What's new

Featured 10 soldiers martyred, 1militant killed and 3 apprehended when BLF attacked military check post in Balochistan's Kech district

The gunships have been used quite effectively in ex-FATA.
Mostly on the offensive ops, I am not saying you cannot use it ever, what I have said is you have to access it on case by case basis. With reference to this attack, using Helo would not be easy due to high potential of RPG fire, sniper fire or LMG suppressive fire from a far off distance....

You have to understand it's a open playfield bigger target like a low flying helo will get picked off from a far off distance.....
Unless you send in muliple 2-3 assets to an attack like this, probability of helo getting out successful is less
 
Why false? it makes sense why helo would return, read my post here:
A high altitude drone strike should get the job done (we have a sh1tload of drones lying around). Nowadays there are clear skies in Baluchistan; visibility should not be a problem either. However, I may be mistaken if their targeting pods are not good enough to be used from altitudes beyond the range of small arms fire.
 
I see all lot of people crying on twitter about not sending in drones, gunships,f-16 while the fighting ensued. I was not there, it's been a while since i stepped foot in the land of Balochistan but i can throw in my 2 cents why its not easy to send reinforcement in the middle of a fire fight:

  • F-16 / JF17 / Mirages / F-7s : none of this fits into the needs of the operation. A low level flypast can deter the militants but carrying out an airstrike is not easy. Tac Ops need to provide grid coordinates, if laser guided bomb being dropped, whose lasing the target? Friendly forces in the area? is it DCAS (Danger Close Air Support) ? going by the past experience and reviewing the footage of past incidents, either militant snipers are hiding far away on ridge top laying down support fire while others get close to the CP or OP (Observation Post). Last thing you need is your own men getting burnt with the PGMs
  • Gunship: looks like those suggesting this never been to a gunfight. Below is a picture taken almost a decade ago during my field visit to Balochistan. thats what a 7.62 bullet from LMG does to a 3inch thick metal beam (firing at a cellphone tower) imagine what it would do to a approaching gunship helo? How many helos have been lost in battlefield around the world just because they were carrying QRF or providing support fire when came under RPG or LMG firing from enemy.
View attachment 811436


  • Drone: they fit the profile but how many PGMs can it carry? how far is the base ?
All these can be used on Offence front not when you are defending an OP being overrun by militants.

Exactly! .. in addition to tactical details. The air-force purpose is to bomb enemy state and to counter enemy fighter jets. The air-force simply cannot scramble fighter jets on militant attacks / ambushes within the country. 1000s of checkposts are in the country, you will just end up exhausting your airforce if you start getting played in the hands of enemy. This act will increase frequency of attacks, Adversary will hire way more mercenaries as the prize of attack suddenly increases many folds that they pushed country's airforce to be used at its own soil on their timing & their will. The local political & global fall-out just don't have stamina to write on that as it will be devastating. We will end up facing 10x more such attacks.

However, We need to give point defense to checkposts against ambushes. Strengthen their body & armored protection to vehicles & structure.. Snipers / machine guns etc.
 
Mostly on the offensive ops, I am not saying you cannot use it ever, what I have said is you have to access it on case by case basis. With reference to this attack, using Helo would not be easy due to high potential of RPG fire, sniper fire or LMG suppressive fire from a far off distance....

You have to understand it's a open playfield bigger target like a low flying helo will get picked off from a far off distance.....
Unless you send in muliple 2-3 assets to an attack like this, probability of helo getting out successful is less
Militants would go wild and include managing to stave of gunships in their statements which they haven't, no images of them either, most likely there were no helicopters present during the gunfight considering current information we have, unless officially/credibly stated.
 
Last edited:
Sorry sir. Having manned combat post myself. I buy non of this. US troops hardly take casualties while in outpost. US casualties were due to IEDs. Despite 20 years of war, there were only 1921 casualties resulted because of hostile action. Compared this is 51,000 dead Taliban or 66,000 Poorly trained ANA.

Warfare has evolved. Small surveillance drones operated at battalion or regimental cost as much fuel as Honda 125. You don’t set up and outpost, send troops and than abandoned them. It was a piss poor operational planing by commander.

COAS is ultimately responsible for every men. If troops are ill equipped or not trained properly than he is responsible.

Reason PA failed to fix this issue in last 20 years is due to “All at Rest” mentality that casualties are acceptable.

Ok, If PA army is gunning to take peaks in Kashmir, clearing way towards Srinagar and Indians are pound relentlessly using artillery than I see this statement make sense, but not in Baluchistan.

Why US is unable to protect Mexican-US border as "fool proof" depsite being the best of drones, satellite coverage, sensors and budget available to it.

As the warfare as evolved, so is the militancy. The militants can easily employ decoy tactics to evade drones.

The US example in Afghanistan is simply WRONG example.. As US was in foriegn nation, it can bring gunship helis or whatever and kill everyone including children mercilessly. It was occupying force. Pakistan is facing this in its own territory.
 
Mostly on the offensive ops, I am not saying you cannot use it ever, what I have said is you have to access it on case by case basis. With reference to this attack, using Helo would not be easy due to high potential of RPG fire, sniper fire or LMG suppressive fire from a far off distance....

You have to understand it's a open playfield bigger target like a low flying helo will get picked off from a far off distance.....
Unless you send in muliple 2-3 assets to an attack like this, probability of helo getting out successful is less
The RPG is surely a threat. But with the targeting system and higher caliber cannon the gunship will out range and lay down accurate fire from stand off distance compared to LMGs and other small arms. Also, pretty sure the protection in cobras (and Mi35) is adequate against small arms caliber.
 
Why false? it makes sense why helo would return, read my post here:
Still doesnt make sense. I dont know which Gunship was dispatched, but if it was the mil mi35m, that can definitely tank a 7.62mm round fired from an assault rifle. The ah1f makes sense since it has less protection but doesnt the 20mm gun on ah1f pretty much outrange anything the militants have? Unless the militants somehow had a 12.7mm gun used for AA which i doubt, then i still dont see how the gunships turned back.

Something seems off about all of this. This account is known for lying at times.
 
Why US is unable to protect Mexican-US border as "fool proof" depsite being the best of drones, satellite coverage, sensors and budget available to it.

As the warfare as evolved, so is the militancy. The militants can easily employ decoy tactics to evade drones.

The US example in Afghanistan is simply WRONG example.. As US was in foriegn nation, it can bring gunship helis or whatever and kill everyone including children mercilessly. It was occupying force. Pakistan is facing this in its own territory.
US border is secure as it gets. There is no such this a fool proof.

How are 50 militants in non vegetated dry deserted are going to employ decoy tactics. Please explain.

No US wasn’t killing mercilessly, nor this post in question was in or near any city or town.

Don’t just make generalized assumptions without much knowledge about the situation.
 
Something seems off about all of this. This account is known for lying at times.
Militants would go wild and include managing to stave of gunships in their statements which they haven't, no images of them either, most likely there were no helicopters present during the gunfight considering current information we have, unless officially/credibly stated.
I think we are misunderstanding the point here - the notion that helos returned from site of attack is incorrect or false. They never made to the area, they returned after there were reports of heavy enemy presence .... it is 'believed' to be a precautionary step for helos to turn back
 
US border is secure as it gets. There is no such this a fool proof.

How are 50 militants in non vegetated dry deserted are going to employ decoy tactics. Please explain.

No US wasn’t killing mercilessly, nor this post in question was in or near any city or town.

Don’t just make generalized assumptions without much knowledge about the situation.


What a surveillance drone will do if it start tracking couple of militants that goes on a route near checkpost. It keeps tracks of it obviously. While the other heavily armed group attacks from other side. How many drones you want to employ ? ..

You always start with basics-

The basic requirements at checkpost (which nobody here is talking) protective gear / armoured protection to the checkpost itself & soldiers.. Then their weapons, what kind of weapons they have. They need to be equipped properly. In addition APC for a far-off checkpost.. These all equipment is what you can make use of instead of drone which is not even fool-proof.

Once you have the basics then yes you can ask for drones or further things which may not be fool-proof but good to have for added surveillance.


P.s: Also remember the scale which we are talking about. Don't want to repeat over pls read few earlier posts.
 
What a surveillance drone will do if it start tracking couple of militants that goes on a route near checkpost. It keeps tracks of it obviously. While the other heavily armed group attacks from other side. How many drones you want to employ ? ..

You always start with basics-

The basic requirements at checkpost (which nobody here is talking) protective gear / armoured protection to the checkpost itself & soldiers.. Then their weapons, what kind of weapons they have. They need to be equipped properly. In addition APC for a far-off checkpost.. These all equipment is what you can make use of instead of drone which is not even fool-proof.

Once you have the basics then yes you can ask for drones or further things which may not be fool-proof but good to have for added surveillance.
What do these outposts even look like? If an outpost can't defend being outnumbered 5:1, then there's no point in there being an outpost anyway because it will be torched by militants. Every fort should be built to a specific standard by being well protected and having more firepower than militants (mortars, artillery, machine gun posts, etc). They have to be connected with other posts too. I can bet you that the outpost in question was weak and easy to attack, just like we've seen in all the other videos.
 
Usually the terrorists and their sympathisers are very active in releasing and posting their material.
Yesterday there were reports of them releasing video of the attack.....so far no images or videos have crossed my eyes.
They uploaded 2 pictures rights after the attack on their Facebook account.... someone siting at ridge top took picture after post was set on fire and second picture was taken at a far off distance as they were leaving the area ---
We follow these aholes very closely on social media, thats how we know that Kamash killed in Pishin 2 days ago was affiliated with BLF
 
The RPG is surely a threat. But with the targeting system and higher caliber cannon the gunship will out range and lay down accurate fire from stand off distance compared to LMGs and other small arms. Also, pretty sure the protection in cobras (and Mi35) is adequate against small arms caliber.
While I disagree with some posters, I find it hard to believe how Nazuk our helicopters are. MI 35 are stationed in Quetta to take on India? A single gun run would have thwarted the attack or at least confused the attackers. A squad of 50 attackers can take the whole military hostage and render all our assets useless. Some even claim helicopters aren’t permitted to be used in the dark, I find it very illogical. We are sending a wrong message here by being overly defensive of our military’s approach to such attacks. It’s not the first time and won’t be the last time. The best and brightest minds in the military are outsmarted by BLA and others who know our helicopters are Nazuk, Can’t fly after Dark, QRF can be engaged at a distance, Drones are incapable, Fighter Jets are for India and isolated posts are easy to target. The terrorists were more confident in their tactics than our military in all their assets and approaches as they stayed there for 5 hours and only left when they got the job done. For 5 long hours and it’s not the first time.
 
The US example in Afghanistan is simply WRONG example.. As US was in foriegn nation, it can bring gunship helis or whatever and kill everyone including children mercilessly. It was occupying force. Pakistan is facing this in its own territory.
Nah bro this argument is not valid - please read this....i assure you posts like these are no where close to any village... only people you find in areas like these are militants or their facilitators who provide food, shelter and water to the runners

1643290038965.png
 
Back
Top Bottom