A Vision of a New Combined Arms Philosophy & Doctrine

[ARMalik]

If you have ignored the canals then you are off to a start on the wrong foot.The canal can be breached to flood the area and bog down armour movement.Canals act as anti tank ditches lined with bunkers which you will have to clear first with artillery,then emplace bridges which would vulnerable to enemy artillery and air attack,then create a bridgehead exposed to counterattack by enemy reserves and then aim to expand that bridgehead.It is time consuming and much more difficult.Trucks replacing rail would incur an enormous economic cost in fuel and motor capacity but possible.

Turkish drones - 1.Caught the syrians by surprise first 3 days ,as syrians lacked enough mobile AA during their advance and all their main defenses were geared towards israel.
2.Practiced electronic jamming of syrian assets most of which are obsolete or defective(like pantsir which was rejected by IA twice),putin watched and let erdogan vent his frustration after killing dozens of turkish soldiers.When he judged turks had had their pound of flesh erdogan was told to stop and he went hat in hand to moscow to make whatever deal was presented to him.The drone attacks proved ultimately not enough as they lost seraqib and the highway anyway.After the initial onslaught the syrians brought whatever SAMs they had and drones started getting shot down.And no syrian army didn't have too many MANPADs as they never needed anti air during the civil war and were largely defenceless at squad/platoon level in this area.
3.To compare IA with obsolete and exhausted SAA is fallacy.
4.The comment was towards ww2 style piston engine CAS that was being proposed which yes,can be shot down by 12.7mm HMG,AAA guns,not to mention one shotted by any MANPAD.Not even getting into more sophisticated systems such as sams and helicopter aam.Standoff PGMs used enmasse are contrary to your very argument as that would shoot up the costs enormously.

Type 59/69 with armour of 200 mm against carl gustavs with 400 mm penetration(500 mm if tandem warhead used) at 400-500 metres is fantasy?RPG-7 effective range is just 100 -150metres against tanks due to accuracy despite similar or slightly higher penetration.Ofcourse gustav is much more costlier.

BMP-2s in indian service are never a 'breakthrough' weapon in themselves.The tanks and artillery provide breakthrough,the IFV carries the infantry to support the attack,and then provides fire support from the back.Sending IFVs charging into teeth of enemy defences is suicide.Soldiers disembark as close as possible without IFV coming in range of AT weaponry,then they assault on foot in spread out formation with tank and arty support.IFV provides fire cover from back,picks up infantry when assault is done and allows it to keep up with the advancing armour.T-55s were lost in thousands in syria,whereas the number of T-90 lost is counted by the fingers of a single hand,being able to frontally shrug off any ATGM and only destroyed if poorly trained crew panicked and abandoned the tank or tank was ambushed from rear in urban areas.Also the syrian army never faced enemy tanks(except few captured) in which t-55 being' marginally' inferior to t-90 is a delusion.T-90 was the single most successful tank in ukraine where light vehicles were a failure.This is also the reason the US army has designated survivability as the topmost priority(out of total 7 parameters) for its future IFV to replace the bradley in its new tender to design companies.Its also why the new israeli namer IFV and the russian kurganets have tank level arrmour protection.Its not world war 2 where all infantry had to fight tanks were cumbersome anti tank guns,mines and obsolete AT rifles or armour of their own.(except from 1944 - bazookas and panzerfaust/shreck which destroyed thousands of tanks in last 2 years of the war)

The south african armoured car 'experience' is meaningless in this context.Those were largely used for reconaissance and infantry support against a ragtag african militia in savanna bushes .And no they didn't face carl gustavs,had to stay away from RPGs and were outgunned by T-55s unless ambushing them.What you are proposing is using a reconaissance vehicle as a frontal offensive breakthrough weapon against T-90 tanks and regular professional infantry with ATGMs and recoiless rifles,backed by artillery in one of the most fortified borders of the world.Its difficult to take the idea seriously.A single T-90 tank regiment in defensive position would shatter an entire divisions worth of such vehicles with negligible losses.If you were proposing this vehicle as a mobile light defensive flanking/ambush weapon in support of infantry and friendly heavy armour that would be a much more logical approach.

I'm playing nothing.I merely wanted to point out the flight of fantasy this thread was.To put it in simple terms the primary dilemma of the PA is it lacks sufficient armour reserves to counter a simultaneous attack by all 3 strike corps of IA in the central sector(provided they can be mobilized quickly enough which CSD and now IBG intends to do).That is why PA has to use terrain judiciously,as employ its 2 armoured divisions deftly for parrying and ripostes and keep tactical nukes as a last resort.For PA to undertake any major offensive in gujarat or rajasthan area is very difficult which is what your scenario is based on.

If you wish to add conscripts then add 1 million active indian paramilitary and 2 million reservists and territorial army as well.
Bhuj is defended by BSF at the border and forward elements of ahmedabad based infantry division.The area is marshy and swampy with few good roads and not suited for heavy armour combat.

Interesting "story-line" I have to say, but unfortunately nothing more than just all lot of feel good 'Fantasies'. The thread was going very well until some indians decided to get "emotional".

Anyways, sorry to be the bearer of bad news but the first thing you need to understand is that the War between India and Pakistan will NOT be decided by Army or Navy - it will be decided by the AF this time. Forget about going anywhere when there is no Air-superiority or even 'partial' air superiority. 3 Strike Corps or 10 strike corps, one millions or two million reservists, it DOES NOT matter. Every battle today, Army, Navy and AF, are all decided by Air Power - FULL STOP. Forget about filling up a canal with water to stop your enemy when your arse is being decimated by the enemy's AF. In short, all your war plannings need to start from your Air-Force, and all other actions by your Army and Navy on the battlefield then are simply based on the 'Results' of what your AF has achieved.

So stop fantasizing and get real. Thank you.

 

[KhanBaba2]

Interesting "story-line" I have to say, but unfortunately nothing more than just all lot of feel good 'Fantasies'. The thread was going very well until some indians decided to get "emotional".

Anyways, sorry to be the bearer of bad news but the first thing you need to understand is that the War between India and Pakistan will NOT be decided by Army or Navy - it will be decided by the AF this time. Forget about going anywhere when there is no Air-superiority or even 'partial' air superiority. 3 Strike Corps or 10 strike corps, one millions or two million reservists, it DOES NOT matter. Every battle today, Army, Navy and AF, are all decided by Air Power - FULL STOP. Forget about filling up a canal with water to stop your enemy when your arse is being decimated by the enemy's AF. In short, all your war plannings need to start from your Air-Force, and all other actions by your Army and Navy on the battlefield then are simply based on the 'Results' of what your AF has achieved.

So stop fantasizing and get real. Thank you.

The Americans had air superiority in Afghanistan.

 

[Old School]

Both times will conscript if the need arises. And if we have reached that phases then it would be better to talk on the table than actually fight with poorly armed conscript armies.

LOL. Check in Europe about conscription practices.



No, she doesn't.



As I mentioned before, wishful thinking is not a useful foundation for war-gaming, or for projections, or for forecasting.



Please think calmly. Your imagery of a rabble of bearded enthusiasts following a rag, tag and bobtail collection of vehicles owes far too much to war movies featuring guerrillas in 'technicals'. The more you outline your plans, the more that seems to have been the fountainhead of inspiration.

In the hypothetical case of conscription, India will use trained uniformed people for war-fighting, she will use others for other purposes. There are military roads to be built in forward areas (already being done by BRO), there are airstrips, air fields and air bases to be built to keep the adversary guessing, there are railroad extensions and road extensions needed for troop and materiel movement, there are military bases, artillery parks, ammunition dumps, and vehicle parks to be built, there are barracks, firing ranges and training centres to be built. We have plenty of these, but can never have too much.

At a more technical level, there are the issues of communications, of logistics (in operation, not in building infrastructure, but in operating rolling stock and flying inventory) and of health care.

We can cope with whatever expansion our friends achieve through conscription simply by re-modelling our very large uniformed services to serve as true para-military forces (they are already seriously engaged in counter-insurgency operations, for which some congratulate themselves on possessing a military that is honed and battle-ready; India has many times more than that trained in similar warfare).



Who said? Napoleon's armies were conscript armies; since when do we think of him as a defensive stalemate expert?



Your continuing assumption that India will take only stupid decisions is breath-taking in its - shall we say, optimism?



Good luck.

My long 35-year experience in man-management informs me that you will need more than soothing words. You will need strong medication.



Certainly, by all means, let us have fun.

But not stupidly crafted fun.

LOL. Check in Europe about conscription practices.



No, she doesn't.



As I mentioned before, wishful thinking is not a useful foundation for war-gaming, or for projections, or for forecasting.



Please think calmly. Your imagery of a rabble of bearded enthusiasts following a rag, tag and bobtail collection of vehicles owes far too much to war movies featuring guerrillas in 'technicals'. The more you outline your plans, the more that seems to have been the fountainhead of inspiration.

In the hypothetical case of conscription, India will use trained uniformed people for war-fighting, she will use others for other purposes. There are military roads to be built in forward areas (already being done by BRO), there are airstrips, air fields and air bases to be built to keep the adversary guessing, there are railroad extensions and road extensions needed for troop and materiel movement, there are military bases, artillery parks, ammunition dumps, and vehicle parks to be built, there are barracks, firing ranges and training centres to be built. We have plenty of these, but can never have too much.

At a more technical level, there are the issues of communications, of logistics (in operation, not in building infrastructure, but in operating rolling stock and flying inventory) and of health care.

We can cope with whatever expansion our friends achieve through conscription simply by re-modelling our very large uniformed services to serve as true para-military forces (they are already seriously engaged in counter-insurgency operations, for which some congratulate themselves on possessing a military that is honed and battle-ready; India has many times more than that trained in similar warfare).



Who said? Napoleon's armies were conscript armies; since when do we think of him as a defensive stalemate expert?



Your continuing assumption that India will take only stupid decisions is breath-taking in its - shall we say, optimism?



Good luck.

My long 35-year experience in man-management informs me that you will need more than soothing words. You will need strong medication.



Certainly, by all means, let us have fun.

But not stupidly crafted fun.

It is always good to ask a question when one comes up with a novel idea. That question is, Please write an antithesis of your own thesis. Failure to do so makes that whole novel idea unworkable.

 

[Mumm-Ra]

This thread is rather amusing due to the amateur assumptions of the OP.He has no understanding of the road-rail networks on both sides,without which you can't launch any mechanized offensive due to logistics.Total absence of understanding of logistics and terrain is shown by the talk of mechanized offensives accross marshy swamps of sindh-gujarat border.Nor does he seem to understand the significance of the canal and ditch cum bund defenses which can be flooded/act as barrier with layered defense as necessary on both sides.

His understanding of 'new' doctrine is also fantastical.Some basic mistakes are -
1.Calling for hundreds of piston engine CAS aircraft and assuming they will 'devastate' indian army by swamping them due to cheapness.It seems he has forgotten that a piston engine aircraft can be shot down by even the 12.7 mm Heavy machine gun on the tanks and 30 mm cannons on IFVs,forget the 200 odd upgraded zsu-23-4 and tunguska mobile gun-AA systems accompanying indian armour and static bofors L70 and zsu-57-2 systems.Cheap as piston engine aircraft are,you know what's cheaper ?-AA guns and MANPADS.A single soldier with even an obsolete MANPAD can 100% one shot a piston engine aircraft with a dirt cheap MANPAD.India has thousands of IGLAs deployed at platoon level.Piston engine aircraft are also defenceless against mistral/stinger armed helicopters like HAL Rudra/LCH(not yet deployed) and apaches.And all this without even getting into missile defences such as QRSAM/SPYDER, Akash, barak-8(not yet deployed).OP has also assumed that these CAS aircraft will operate will total impunity over indian airspace which means PAF has gained total air dominance over core indian territory,if you believe PAF can achieve that i commend you on your optimism.

2.OP also has developed unreal notions of breakthrough with cheap 'light' tank/car and obsolete 'upgraded' t-55 derivatives and also believes that putting ATGM on a platform makes it a breakthrough offensive weapon(in reality its a defensive weapon).Let me give you a reality check on 'light tanks'.A light tank-car can be easily defeated by even basic light infantry.Indian army platoon and some times squad level M3/M4 Carl gustav rocket launcher(which has far better accuracy at range over RPGs)/LAW are sufficient to destroy 'light' tanks and these are present in tens of thousands .Thats not even counting the 50,000 plus ATGM stock of the indian army's infantry battalions.The 4000 MILAN-2T,3000 kornet,300 NAG and 300 Spike-LR are generally kept for enemy's modern tanks but over 40,000 konkurs-m and milan 2 are available for general use which are more than enough for tin cans like the ones being proposed(infact enough for all PA armour with exception of maybe T-80UD with duplet ERA).Heavy tanks can survive MBRL barrages,soft skinned vehicles can't,as was found in ukraine where whole mechanized battalions were wiped out in seconds by MBRL attacks but heavy armour did rather well.

Hear this lecture if you want to understand modern warfare trends in maneuvre from an american veteran expert who was an on the ground observer in ukraine.

I pity the mind that thinks that these tank-car or t-55 upgrades can offensively punch through even a single regiment of dug in hull down modern tanks like a t-90.The frontal armour of the T-90 is on video in youtube shown to have survived direct hit from american TOW-2 in syria,survived 7 RPG hits in dagestan in chechen wars.The 1200 strong(400 more in production) T-90 fleet has a stock of 25,000 INVAR 4km range cannon launched ATGM also.

The real armour balance between IA and PA is ~770 modern tanks for PA-450 Al khalid + 320 T-80UD vs ~2300 modern tanks for IA- 1200 T-90 plus 1000 upgraded t-72 plus 124 arjuns.Add to this 1500 unupgraded T-72 for IA and thousands of t-55 derivatives and older chinese models for PA.
http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/TRIALS/19991020.html
Russian source on T-80U vs T-90 protection levels.


3.Also the above ORBAT starting from post #124 on page 9 and plan of attack is messed up(even though commands and corps structure is due to be overhauled in next 3 years with IBG and theatre commands).He assumes that size of corps is uniform on both sides and uses the corps as a basic maneuvre unit creating fake material superiority where none exists.

Let me put into perspective -(infantry is lorry borne,mech either m-113 APC for PA or BMP-2 IFV for IA)

Southern command - Indian XII corps(1 rapid div+ 1 inf div+ 1 arm brigade+1 mech brigade) is seen being defeated and losing half of gujarat to an undisclosed airborne helicopter force and a random marine division ignoring the existence of indian air force and navy altogether or how they would be supplied over the marshes.Realistically speaking PN would be lucky to have its surface fleet survive the first 48 hours and not have karachi harbour in flames against the full might of indian navy,forget an amphibious assault with transports along the coast.The grand fantasy envisages these embarked 'marines' and light airborne forces will capture half of gujarat against a rapid division(which is 2-3 infantry/mech inf brigades plus an armoured brigade),another full infantry division quartered in ahmedabad,plus 2 more independent mechanized brigade and armoured brigade formations.Not sure if this is scenario meant to be serious or ganja humour.The air borne force penetration (if its gets through IAF) being proposed in gujarat can be crushed by just the sole infantry division,leaving all the mechanized formations to entreat the pak armour movements further north.The petty hovercraft penetrations proposed can be simply dealt with by the BSF and coast guard.The size of the BSF is 260,000 compared to 40,000 for pak rangers to put things in perspective.So the whole gujarat -bhuj front is a fantasy.

Now little to the north coming to southern rajasthan sector,what the fantasy in gujarat has allowed the OP is to artificially negate on paper 3 mechanized and 2 armoured brigades of indian southern command as if they didn't exist,and thus not allocate any pakistani forces in sindh to oppose them by imagining they are defeated by vague airborne troops and some imaginery marine division just so he can now focus 2 corps in this sector,creating a fake local superiority.Infact 12 RAPID division(2 mech brig+1 amd brig) of indian XII corps is not even in gujarat,and actually based at Jodhpur and will face action in rajasthan.

Here,Pakistan 12corps is brought in which in reality is in Quetta garrisoning balochistan against an uprising and manning the afghan border.Even allowing this its 2 infantry divisions,1 armd brigade and 1 inf brigade.Add 5th corps (freed up because of gujarat fantasy) with 2 infantry divisions and a mechanized inf div(25th,not sure composition) still total attacking force is 4 infantry divisions,1 inf brigade and,1 armd brigade and 1 mech div.Against this will be pitted XXI strike corps plus 12 RAPID at jodhpur (even if we magically ignore indp armd brigade and indp mech brigde of XII corps keeping in line with gujarat fantasy,when in reality they would crash into the open flank of pak 5th corps from the south in any attempted turning move).Even ignoring them you have 2 RAPID divisions,a full armoured division,an infantry division and an artillery division with its own smerch battalions and brahmos regiment(~100 missiles plus 100 reload) and field arty.Upto the observer to decide who has better chances in the open desert - total 13 inf brigades,2 amd brgde,1-2 mech brgde vs 4 amd brigades,3 inf brigades,4-6 inf/ mechanized brigades ,1 artillery division).I am not shifting any units from eastern command to counter 12 corps shift from quetta due to china threat.

In OP's scheme,moving further north around bikaner Indian I strike corps is attacked by Pak 2nd strike corps(1 amd div plus 1 mech inf div) and 31 corps(2 infantry divs +1 mech inf div) over the rajasthan canal.However here OP has made a mistake in his ORBAT.2 whole Rapid divisions under X corps have been placed much north ,whereas they are actually deployed in bikaner and kota in this axis.(24 RAPID at bikaner,18 RAPID reserve at kota).So in case of a attempted pincer attack on this front by pak 2nd and 31 corps it will face overwhelming forces.The balance of forces would be 2 pak infantry divs,2 mech inf divs and 1 armoured division against india's 3 full rapid divisions,1 armoured division,1 infantry division and 1 independent armoured brigade(iab),plus a full artillery division(with integral smerch and brahamos regiments).The result would be a decimation of the pakistani attack at worst,a huge battle of attrition at best.

By prematurely deploying the PA 2nd strike corps and its armoured division,OP also creates a crisis further up north.Pak XI corps(wrongly shown as IX corps probably typo) is seen as a defensive force(11 corps presumably redeployed from NWFP in peshawar) with 1 or 2 infantry divisions and one iab facing indian X corps with one infantry div and one iab in defense.(its two rapid divisions fighting in bikaner axis)
Now here the indian II strike corps -the kharga corps which is the elite tip of the spear formation(500 t-90 and 500 bmp-2 approx) of the indian army is free to make its move.The kharga corps has one armoured division,one rapid division,one iab( overstrength),one artillery division and one infantry division.The forward advance of the PA 2nd strike corps removes any obstacle from its path and essentially gives it a free run to do its traditional job.The kharga corps has an open field to race south-west towards rahim yar khan and then jacobabad blocking off N5 and n55 highway,cutting off punjab from sindh and splitting pakistan in two.This movement would also put it into the rear of pak attacking forces in bikaner axis(31st and 2nd) encircling them and annihilating them in a hammer anvil with II kharga corps as hammer and I strike corps plus elements of X corps as anvil.
So i consider the 2 prong attack plan on bikaner as suicidal,would certainly lead to destruction of the two attacking PA corps due to kharga corps attack and resulting sandwich between two strike corps of indian army.

Further north in the lahore-amritsar axis OP's scheme pits pakistan 4th corps(with 2 inf div,one inf brigde,one arty bgde,one iab) against IA XI corps with 3 infantry divisions,one arty bgde,one iab,one mech brigade).IA superiority is marginal and insufficient for major advance.XI corps if needed can however easily detatch a mechanized brigade north or south and still maintain slight numerical superiority.No hard progress on any side can be expected here.

Further north in sakargarh -pathankot -akhnoor area you have pakistan 1st strike corps and 30 corps vs IX corps and XVI corps of india.72 mountain strike corps(MSC) division based at pathankot(currently being reorganized into IBGs) is reserve which can go north towards china border or west towards pakistan.Combination of 30 corps (two infantry divs + iab +arty division+AT bgde) and 1st strike corps(two infantry divisions+iab +arty bgd+ one armoured division) for total of 4 infantry div,2iab,2artybgd,1 amd div,AT bgd is an impressive concentration. Combined indian formations would amount to 6 infantry divisions(incl MSC),4 iab,1artybgd.Battle here would be a ferocious .

Further north,due to difficult terrain no major advances in LOC except localized operations .India certain to make an attempt on haji pir which it foolishly gave back in 1965 after capture and the bulge is major source of infiltration.

5.Finally the role of raising hundreds of thousands of conscripts in this scheme is meaningless.Conscripts will have to be fed and supplied,have very limited military utility,and would get massacred if facing regular formations with armour and artillery(may hold back infantry for limited time).Also not explained why hundreds of thousands of conscripts are added to Pak ORBAT ,but 1 million strong active paramilitary forces of india not similarly accounted for ,or the territorial army or reserve manpower over 2 million .

Damn Dude. now that's one hell of a way to make an entry with a positive rating. Welcome to the forum and hope that you stick around

 

[Joe Shearer]

It is always good to ask a question when one comes up with a novel idea. That question is, Please write an antithesis of your own thesis. Failure to do so makes that whole novel idea unworkable.

A very good point. In science and in forecasting, this (the antithesis) is defined as the null hypothesis. The task is to disprove the null hypothesis; if it cannot be disproved, the alternative, the alternate hypothesis, is not to be taken into account. If it is disproved, we can turn to the alternate hypothesis and bank on it.

In this case, to prove the point about the overall concept planned and presented, it is necessary for OP to present a null hypothesis, as you have proposed, an antithesis of his own proposed thesis. Only by disproving the antithesis can there be some credibility for the original idea.

I believe that this is a good point at which to leave the discussion. One more mention of conscripts and why they will perform brilliantly on one side of the border, and will fail totally on the other side (a more knowledgeable analyst might have put in contrast the Swiss system against the Russian), and I will burst.

So, too, with an attack on a sandy, salty plain that is home to flamingos, by a non-existent force, or tank attacks by a mass of Toyotas covered with galvanised steel sheets and armed with machine guns - or the YouTube equivalents. Not to mention shifting around large masses of men and machines without the benefit of the usual prosthetics - roads and railroads.

This discussion has potential; it can drive people crazy.

Have fun, good people.

 

[Mumm-Ra]

It is always good to ask a question when one comes up with a novel idea. That question is, Please write an antithesis of your own thesis. Failure to do so makes that whole novel idea unworkable.

I will try to be articulate in future. Right now, I'm waiting if the OP came up with something new.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Damn Dude. now that's one hell of a way to make an entry with a positive rating. Welcome to the forum and hope that you stick around

He's good, isn't he? Quite a breath of fresh air.

 

[PanzerKiel]

I'm aware of the long canals on both sides and road and rail network (which I learned from @PanzerKiel 8 years ago) but choose to ignore them as they don't make for an interesting category of warfare. Reminds me more about WWI rather than even WWII. Canals can be bridged, trucks can replace rail logistics.

I believe you are grossly underestimating the importance of railways as far as move of forces and logistics are concerned. They still form the mainstay during the planning. With high urbanization and increase in population / traffic, road space management is getting trickier day by day. Then again, we dont have a dense nrtwork of autobahns to support our operations.

Canals, again, still pose a considerable obstacle for anyone attempting to cross it even in the face of light opposition. A weak force defending a water line is very difficult to be dislodged.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I will try to be articulate in future. Right now, I'm waiting if the OP came up with something new.

No, Sir, you have done your bit.

If, after all the hullabaloo dies down, there is an attempt to re-work the basic idea - how to win a war with fewer people, fewer arms and weapons, and a faltering economy - I would love to be there. It is a challenging problem.

 

[Mumm-Ra]

He's good, isn't he? Quite a breath of fresh air.

He's definitely on my watchlist.

No, Sir, you have done your bit.

If, after all the hullabaloo dies down, there is an attempt to re-work the basic idea - how to win a war with fewer people, fewer arms and weapons, and a faltering economy - I would love to be there. It is a challenging problem.

Well the words of Gen. Ghaffoor comes to mind and I quote "we will surprise you"

 

[PanzerKiel]

The concept of your 'troop carrying light tanks' seem to be a cross between motorised mortar carriers, generally used by a number of armies to keep their 120 mm mortars mobile, and an APC, even an IFV, that substitutes mortar carriage and indirect fire for heavy machine-guns or light automatic cannons in the 20mm to 40 mm range.

@Armchair should then come up with the solution of another problem as well....with a 120 mm mortar inside the APC, how much ammunition of 120 will it be able to carry, alongside soldiers.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I believe you are grossly underestimating the importance of railways as far as move of forces and logistics are concerned. They still form the mainstay during the planning. With high urbanization and increase in population / traffic, road space management is getting trickier day by day. Then again, we dont have a dense nrtwork of autobahns to support our operations.

Canals, again, still pose a considerable obstacle for anyone attempting to cross it even in the face of light opposition. A weak force defending a water line is very difficult to be dislodged.

Sir, purely at a facetious level, even an undefended water obstacle can pose hazards. In @fatman17's educative outlines of the 65 conflict, there was that incident where the lead tank of a regiment fell off the narrow passage leading past the obstacle, and blocked the whole formation for several hours. Fortunately, the IAF was not informed.

He's definitely on my watchlist.



Well the words of Gen. Ghaffoor comes to mind and I quote "we will surprise you"

LOL. Have you EVER failed to surprise us?

Sorry, couldn't resist. No hard feelings.

 

[Old School]

A very good point. In science and in forecasting, this (the antithesis) is defined as the null hypothesis. The task is to disprove the null hypothesis; if it cannot be disproved, the alternative, the alternate hypothesis, is not to be taken into account. If it is disproved, we can turn to the alternate hypothesis and bank on it.

In this case, to prove the point about the overall concept planned and presented, it is necessary for OP to present a null hypothesis, as you have proposed, an antithesis of his own proposed thesis. Only by disproving the antithesis can there be some credibility for the original idea.

I believe that this is a good point at which to leave the discussion. One more mention of conscripts and why they will perform brilliantly on one side of the border, and will fail totally on the other side (a more knowledgeable analyst might have put in contrast the Swiss system against the Russian), and I will burst.

So, too, with an attack on a sandy, salty plain that is home to flamingos, by a non-existent force, or tank attacks by a mass of Toyotas covered with galvanised steel sheets and armed with machine guns - or the YouTube equivalents. Not to mention shifting around large masses of men and machines without the benefit of the usual prosthetics - roads and railroads.

This discussion has potential; it can drive people crazy.

Have fun, good people.

Correct. Beyond passing the null hypothesis, it takes much more to bring a new idea to the level of wargaming.
If you have time, please also let people know why and what percentage Majors never make it to the rank of Lt. Colonel. That can be a good eye opener to many enthusiasts. I am not a ' professional ' and that is why I leave it to you.

 

[Armchair]

@Armchair should then come up with the solution of another problem as well....with a 120 mm mortar inside the APC, how much ammunition of 120 will it be able to carry, alongside soldiers.

I concede, 120mm mortar and troops would be hard to do in practical terms. How about 82mm like this? Apparently some BMPs used to be armed with them.

120mm still fascinates me as a system. In an APC configuration they can fire and scoot. Fire again and change position. This would be organic and would be an interesting weapon for combined arms operations.

One could have 120mm versions of an apc and then 82mm version with troops.

About the rail network I am not discounting it obviously most useful for mobilization but not very useful for offensive blitzkreig like movements into India.

 

[PanzerKiel]

Sir, purely at a facetious level, even an undefended water obstacle can pose hazards. In @fatman17's educative outlines of the 65 conflict, there was that incident where the lead tank of a regiment fell off the narrow passage leading past the obstacle, and blocked the whole formation for several hours. Fortunately, the IAF was not informed.

Couldnt agree more sir. But in our accounts, IAF did visit our side and fired, witnesses say there was no chance of a miss even if you would have fired blindly into that traffic jam of two divisions. Several ammo vehicles took the brunt.