since the First Intifada,except the massive rocket barrages. 

Namer is sooooo beautiful!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Imagine this, 48 Shorter ranged missiles for engaging swarm drones, PGMs etc; 6×med range AA missiles providing AD up to 25kms and 1×30mm Gatling gun.
Also capable of firing on the move.
Couple this with other SPAAGs that PA may be buying.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1587752567781597184

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Beny Karachun

Foinikas said:


> Achzarit was very good back in the '90s and throughout the 2000s,but now Hamas etc. have heavier AA weapons and probably use different tactics. Probably. Because,generally,their way of fighting hasn't changed much since the First Intifada,except the massive rocket barrages.
> 
> Namer is sooooo beautiful!


Basically, yeah. They will be replaced by the Eitan.










It's going to be a VERY major fire boost to Israel.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
2


----------



## Beny Karachun

Raja Porus said:


> Imagine this, 48 Shorter ranged missiles for engaging swarm drones, PGMs etc; 6×med range AA missiles providing AD up to 25kms and 1×30mm Gatling gun.
> Also capable of firing on the move.
> Couple this with other SPAAGs that PA may be buying.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1587752567781597184


How is that a copy of the Iron Dome? Only similarity is the arrows on the missile canister lol.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Beny Karachun said:


> How is that a copy of the Iron Dome? Only similarity is the arrows on the missile canister lol.


Everything China makes is a copy for the west.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## jhungary

Inception-06 said:


> I understand that, the doctrine says “ fast battle Taxi” I know, but the firing squad can be more effective trough minor infantry weapon and equipment upgrades. And battle taxi doctrine is outdated and would not survive against the Indian hordes. There needs to be a change, the Viper idea was not bad and is the right direction. Even the Germans in 75 years ago did know that the transport vehicle must support and fight with his dismounted infantrymen, otherwise it’s waste. That’s why Wehrmacht continued to upgrade its “battle taxis” and the equipment of the firing squads.


It's depends on whether or not PA wanted to use Mech Infantry as a complement/part of Combine Arms Tactics or do PA wanted to use them as is, a fast, mobile infantry squad that you can deployed from A to B. 

Ini a combine arms scenario, mech infantry act as eyes and ears for tanks and gunships. You don't need them to be too heavily armed because the Armour and IFV would provide security for the dismounted troop. 

But if you want to use them as a standalone infantry squad, which mean your APC is just dropping the infantry off for quick advance, then you would need to mount heavy weaponry with the mech infantry.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> What’s about the 60mm mortar


Yes, 60mm is also there, forgot to mention it. And MIBs are being equipped with the Alcotan. I'm not sure about the numbers

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## renhai

Raja Porus said:


> Everything China makes is a copy for the west.


WTF?????


----------



## Inception-06

jhungary said:


> It's depends on whether or not PA wanted to use Mech Infantry as a complement/part of Combine Arms Tactics or do PA wanted to use them as is, a fast, mobile infantry squad that you can deployed from A to B.
> 
> Ini a combine arms scenario, mech infantry act as eyes and ears for tanks and gunships. You don't need them to be too heavily armed because the Armour and IFV would provide security for the dismounted troop.
> 
> But if you want to use them as a standalone infantry squad, which mean your APC is just dropping the infantry off for quick advance, then you would need to mount heavy weaponry with the mech infantry.




That’s what I am saying, the Pakistani doctrine says the APC is just a „battle taxi“ a Soyuz have described. But what comes then ? Light Pakistani infantrymen charging heavily armed and overwhelming Indian Forces, that sounds suicidal. What I know the Pakistani infantry squad is carrying MG-3,RPG-7, 60mm Mortar and a dedicated marksman is equipped with a Steyr SSG 69, the Rest of the troopers have G-3s and Type-56. That’s it. Compared that with NATO or US standards, Pakistani infantrymen are I’ll equipped.

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## renhai

Beny Karachun said:


> How is that a copy of the Iron Dome? Only similarity is the arrows on the missile canister lol.


copy of the Iron Dome??

just like China's type 055 is a copy of Israel's s??? frigate.


----------



## Inception-06



Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Beny Karachun

renhai said:


> copy of the Iron Dome??
> 
> just like China's type 055 is a copy of Israel's s??? frigate.


Can you read please

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> That’s what I am saying, the Pakistani doctrine says the APC is just a „battle taxi“ a Soyuz have described. But what comes then ? Light Pakistani infantrymen charging heavily armed and overwhelming Indian Forces, that sounds suicidal. What I know the Pakistani infantry squad is carrying MG-3,RPG-7, 60mm Mortar and a dedicated marksman is equipped with a Steyr SSG 69, the Rest of the troopers have G-3s and Type-56. That’s it. Compared that with NATO or US standards, Pakistani infantrymen are I’ll equipped.


What else do you want to add? Also the RPG has been modernized and Alcotan are in great numbers

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Beny Karachun

Raja Porus said:


> What else do you want to add? Also the RPG has been modernized and Alcotan are in great numbers


Weapon sights are as important as the weapons themselves, if not more important in cases of thermal sights.

Here every infantryman has a red dot sight at the very least, and smart optics like SMASH or thermal sights at the very best.

Smart optics like SMASH X4:




SMASH 3000:





They make your average soldier into a deadly sniper that can one shot a drone midflight from hundreds of meters away.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Beny Karachun said:


> Weapon sights are as important as the weapons themselves, if not more important in cases of thermal sights.
> 
> Here every infantryman has a red dot sight at the very least, and smart optics like SMASH or thermal sights at the very best.
> 
> Smart optics like SMASH X4:
> View attachment 893053
> 
> SMASH 3000:
> View attachment 893054
> 
> 
> They make your average soldier into a deadly sniper that can one shot a drone midflight from hundreds of meters away.


Yes, but I was talking about squad as a whole

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Inception-06

Raja Porus said:


> What else do you want to add? Also the RPG has been modernized and Alcotan are in great numbers


Haven’t you read my posts above? Smoke grenades for every APC, ALCOTAN as a surplus to the RPG-7 in every M-113. G-3,MG-3 upgrade on moderner Standards, under-barrel grenade launchers.


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> Haven’t you read my posts above? Smoke grenades for every APC, ALCOTAN as a surplus to the RPG-7 in every M-113. G-3,MG-3 upgrade on moderner Standards, under-barrel grenade launchers.


Alcotan has become pretty much standard for both SIBs and MIBs. Also, RPG has been modernized with PD7. 
G3 will be replaced completely.
MG42 already has picatinny rail NVs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
2


----------



## farooqbhai007

Inception-06 said:


> Haven’t you read my posts above? Smoke grenades for every APC, ALCOTAN as a surplus to the RPG-7 in every M-113. G-3,MG-3 upgrade on moderner Standards, under-barrel grenade launchers.


re- rails in last 2 or 3 months there are 2 tenders given out one is for all squad weapons




and then there was another Type56 & G3 rails only tender which had like 10k+ rails order.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## renhai

Beny Karachun said:


> Can you read please


No. I don't like reading. But I heard that Israel likes China's Golden Dragon Bus very much. And Israel are seeking the technology of Golden Dragon Bus. Is this true?

PS. Golden Dragon Bus is backward in technology. It has been eliminated by the Chinese market. At present, its business is only in the third world countries.


----------



## PanzerKiel

farooqbhai007 said:


> re- rails in last 2 or 3 months there are 2 tenders given out one is for all squad weapons
> View attachment 893071
> 
> and then there was another Type56 & G3 rails only tender which had like 10k+ rails order.


Tender say all of these are for Long Range Thermal Weapon Sights, starting from AN/PAS - 13e.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## iLION12345_1

Inception-06 said:


> @iLION12345_1 @Raja Porus I would recommend to transform this 1980s Infantrymen to a true mechanised storm infantry.Pakistani infantrymen are I’ll equipped compared to what a brute force they have to face from the other side of the Border. That’s the actual show:
> View attachment 892852
> View attachment 892851
> View attachment 892853
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 892854
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The NATO military’s and Israeli seems to be stupid to have more machine guns.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 892856
> View attachment 892857
> View attachment 892858


All of those pictures are pre 2010, some even older than 2000. Gear has changed quite a bit since then, especially after WoT. So have the tactics.

However the APCs remain largely the same. That is definitely an issue.

We can’t exactly put up pictures of the German army to compare to the PA, and even then, PA has less supply and logistical issues than the Germany army (and PAF compared to the German Air Force) has had in recent years due to limited funding because politicians there keep getting in the way. (I’m aware this is changing recently due to a massive budget spike post Ukraine invasion). PA manages to use its funds better than some much better supplied and trained militaries, PA soldiers haven’t needed to use brooms to replace guns during training yet, so maybe it’s a double edged sword to try and buy the best of everything.

That being said, I’ve always supported the idea of decreasing the size of the forces and going for quality over quantity, which I believe puts me in the minority here. With Pakistans economic state, it is simply entirely impossible to arm the PA better without downsizing.

As for the tactical aspect of things, I leave that to people with a better understanding of it, and I can see they’re already commenting their views, so I’ll leave that to them

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Love Love:
1


----------



## jhungary

Inception-06 said:


> That’s what I am saying, the Pakistani doctrine says the APC is just a „battle taxi“ a Soyuz have described. But what comes then ? Light Pakistani infantrymen charging heavily armed and overwhelming Indian Forces, that sounds suicidal. What I know the Pakistani infantry squad is carrying MG-3,RPG-7, 60mm Mortar and a dedicated marksman is equipped with a Steyr SSG 69, the Rest of the troopers have G-3s and Type-56. That’s it. Compared that with NATO or US standards, Pakistani infantrymen are I’ll equipped.


That goes with an age old question, should Mech Infantry be considered Light Infantry?

Again, that's really depends on the usage, not having study a lot of Indian-Pakistan scenario, I am probably the least qualified to tell you. But as a general doctrine, if you want to be more mobile, you can't afford to have a lot of different heavy equipment, Because all those GPMG (or HMG), RPG and Mortar slow your advance, and you can't use IFV/APC all the way, you are going to get to get off and leg it somewhere. If mobility is the key for PA, then lightly armed troop is an acceptable view if PA are going to use their Mech Infantry to do hit and run.

On the other hand, NATO uses Mech Infantry like they are more or less standard infantry, they were inserted and then expected to survive a sustained fight. That can only be done if there are enough Air Support and long-range artillery support. Basically, you brought them in, and they stay and fight, and you support those troop with gunships, chopper and fast mover. 

Which mean the question you really should ask is, if Pakistan Army can withstand a full-on Indian assault with their Mech Infantry with the support given to the mech troop?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Inception-06

jhungary said:


> That goes with an age old question, should Mech Infantry be considered Light Infantry?
> 
> Again, that's really depends on the usage, not having study a lot of Indian-Pakistan scenario, I am probably the least qualified to tell you. But as a general doctrine, if you want to be more mobile, you can't afford to have a lot of different heavy equipment, Because all those GPMG (or HMG), RPG and Mortar slow your advance, and you can't use IFV/APC all the way, you are going to get to get off and leg it somewhere. If mobility is the key for PA, then lightly armed troop is an acceptable view if PA are going to use their Mech Infantry to do hit and run.
> 
> On the other hand, NATO uses Mech Infantry like they are more or less standard infantry, they were inserted and then expected to survive a sustained fight. That can only be done if there are enough Air Support and long-range artillery support. Basically, you brought them in, and they stay and fight, and you support those troop with gunships, chopper and fast mover.
> 
> Which mean the question you really should ask is, if Pakistan Army can withstand a full-on Indian assault with their Mech Infantry with the support given to the mech troop?



The Pakistan Army can sustain and defend,Pakistan Army has done more with less in 1965 and 1971, now the Pakistani military has a much bigger arsenal and is battle hardened. But it looks very different when the Pakistan Military wishes to capture and hold Indian territory, that's a different story to tell, and I don't see any significant indications that this mission to attack India and grab much land as possible as bargain chip is realistically possible not with light Infantry.


----------



## jhungary

Inception-06 said:


> The Pakistan Army can sustain and defend,Pakistan Army has done more with less in 1965 and 1971, now the Pakistani military has a much bigger arsenal and is battle hardened. But it looks very different when the Pakistan Military wishes to capture and hold Indian territory, that's a different story to tell, and I don't see any significant indications that this mission to attack India and grab much land as possible as bargain chip is realistically possible not with light Infantry.


As I said, I am probably the least qualified to talk about Pakistani Army capability, I know probably just above nothing on the issue, and the stuff that I do know is overdue by 20 years.....And even if I do think I know, I wouldn't speculate after how many people, including me, got the Ukrainian and Russian capability wrong, and I studied quite extensively both Ukrainian and Russian military, I even have friends that are high ranking Ukrainian military official....

Anyway, you will need to look at the function of Mech Inf both offensively and defensively. Their use is battlefield is actually quite limited, you either use them to try to outmaneuver your enemy in offensive term or use it to plug gap or act as a mobile reserve if you are to use them defensively. which again it comes down to how PA think they can support their troop in the field, if they think they can sustain it while conducting an offensive operation, then yes, they should be properly armed with heavy equipment with weapon platoon, but if PA think they can't and use their Mech Inf to do hit and run (like Area Denial duty such as mining the road, or cutting off enemy retreat,) Then they will be more geared toward Light Inf role. 

It's like Airborne forces, the West opt for Light Infantry Role for their Airborne force because you don't expect to fight behind enemy line for a long time over a sustained period. then they don't equip the airborne troop with heavy equipment like armour or even crew serve weapon. However, in the Eastern Doctrine, VDV and Chinese Airborne are used mainly as mainstream infantry, which mean they are to equip with Light Tank or even full Armour like T-72.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Love Love:
1


----------



## renhai

Beny Karachun said:


> Do you want to tell me China's GDP per capita? Or maybe human rights in China? How about we talk on empathy of people in our countries, maybe let's compare IQ of Jewish people and IQ of Chinese people? Creativeness of our citizens? Let's also ask which country will have a population crisis because some idiot decided to start a one child policy.
> 
> You think China is better? I'd rather live in Israel.


WTF? Do you mean that you think Israel is advanced because of its high GDP per capita?? Can we talk about population? A "high per capita GDP country" without Disneyland. oh How advanced? i 'm sorry. I really don't know.

I am curious that Israelis talk about human rights and empathy. Do you think Israel has too few rockets or not enough explosions? Listen to the sound "bomb bomb bomb". lol.

I just hope the Israelis will understand it is important to remember your reference country. I recognize that Israel has performed well among Middle East countries. But this does not prove how advanced Israel is.









International Innovation Index - Wikipedia







en.m.wikipedia.org





PS: Today is my birthday. happy!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

jhungary said:


> As I said, I am probably the least qualified to talk about Pakistani Army capability, I know probably just above nothing on the issue, and the stuff that I do know is overdue by 20 years.....And even if I do think I know, I wouldn't speculate after how many people, including me, got the Ukrainian and Russian capability wrong, and I studied quite extensively both Ukrainian and Russian military, I even have friends that are high ranking Ukrainian military official....
> 
> Anyway, you will need to look at the function of Mech Inf both offensively and defensively. Their use is battlefield is actually quite limited, you either use them to try to outmaneuver your enemy in offensive term or use it to plug gap or act as a mobile reserve if you are to use them defensively. which again it comes down to how PA think they can support their troop in the field, if they think they can sustain it while conducting an offensive operation, then yes, they should be properly armed with heavy equipment with weapon platoon, but if PA think they can't and use their Mech Inf to do hit and run (like Area Denial duty such as mining the road, or cutting off enemy retreat,) Then they will be more geared toward Light Inf role.
> 
> It's like Airborne forces, the West opt for Light Infantry Role for their Airborne force because you don't expect to fight behind enemy line for a long time over a sustained period. then they don't equip the airborne troop with heavy equipment like armour or even crew serve weapon. However, in the Eastern Doctrine, VDV and Chinese Airborne are used mainly as mainstream infantry, which mean they are to equip with Light Tank or even full Armour like T-72.





Inception-06 said:


> The Pakistan Army can sustain and defend,Pakistan Army has done more with less in 1965 and 1971, now the Pakistani military has a much bigger arsenal and is battle hardened. But it looks very different when the Pakistan Military wishes to capture and hold Indian territory, that's a different story to tell, and I don't see any significant indications that this mission to attack India and grab much land as possible as bargain chip is realistically possible not with light Infantry.


PA armoured bdes are structured as follows:
- 2×Armd regts + 1×MIB (2+1)
Thus we can understand from this structuring that the major role of MIB is that of a classic mech inf, i.e to provide inf support to tanks and do heavy assaults again defended areas and not Hit and Run; for that we have Ligh Anti Tank (LAT) and Heavy Anti Tank (HAT) Bns.
Thus the main role of MIB is to take on and destroy enemy strong points that maybe set as objective for the armour push or may pop up during the advance.
Each MIB section has approx 2×LMG, 1×Alcotan/RPG and also the 12.7mm HMG from which it dismounted.
While each platoon has 1×ATGM and several 60mm mortars. I don't think we can have greater firepower in a platoon.
Thus as a whole an MIB will have:
- 40-45×HMGs
- 10-20× ATGMs
- 20-30× 60mm mortars
- 120mm mortars
- RPG(with PD-7 sights)/Alcotan
-16× Snipers
This is greater than a SIB.
Moreover, the MIB will not be operating alone. It will be with armoured regt and atleast one SP (M109) regt.
Moreover, we don't use MIB for defending. All armoured divs have one or two inf divs with the sole purpose of defending and relieving the Armd div, so that the GOC can make another push without worrying about defending.

Reactions: Love Love:
3


----------



## Inception-06

Raja Porus said:


> PA armoured bdes are structured as follows:
> - 2×Armd regts + 1×MIB (2+1)
> Thus we can understand from this structuring that the major role of MIB is that of a classic mech inf, i.e to provide inf support to tanks and do heavy assaults again defended areas and not Hit and Run; for that we have Ligh Anti Tank (LAT) and Heavy Anti Tank (HAT) Bns.
> Thus the main role of MIB is to take on and destroy enemy strong points that maybe set as objective for the armour push or may pop up during the advance.
> Each MIB section has approx 2×LMG, 1×Alcotan/RPG and also the 12.7mm HMG from which it dismounted.
> While each platoon has 1×ATGM and several 60mm mortars. I don't think we can have greater firepower in a platoon.
> Thus as a whole an MIB will have:
> - 40-45×HMGs
> - 10-20× ATGMs
> - 20-30× 60mm mortars
> - 120mm mortars
> - RPG(with PD-7 sights)/Alcotan
> -16× Snipers
> This is greater than a SIB.
> Moreover, the MIB will not be operating alone. It will be with armoured regt and atleast one SP (M109) regt.
> Moreover, we don't use MIB for defending. All armoured divs have one or two inf divs with the sole purpose of defending and relieving the Armd div, so that the GOC can make another push without worrying about defending.


I notice G-3s ( I am happy to see them), and a APC, with smoke tubes and a turret. This are the most actual footage of a MIB, is that even a MIB ?

Reactions: Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Signalian

Inception-06 said:


> I notice G-3s ( I am happy to see them), and a APC, with smoke tubes and a turret. This are the most actual footage of a MIB, is that even a MIB ?
> View attachment 893337
> View attachment 893338
> View attachment 893344
> View attachment 893345


Is the one PA got from Italy ? the VCC ?

Reactions: Love Love:
3


----------



## Raja Porus

@Beny Karachun @renhai , respectfully, please take this discussion to some appropriate thread. This thread is perhaps amongst the few remaining with proper to the point discussions. Let's Keep it that way.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Love Love:
3


----------



## renhai

Beny Karachun said:


> Yes, a higher GDP per capita means a more advanced, more developed country.
> 
> Yes, Israelis talk about human rights, we don't live in a dystopian dictatorship that harvests people's organs. We don't have dog eating festivals either.
> 
> Lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The World’s Most Innovative Economies
> 
> 
> What countries have the most innovative economies? This index uses seven equally-weighted variables, including R&D spending and patents, to rank countries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.visualcapitalist.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 893635
> 
> You aren't even close
> 
> View attachment 893636


oh sorry. I really don't know what Israel can make? just Israel??? lol.

A backward country without Disneyland~ Israel! You talk about human rights? A country full of suicide bombs and rockets What can you make? 

Hey, little Israel! We control your port, occupy your market, Manipulate your entertainment and shopping. Israel pays China every day! lol！






China's BYD to sell new energy vehicles in Israel


China's BYD to sell new energy vehicles in Israel-



english.news.cn










Chinese Geely's EV best-selling in Israel in Aug.


Chinese Geely's EV best-selling in Israel in Aug.-



english.news.cn













Chinese firms step up their involvement in Israel over US objections


Israeli government officials estimate that in Israel alone, Chinese corporations have invested in or accessed projects worth nearly $15 billion.




www.google.co.jp







Chinese tech at forefront of Israeli mass transit - CGTN








CREG EPB TBM Launched in Israel







tunnelingonline.com













CRRC Presents 'Explosion-Proof' Trains for Tel Aviv


CRRC has manufactured 'explosion-proof' trains for Tel Aviv's Red Line, the first light rail system in Israel's second-largest city.




railway-news.com













New 4K QLED and Mini LED TVs from TCL are coming to Israel


The television manufacturer TCL and the SG group, the official importer of TCL in Israel, are launching six series of 4K smart televisions in Israel, which come with Google’s Android TV syste…




time.news










Best Phones In Israel 2023 - Top 10 Best Phones In Israel - Mobile57 Il


Best phones Israel, Our Top 10 best phones list in Israel




www.mobile57.com













Top 10 TikTok Influencers In Israel In 2022


Find top TikTok influencers in Israel in 2022. Most popular hashtags: #fyp #foryou #explore.




www.inbeat.co





I said that China controls Israeli ports. Occupy Israeli markets. Manipulate entertainment and shopping in Israel.

oh you said Israel is very advanced. emm... how advanced???????? you Israel developed the interstellar bus???

Even Chongqing city in China is more advanced than Israel! lol.



Raja Porus said:


> @Beny Karachun @renhai , respectfully, please take this discussion to some appropriate thread. This thread is perhaps amongst the few remaining with proper to the point discussions. Let's Keep it that way.


I just want to help Israeli friends understand Israel better. lol.


----------



## Inception-06

@waz This thread needs a cleanup please, may be to bans.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## renhai

Beny Karachun said:


> You are our slaves and the slaves of the world, working in factories to make us happier, turning your environment into a shithole, while your population is stuck working 24/7 in a laughing emoji pillow factory, we are making startups and sell them for tens of billions of dollars.
> 
> You control one Israeli port, Israel has 5.


But. But. But. Even Chongqing city in China is more advanced than Israel.lol.


----------



## Primus

Goofy ahh conversation happening here 💀

Reactions: Haha Haha:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

@PanzerKiel @farooqbhai007 does PA has HEMTT M978A2 fuel tanker type vehicle?
Also can PA lay oil pipelines to support forward ops like US army?

Reactions: Sad Sad:
1


----------



## ghazi52

,.,.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Inception-06

ghazi52 said:


> ,.,.
> View attachment 896725



What’s the Idea behind the yellow helmets?


----------



## Inception-06

@Signalian @Raja Porus 
What’s the purpose of this gunner’s table ?









@PanzerKiel are you satisfied with this minor modification?

Reactions: Love Love:
1


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> @Signalian @Raja Porus
> What’s the purpose of this gunner’s table ?
> 
> View attachment 896802
> View attachment 896803
> 
> 
> @PanzerKiel are you satisfied with this minor modification?
> 
> View attachment 896805
> View attachment 896804
> View attachment 896806


For gunner of BSWS to stand on?

Reactions: Love Love:
2


----------



## Signalian

Inception-06 said:


> @Signalian @Raja Porus
> What’s the purpose of this gunner’s table ?
> 
> View attachment 896802
> View attachment 896803
> 
> 
> @PanzerKiel are you satisfied with this minor modification?
> 
> View attachment 896805
> View attachment 896804
> View attachment 896806


@PanzerKiel can you explain the loading and firing process for this one ?

9 Sindh was in Malir cantt I think.

M-901 is different.

Reactions: Love Love:
2


----------



## ghazi52

At IDEAS 2022
Pakistan🇵🇰 Army Armoured Corps' W653 ARV (armoured recovery vehicle) ..


----------



## PanzerKiel

Signalian said:


> @PanzerKiel can you explain the loading and firing process for this one ?
> 
> 9 Sindh was in Malir cantt I think.
> 
> M-901 is different.
> View attachment 896827


That table is for the gunner to stand on. Platform remains outside throughout. Same for loading as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Signalian

PanzerKiel said:


> That table is for the gunner to stand on. Platform remains outside throughout. Same for loading as well.


Not the TUA concept

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## Signalian

PanzerKiel said:


> That table is for the gunner to stand on. Platform remains outside throughout. Same for loading as well.


Reason I asked for loading and firing since it exposes the crew and is the loading manually handled ? He has to lift the BS and load externally ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Signalian said:


> Reason I asked for loading and firing since it exposes the crew and is the loading manually handled ? He has to lift the BS and load externally ?


Yes, manually. Gunner remains the gunner. The loader loads the missile. However, he is exposed to SA fire of course. Thats different from M901 of course.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Sad Sad:
1


----------



## bhola record

PanzerKiel said:


> Yes, manually. Gunner remains the gunner. The loader loads the missile. However, he is exposed to SA fire of course. Thats different from M901 of course.


sir can you tell me what's the purpose of HAT and LAT? How do they defer and what sector can they be deployed/

Reactions: Haha Haha:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

bhola record said:


> sir can you tell me what's the purpose of HAT and LAT? How do they defer and what sector can they be deployed/


Mobile anti tank defence over a wide area....having weapons with effecting ranges till approx 4 km, they are ideally suited for SOuthern Punjab and Sind areas where the area allows to maximize the ranges of these weapons. Main difference in weapon is of Bakhtar Shikan and TOWs. Platform is common, which is M113 based.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## bhola record

PanzerKiel said:


> Mobile anti tank defence over a wide area....having weapons with effecting ranges till approx 4 km, they are ideally suited for SOuthern Punjab and Sind areas where the area allows to maximize the ranges of these weapons. Main difference in weapon is of Bakhtar Shikan and TOWs. Platform is common, which is M113 based.


when it comes to hunting we prefer tanks

s


PanzerKiel said:


> Mobile anti tank defence over a wide area....having weapons with effecting ranges till approx 4 km, they are ideally suited for SOuthern Punjab and Sind areas where the area allows to maximize the ranges of these weapons. Main difference in weapon is of Bakhtar Shikan and TOWs. Platform is common, which is M113 based.


seeing the russian ukraine war i think side which is numerically inferior should rely more on anti tank only if we has gifts from a friend

Reactions: Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Inception-06

@Raja Porus see what I found inside AK-1Tank.

Reactions: Love Love:
2


----------



## Raja Porus

Inception-06 said:


> @Raja Porus see what I found inside AK-1Tank.
> View attachment 897069


These have always been there

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Signalian

bhola record said:


> when it comes to hunting we prefer tanks


Hunting tanks from air hopefully.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Love Love:
1


----------



## Great Janjua

PanzerKiel said:


> Mobile anti tank defence over a wide area....having weapons with effecting ranges till approx 4 km, they are ideally suited for SOuthern Punjab and Sind areas where the area allows to maximize the ranges of these weapons. Main difference in weapon is of Bakhtar Shikan and TOWs. Platform is common, which is M113 based.


For Heavens sake soldiers are dying left right and center 2 more today who the fck is sector command in Waziristan please wake up ur colleagues' lives are important than crap kursi post.


----------



## Signalian

Great Janjua said:


> For Heavens sake soldiers are dying left right and center 2 more today who the fck is sector command in Waziristan please wake up ur colleagues' lives are important than crap kursi post.


Sometimes it seems an un-winnable war.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## farooqbhai007

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1602666167323299840

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Signalian



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Great Janjua

Signalian said:


>


Tin can


----------



## Signalian

Great Janjua said:


> Tin can


Got from US Army showing US number markings, but pressed into service immediately with a quick paint job and off you go.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Great Janjua

Signalian said:


> Got from US Army showing US number markings, but pressed into service immediately with a quick paint job and off you go.


Same old US woodland as far as i can see.


----------



## Signalian

Great Janjua said:


> Same old US woodland as far as i can see.


I think the M48 AVLBs and M-113 are the equipments carried forward from 60’s to date in PA in Armored forces, can you think of any other vintage equipment in Armored forces carried on to date ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Wow Wow:
1


----------



## Great Janjua

Signalian said:


> I think the M48 AVLBs and M-113 are the equipments carried forward from 60’s to date in PA in Armored forces, can you think of any other vintage equipment in Armored forces carried on to date ?


As far as AVLBs and other vehicles that are not used as troop carriers its fine really but these tin cans wont last under machine gun fire let alone bigger calibres why has the army not gotten Turkish armour upgrades for these is beyond my imagination.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

Signalian said:


> Got from US Army showing US number markings, but pressed into service immediately with a quick paint job and off you go.


From NATO stocks , including VCC1s.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Areesh

Signalian said:


> Sometimes it seems an un-winnable war.



Then make it winnable. That is your job


----------



## Signalian

Areesh said:


> Then make it winnable. That is your job

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Great Janjua

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1612496483294785536
Lord have mercy

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------

