What's new

Pakistan Army Aviation Corps - Updated

Desert Fox 1

FULL MEMBER
Aug 11, 2020
920
2
1,951
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
For shoot whilst on move AAD the Turks have the korkut SPAAD a very lethal piece of equipment if used properly with armoured thrusts.I heard the Army AAD was evaluating the system last year but like always the army has a mind of its own,Don't know what panned out next after the evaluations.
Range is 5 kms less than RBS-70.
. No effective offensive maneuvers will be possible, with the actual equipment and doctrines, without repeating a longewala disaster.
That's what we are discussing. The current AD assets of amrd divs are not potent enough to provide G2A protection farther than 20 kms at best. Thus I was talking about the alternative PA/PAF is going to adopt in order to overcome this.
 

Akh1112

FULL MEMBER
Nov 21, 2019
1,208
4
1,908
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
Range is 5 kms less than RBS-70.

That's what we are discussing. The current AD assets of amrd divs are not potent enough to provide G2A protection farther than 20 kms at best. Thus I was talking about the alternative PA/PAF is going to adopt in order to overcome this.
You also get to attack more targets than an rbs70… the point of korkut would be to work in conjunction with fm90. IMO hq17 should be looked at, missile based shorad with high ceiling and can shoot on the move
 

Great Janjua

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 13, 2016
2,358
-3
2,400
Country
United Kingdom
Location
Pakistan
You also get to attack more targets than an rbs70… the point of korkut would be to work in conjunction with fm90. IMO hq17 should be looked at, missile based shorad with high ceiling and can shoot on the move
Yes the korkut system best compliments our armoured thrust requirements it's a true shoot whilst on move platform can operate simultaneously with tanks and infantry.Whilst can be adopted on our local m113 chassis.Its a win a win but no news regarding what happened after the evaluation process.
 

Inception-06

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 17, 2007
3,556
17
4,672
Country
Pakistan
Location
Germany
Range is 5 kms less than RBS-70.

That's what we are discussing. The current AD assets of amrd divs are not potent enough to provide G2A protection farther than 20 kms at best. Thus I was talking about the alternative PA/PAF is going to adopt in order to overcome this.
A homegrown solution would be the best.
Range is 5 kms less than RBS-70.

That's what we are discussing. The current AD assets of amrd divs are not potent enough to provide G2A protection farther than 20 kms at best. Thus I was talking about the alternative PA/PAF is going to adopt in order to overcome this.

Sir please elaborate bit further. Thanks.
Btw I believe that only some short to medium range Mobile air defence would be useful, without them, the current short range ones are of little use against IAF packages especially when thay are using SOWs and REKs.
OK, in short Pakistan needs air superiority fighter squadrons like the J-10CE, and something equal to the Tor missile system like the HQ-17 which can create and ensure safe air space during the offensive maneuvers across the Border.

From the Theory:

Pakistani air defence units should have mobility that matches that of their mechanized or defended assets. Current ADA units cannot match the cross-country mobility of maneuvering forces. However, HQ-16 and FM-90 systems can move with and maintain defense of the maneuver force’s semi-fixed assets, but have not sufficient mobility to move from position to position to continuously extend protection over the supported force on the move. Mobility of ADA units increases their survivability as well as that of their supported assets and of the mechanized Forces !

 
Last edited:

Inception-06

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 17, 2007
3,556
17
4,672
Country
Pakistan
Location
Germany
Range is 5 kms less than RBS-70.

That's what we are discussing. The current AD assets of amrd divs are not potent enough to provide G2A protection farther than 20 kms at best. Thus I was talking about the alternative PA/PAF is going to adopt in order to overcome this.
Longterm solution could be transfer of Chinese HQ-16 missile technology or Italian aspide A la Spada missiles with extended range. Starting with production of semi Kits, while establishing a air defense researching Center. Chasis for missile carriers could be the body of the Alkhalid Tank.
 
Last edited:

Inception-06

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 17, 2007
3,556
17
4,672
Country
Pakistan
Location
Germany
Range is 5 kms less than RBS-70.

That's what we are discussing. The current AD assets of amrd divs are not potent enough to provide G2A protection farther than 20 kms at best. Thus I was talking about the alternative PA/PAF is going to adopt in order to overcome this.
We are experts in developing, researching cruise missiles, ballistic missiles and anything else, but air defense seems to be remain in the dark.
 
Last edited:

SQ8

ADVISORS
Mar 28, 2009
35,475
413
74,816
Country
United States
Location
United States
10km at best.

I wonder why we are not looking into neither HQ-17 nor any CBU-105 type munition.

Due to these reasons as well as the numerical superiority of IAF, PAF will be facing serious strain in a battle of attrition. Thus we HAVE to suppress the enemy bases within 150-200km of the border at all costs. If we are able to do that we can move our armoured formations with relative ease just like the Israelis did in 67. We have to do the pre-emptive on IAF bases other wise their numbers along with decent quality will be difficult to handle and as you have pointed out our Short ranged SAMs will be useless. The bases within this range can be suppressed by A100s or Fatah which can be equipped with cluster munitions as well as the GBU-6A having a range of 120+ km, if not by PAF itself due to strong enemy AD concentration. However even that(S400 etc) can be neutralised because I bet our intel knows the locations of their AD assets which canbe then engaged by various munitions. Indians knew this aim of PA and hence one of the reasons IAF opted SU-30s( and later its integration Brahmos) was its ability to operate from air bases deeper in India,out of reach of PAF... If we are able to do this we can pretty much stop worrying about the CBU-105 problem as well. After suppressing these bases we can monitor those bases far away with ground(tps, jy27) as well as airbased radars (this point also justifies why we have more AEWACS then our commonly thought of requirements) so any package taking off from deeper enemy territory can be intercepted by PAF before reaching our armoured spearheads. I believe the current procurement of J10C (if), is not as a bomb truck or a replacement for mirages as is commonly believed, but because PAF lacks a strong capability to perform long range interception (and interdiction), deep strike missions. In short, preventing IAF from using its numbers is the key to Pakistani success both on land as well as the air.

Tbh I'm enjoying this discussion because it involves operational level discussion keeping in view the tactical level complications.
Well @PanzerKiel keeps saying “kharboozay ke baghaat mein bahaar hai” .. and we have been estimating based on the trends that its “paise aanay de, din badalne de.. sitaron se teri maang bhar dun, gali teray naam kar dun” ..perhaps it has more to do with them gauging the operational requirements/reality different versus what we see based on OSINT.

That simulation I did actually account for some suppression of IAF front line bases using MBRLs or other strikes but they can do the same with Pakistan. The MKI lets them retreat to relative safety as so does the Rafale. Their other CAS or interdiction assets such as the Jaguar will have to operate from bases with a 30-45 minute flight time to FLOT otherwise they will face issues being that responsive.

On the other hand, the lack of depth forces Pakistan to have different dispersal techniques as its only option and expect its CAS sorties to face contested airspace possibly from the get go.

I don’t think for CAS the need is to go beyond standoff AT systems and then leave the rest to some really good guided artillery.
I remember we( 🇺🇸) were experimenting with launching small diameter bombs from the MLRS to hit targets. While there are AT mines dispersal on the MBRLs Pak Army has, there really needs to be some R&D of letting arty launch skeets or other munitions that may end up costing $70k a piece but will also knock out an entire column of $millions 90% of the time. Im sure the Indians are already investigating and eventually despite their own R&D project management and bureaucracy being a hinderance make better and faster solutions to the Pakistani problem.

I constantly fear Pakistanis underestimate the enemy as soon as there is a minuscule tactical victory
 

SQ8

ADVISORS
Mar 28, 2009
35,475
413
74,816
Country
United States
Location
United States
They have sensor-fuzed skeets for artillery rockets. Never understood why they never mated it with aerial bomb to make their own CBU105 equivalent.
It’s possible their operational requirements are different (thinking of Marine and Naval focused battles) versus long drawn out airland battles.

Artillery skeet rounds are better suited for supporting a marine invasion than a hotly contested airspace.

Finally, as mentioned - it is likely that there are measures to tackle these gaps but kept classified (and rightly so). But just like the ELINT F-104, one hopes they are employed effectively by commanders that understand their significance rather than being left unused or employed incorrectly because the users were never trained properly on employing the classified equipment(that has happened more often than one thinks in military history)
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 11, Members: 2, Guests: 9)


Top Bottom