What's new

The first batch of VT5 light tanks was delivered to Bangladesh

Bengal71

SENIOR MEMBER
Sep 21, 2018
2,374
-13
2,948
Country
Bangladesh
Location
Australia
Iran also has highly mobile platforms like mini torpedo boats to launch those missiles from close quarters. Like 'swarm attack' strategy. If they can fight against the US with that strategy, no issue with us using those ideas against our naval adversaries.

Look at how heavily armed Pakistan's small LPC Azmat class is, which is meant to use 'shoot and scoot' strategy. Classic small Navy doctrine. Azmat class is smaller than even our locally built Durjoy class variant.

Same strategy with Mini subs Pakistan has. WE need to get some or build some.



You guys are echoing my thoughts exactly. :-)
Small missile boats can work in the Persian gulf but not in the Bay of Bengal or Indian Ocean. I think we need a large sub fleet and cruise and ballistic missiles.
 

BanglarBagh

FULL MEMBER
May 16, 2017
199
0
412
Country
Bangladesh
Location
China
I'm fascinated how the thread for first batch of VT-5 delivery turned into a discussion for the possibility and supposed necessity of aircraft carriers for BN! Also, a full blown argument about naval and missile capabilities in BoB that has nothing to do with the topic at hand. You guys are hilarious!!!
 

DalalErMaNodi

SENIOR MEMBER
May 12, 2020
5,157
6
8,488
Country
Bangladesh
Location
Kuwait
I'm fascinated how the thread for first batch of VT-5 delivery turned into a discussion for the possibility and supposed necessity of aircraft carriers for BN! Also, a full blown argument about naval and missile capabilities in BoB that has nothing to do with the topic at hand. You guys are hilarious!!!


Started off with on BAF incompetence. :lol:

Some BD bhais on here, take everything literally.
 

BlackViking

FULL MEMBER
Feb 7, 2020
178
0
209
Country
Bangladesh
Location
Bangladesh
I'm fascinated how the thread for first batch of VT-5 delivery turned into a discussion for the possibility and supposed necessity of aircraft carriers for BN! Also, a full blown argument about naval and missile capabilities in BoB that has nothing to do with the topic at hand. You guys are hilarious!!!
Some pages claiming that bd didn't receive any vt5..in fact they are saying army haven't sent anyone to train on vt5
 

Michael Corleone

ELITE MEMBER
Oct 27, 2014
9,965
-5
10,226
Country
Bangladesh
Location
Ukraine
Now, I see there were six (not two as I assumed before) aircraft carriers involved in the attacks on the US military assets in Hawai. But, Japan had 22 carriers that they built before 1939.

- Japan was already a technology superpower in the late 1890s. It captured Korea, Taiwan, Manchuria, etc.
- Japan defeated Russia in 1905 in the bloodiest naval war in Tsushima Strait. Russia was regarded as the strongest naval power of the then world. It annihilated more than hundred Russian navy ships and chased others towards Vladivostok.

About Bangladesh, I will be happy if it can build frigates. Note that the machines and weapons systems in the made-in-Bangladesh frigates are imported mostly from China.

BD is a very sad story without any achievements in any field to say of.
The only thing japan lagged in is natural resource and industrial capacity. Otherwise if japan had the resource Germany did, I’m sure it would dominate the pacific. too many blunders lost hem the war.
as for the modern day Bangladesh, it’s too young to achieve such heights... gotta give it time. Otherwise the bengal as a region has its fair share of achievements. I hold Mir Zafar and his entourage solely responsible for this
 

DESERT FIGHTER

ELITE MEMBER
Jan 1, 2010
46,139
93
89,341
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Iran also has highly mobile platforms like mini torpedo boats to launch those missiles from close quarters. Like 'swarm attack' strategy. If they can fight against the US with that strategy, no issue with us using those ideas against our naval adversaries.

Look at how heavily armed Pakistan's small LPC Azmat class is, which is meant to use 'shoot and scoot' strategy. Classic small Navy doctrine. Azmat class is smaller than even our locally built Durjoy class variant.

Same strategy with Mini subs Pakistan has. WE need to get some or build some.




You guys are echoing my thoughts exactly. :-)
Bro, take a look at the map... iranians operate in shallow waters and a narrow strait... not the arabian or the indian ocean.



That said, Paks Azmat class FACs carry long ranged anti ship missiles. Unlike Durjoy.. among other advantages:

images.jpeg-90.jpg


https://quwa.org/2019/11/27/pakistans-ksew-launches-fourth-fast-attack-craft-missile/
While Pak has (and is producing midget subs) for special forces operations, at max mine laying and secondary attack capabilities such as deploying torpedos..
 
Last edited:

bluesky

ELITE MEMBER
Jun 14, 2016
11,490
0
13,113
Country
Bangladesh
Location
Japan
The only thing japan lacked in is natural resource and industrial capacity. Otherwise if japan had the resource Germany did, I’m sure it would dominate the pacific. too many blunders lost hem the war.
as for the modern day Bangladesh, it’s too young to achieve such heights... gotta give it time. Otherwise the bengal as a region has its fair share of achievements. I hold Mir Zafar and his entourage solely responsible for this
Bold part: I am surprised to read that Japan lacked industrial power. Could it be possible for Japan to fight against all the western big powers at the same time without first building its industries? It fought against China, America, Netherlands, France and British at the same time. Do you think it was possible without first building its industries. Japan was an industrial might since late 1890s to early 1900s.

Japan occupied Korea and in north Korea the industries Japan built in 1905 are still in operation. It built its first subway in Tokyo in 1920, it built Zero fighter planes which was the best in the WWll time.

If any country could have done so many things without an industrial base in modern time, then the big-talking people of BD would have occupied the entire southeast Asia already.
 

Michael Corleone

ELITE MEMBER
Oct 27, 2014
9,965
-5
10,226
Country
Bangladesh
Location
Ukraine
Bold part: I am surprised to read that Japan lacked industrial power. Could it be possible for Japan to fight against all the western big powers at the same time without first building its industries? It fought against China, America, Netherlands, France and British at the same time. Do you think it was possible without first building its industries. Japan was an industrial might since late 1890s to early 1900s.

Japan occupied Korea and in north Korea the industries Japan built in 1905 are still in operation. It built its first subway in Tokyo in 1920, it built Zero fighter planes which was the best in the WWll time.

If any country could have done so many things without an industrial base in modern time, then the big-talking people of BD would have occupied the entire southeast Asia already.
What I meant to say is japan couldn’t possibly outbuild the US, US became the largest ship building nation during the war... for every battleship japan could put down, US could field 10 at that same time... this is why they resorted to building two of the mightiest the world has ever seen... when their carriers sank at midway, they cancelled the Yamato class project and turned the hull of the third into an aircraft carrier... the largest of its kind... but they lacked the professional manpower and so it served a secondary role until sunk...
Not to mention, although prior to entry in the war their aviation technology was superior to that of the Americans lack of resources proved to be the nail in the coffin for their naval aviation... they also lacked behind in tank engineering, even though they built world class battleships... it’s said they ordered a tiger 1 for purposes of research but the tanks never reached japan. One unit was leased back to German army and the other was sunk
 

bluesky

ELITE MEMBER
Jun 14, 2016
11,490
0
13,113
Country
Bangladesh
Location
Japan
What I meant to say is japan couldn’t possibly outbuild the US, US became the largest ship building nation during the war... for every battleship japan could put down, US could field 10 at that same time... this is why they resorted to building two of the mightiest the world has ever seen... when their carriers sank at midway, they cancelled the Yamato class project and turned the hull of the third into an aircraft carrier... the largest of its kind... but they lacked the professional manpower and so it served a secondary role until sunk...
Not to mention, although prior to entry in the war their aviation technology was superior to that of the Americans lack of resources proved to be the nail in the coffin for their naval aviation... they also lacked behind in tank engineering, even though they built world class battleships... it’s said they ordered a tiger 1 for purposes of research but the tanks never reached japan. One unit was leased back to German army and the other was sunk
You have valid points on the subject that it was impossible to win over the USA in the long run when it is bestowed with natural resources and intelligent human power. Japan tried to outbid this prospect by capturing countries like Indonesia or Malaysia where it could harness natural resources to feed its home industries.

Now, enjoy reading a prediction by a wartime Japanese Admiral Yamamoto. However, I must repeat that Japan was already highly developed in terms of industrialization. Even in WWl it was a superpower and it was the only Asian country to sit in and sign Versailles Treaty documents. Read on this Treaty.

"The Treaty of Versailles was signed on June 28, 1919, by 66 representatives from 32 different countries. The countries were split into three parties, which were led by the Principal Allied and Associated Powers of Britain, France, Italy, Japan and the United States".

How was Admiral Yamamoto so accurate at predicting the events of WWII ("awaken sleeping giant")?
Gary Zhang
·
Updated September 13, 2018
Psychopathic Genocidal Destroyer of Reality
One thing that made Yamamoto different from the other Japanese flag officers was that unlike them, he was familiar with the Americans on a personal level. He studied at Harvard University and was fluent at speaking English. While in America, he traveled extensively, and taught himself American culture and customs.


Yamamoto with Americans

This made him unique among the higher ranking Japanese, because he understood and respected the Americans, and was well aware of what they were capable of(as demonstrated in the war). He opposed Japanese plans of war against the Americans, because of these reasons. He knew that the Japanese simply were unable to win against the Americans, especially in a protracted war.

This is the context behind his quote:

In the first 6 to 12 months of a war with the United States and Great Britain, I will run wild and win victory upon victory. But then, if the war continues after that, I have no expectation of success

Yamamoto was accurate at predicting the events of WW2 because he knew the Americans well, and was aware of their capabilities. Due to this, he wasn’t possessed by the often blind arrogance that other Japanese Generals displayed. Furthermore, due to his past experiences in the Navy(he fought at the Battle of Tsushima against the Russians), he was much more accomplished and capable and could make incredibly exact predictions, based on those past experiences.

He wasn’t wrong when he stated his quote. It was so prophetic it hurt.
 

Nike

ELITE MEMBER
Mar 28, 2013
13,928
24
19,066
Country
Indonesia
Location
Indonesia
Iran also has highly mobile platforms like mini torpedo boats to launch those missiles from close quarters. Like 'swarm attack' strategy. If they can fight against the US with that strategy, no issue with us using those ideas against our naval adversaries.

Look at how heavily armed Pakistan's small LPC Azmat class is, which is meant to use 'shoot and scoot' strategy. Classic small Navy doctrine. Azmat class is smaller than even our locally built Durjoy class variant.

Same strategy with Mini subs Pakistan has. WE need to get some or build some.



You guys are echoing my thoughts exactly. :-)
you should know, by experiences those small missile boats means nothing in front of Destroyer equipped with Naval Helicopter carrying air to ground missiles like Hellfire or Brimstones in which can reach range around 6-11 km. That's why Indonesian Navy, China PLA Navy and other like ROKN doesn't invest much on those small missile boats anymore (small means less than 500 tonnes), instead we are more concerned to increase the patrol platform number like corvettes, Frigates and Destroyer. Our smallest missile boats in production is KCR 60 type with tonnage around 500-600 tonnes and less than that will be assigned as patrol boats armed with gun only.

Looking at what India Navy had and other in the region as precaution, i think it is more proper for Bangladesh Navy to invest more on corvettes or Frigate platform the most and equipped them with dedicated Anti Submarine/Surface warfare Helicopter, and not spent your budget on smaller missile boats. If you want something like that, better to use the platform as gun boats for patrol duty.
 

Destranator

SENIOR MEMBER
Jul 20, 2018
2,063
-2
3,672
Country
Bangladesh
Location
Bangladesh
you should know, by experiences those small missile boats means nothing in front of Destroyer equipped with Naval Helicopter carrying air to ground missiles like Hellfire or Brimstones in which can reach range around 6-11 km. That's why Indonesian Navy, China PLA Navy and other like ROKN doesn't invest much on those small missile boats anymore (small means less than 500 tonnes), instead we are more concerned to increase the patrol platform number like corvettes, Frigates and Destroyer. Our smallest missile boats in production is KCR 60 type with tonnage around 500-600 tonnes and less than that will be assigned as patrol boats armed with gun only.

Looking at what India Navy had and other in the region as precaution, i think it is more proper for Bangladesh Navy to invest more on corvettes or Frigate platform the most and equipped them with dedicated Anti Submarine/Surface warfare Helicopter, and not spent your budget on smaller missile boats. If you want something like that, better to use the platform as gun boats for patrol duty.
In fact this is exactly what BN has been doing. Due to the increasing roughness of BoB waters due to climate change coupled with endurance issues, they have decided not to replace retired FACs and instead are procuring more and more corvettes/LPCs and frigates.
 

bluesky

ELITE MEMBER
Jun 14, 2016
11,490
0
13,113
Country
Bangladesh
Location
Japan
you should know, by experiences those small missile boats means nothing in front of Destroyer equipped with Naval Helicopter carrying air to ground missiles like Hellfire or Brimstones in which can reach range around 6-11 km. That's why Indonesian Navy, China PLA Navy and other like ROKN doesn't invest much on those small missile boats anymore (small means less than 500 tonnes), instead we are more concerned to increase the patrol platform number like corvettes, Frigates and Destroyer. Our smallest missile boats in production is KCR 60 type with tonnage around 500-600 tonnes and less than that will be assigned as patrol boats armed with gun only.
No, not exactly what you are stating. Iranian missile boats are small with high speed that are capable to swamp a destroyer in times of emergency and fire rockets/missiles at the target. These will suddenly arrive, move around their target with high speed and then vanish from the site before any action is taken by the enemy destroyer.

Even one or two helicopters will find it difficult to target the fast moving boats. Even before the helis fly, the boats are capable to fire at their target. Only similarly speedy boats can challenge Iranian boats. Anything fired from the big ship will miss its target because it is moving fast and in circles.

A destroyer can take on the boats' anchorage base in the shore and destroy it to dust, but I do not think a destroyer can launch missiles or rockets successfully if there are more than 50 missile boats moving in high speed around it.
 

Nike

ELITE MEMBER
Mar 28, 2013
13,928
24
19,066
Country
Indonesia
Location
Indonesia
No, not exactly what you are stating. Iranian missile boats are small with high speed that are capable to swamp a destroyer in times of emergency and fire rockets/missiles at the target. These will suddenly arrive, move around their target with high speed and then vanish from the site before any action is taken by the enemy destroyer.

Even one or two helicopters will find it difficult to target the fast moving boats. Even before the helis fly, the boats are capable to fire at their target. Only similarly speedy boats can challenge Iranian boats. Anything fired from the big ship will miss its target because it is moving fast and in circles.

A destroyer can take on the boats' anchorage base in the shore and destroy it to dust, but I do not think a destroyer can launch missiles or rockets successfully if there are more than 50 missile boats moving in high speed around it.
You should know the fate of many Iraqi missile boats when being hunted by British Navy during the Gulf war. The Advent of precision Missiles like Brimstone or Hellfire Made small Missile boats less relevan and a typical ASW helicopter like Seahawk can carry 8 hellfire missiles in surface attack type mission, not to mention any large Navy had a complete Naval package among their fleets and they work in networking environment and not work as stand alone platform, and there is plethora of type of missiles to engage such fast attack boats from distances like Grifin missiles. Or if needed the destroyer can relay the data they gather into fleets of fighter aircraft in the area such as F-18 to engage the swarm boats from long range



 

Bilal9

ELITE MEMBER
Feb 4, 2014
17,728
1
28,042
Country
Bangladesh
Location
United States
you should know, by experiences those small missile boats means nothing in front of Destroyer equipped with Naval Helicopter carrying air to ground missiles like Hellfire or Brimstones in which can reach range around 6-11 km. That's why Indonesian Navy, China PLA Navy and other like ROKN doesn't invest much on those small missile boats anymore (small means less than 500 tonnes), instead we are more concerned to increase the patrol platform number like corvettes, Frigates and Destroyer. Our smallest missile boats in production is KCR 60 type with tonnage around 500-600 tonnes and less than that will be assigned as patrol boats armed with gun only.

Looking at what India Navy had and other in the region as precaution, i think it is more proper for Bangladesh Navy to invest more on corvettes or Frigate platform the most and equipped them with dedicated Anti Submarine/Surface warfare Helicopter, and not spent your budget on smaller missile boats. If you want something like that, better to use the platform as gun boats for patrol duty.
Well you do have a point.

However Iranian missile boats under two hundred tons are not designed to stand around and fight, they are designed to launch missiles and get out of range, that is what the 'fast' part is for. Shoot-and-scoot. And swarm attack means it is much less likely to hit one of these tiny things with even hellfire missiles if they are zig-zagging and moving at sixty or so knots. There are anti-dotes to missile attacks such as chaff-dispensers and optical confusion measures which even these small craft can have.

IMHO what Pakistani or Bangladeshi 500 ton Large Patrol Craft have is the same shoot-and-scoot advantage. What they do not have yet (and should have IMHO) is waterjet propulsion which can give them the forty-five or fifty knot speed. Maybe the new fourth Azmat class has waterjet propulsion. It is expensive however in Bangladesh we have built one such OPV example for Kenyan Fisheries Patrol.

This vessel has two normal screw propulsion plus one waterjet for speed - when it is needed.

 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom