ATF-10 NLOS - Nasty shock for 'Cold Start'?

[Viper0011.]

What becomes of Nasr

@Horus

Nasr is a last resort when you need to take out the entire corps, or majority of it. Horus was referring to conventional warfare.....
I think this system should be bought with tot and mass produced internally. If you can remove say 50-100 tanks and other artillery / armored vehicles from one strike corps, you've broken the spine of that attack.

The conventional dissimilarity would disappear and it'll become a regular 1:1.25 ratio attack (1 being Pakistan and 1.25 being India), which is normal for the Pakistanis as they train for defense with a larger foe and numerical superiority in mind.

 

[Didact]

Nasr is a last resort when you need to take out the entire corps, or majority of it. Horus was referring to conventional warfare.....
I think this system should be bought with tot and mass produced internally. If you can remove say 50-100 tanks and other artillery / armored vehicles from one strike corps, you've broken the spine of that attack.

The conventional dissimilarity would disappear and it'll become a regular 1:1.25 ratio attack (1 being Pakistan and 1.25 being India), which is normal for the Pakistanis as they train for defense with a larger foe and numerical superiority in mind.

Hardly a correct or logical understanding of warfare. Your understanding only holds true if the entirety of a strike corps parks itself in an area roughly 6-8 football fields. That is not practiced, even at Corps headquarters.

The divisional responsibility for an American division is something of the order of 120 km length by 220 km depth today. (During the Cold war, the numbers were obviously less, somewhere in the region of 12km by 20 km).Even assuming an IA division being just 10% as effective as the US, you get an area roughly 12kmx22km. Needless to say, that's way way bigger than even a Strategic mega ton nuke can take care of.

Furthermore, the IA armored formations whilst in attack follow the traditional NATO formations, with a maximum of 1 armored regiment (tank battalion) spread out over some 1.5-2 km. That's the biggest target NASR can hope to aim for. Not big enough for a "Corps Killer", is it?

Next, the IA has been drilling for NBC warfare since the 80s, and tactics have been developed to continue operations right through a contaminated battlefield, if need be. Just because you nuke an area doesn't mean it's impassable for the IA.

Also, the IA wants to further thin out its forces to mitigate the impact of a TNW. Thus the increased numbers of Attack helis (279-330), more preponderance to CAS and MRBL over traditional artillery, and use of sensor fused Cluster munitions. The IA intends to use them to offset the numerical inferiority they will face due to thinning out of the front.

And finally, the PA might be training to take on a larger foe, but at field levels, the offensive arms of the IA are expected to fight and advance against numerical superiority, which is all the more necessary given the need for rapid advances. So they are just as trained, if not better, for battling numerical odds.

What that shows, is the inherent flaw in actually using a TNW. It basically does nothing out of the ordinary, but comes at a horrifying strategic cost for the user. A single TNW would at best wipe out a battalion and render a brigade ineffective. Hardly the stuff that will stall an army that's really an army group.

People should really try to understand war before parroting NASR NASR NASR in every discourse.

 

[MilSpec]

Hardly a correct or logical understanding of warfare. Your understanding only holds true if the entirety of a strike corps parks itself in an area roughly 6-8 football fields. That is not practiced, even at Corps headquarters.

The divisional responsibility for an American division is something of the order of 120 km length by 220 km depth today. (During the Cold war, the numbers were obviously less, somewhere in the region of 12km by 20 km).Even assuming an IA division being just 10% as effective as the US, you get an area roughly 12kmx22km. Needless to say, that's way way bigger than even a Strategic mega ton nuke can take care of.

Furthermore, the IA armored formations whilst in attack follow the traditional NATO formations, with a maximum of 1 armored regiment (tank battalion) spread out over some 1.5-2 km. That's the biggest target NASR can hope to aim for. Not big enough for a "Corps Killer", is it?

Next, the IA has been drilling for NBC warfare since the 80s, and tactics have been developed to continue operations right through a contaminated battlefield, if need be. Just because you nuke an area doesn't mean it's impassable for the IA.

Also, the IA wants to further thin out its forces to mitigate the impact of a TNW. Thus the increased numbers of Attack helis (279-330), more preponderance to CAS and MRBL over traditional artillery, and use of sensor fused Cluster munitions. The IA intends to use them to offset the numerical inferiority they will face due to thinning out of the front.

And finally, the PA might be training to take on a larger foe, but at field levels, the offensive arms of the IA are expected to fight and advance against numerical superiority, which is all the more necessary given the need for rapid advances. So they are just as trained, if not better, for battling numerical odds.

What that shows, is the inherent flaw in actually using a TNW. It basically does nothing out of the ordinary, but comes at a horrifying strategic cost for the user. A single TNW would at best wipe out a battalion and render a brigade ineffective. Hardly the stuff that will stall an army that's really an army group.

People should really try to understand war before parroting NASR NASR NASR in every discourse.

Wow, you have very high expectations. the bottom line for everything from Air force, Army, doctrines etc etc is NASR, THE END...of discussion that is.... unless it's the navy, (then it is Nasr on a boat!)

 

[Viper0011.]

The divisional responsibility for an American division is something of the order of 120 km length by 220 km depth today.

Furthermore, the IA armored formations whilst in attack follow the traditional NATO formations, with a maximum of 1 armored regiment (tank battalion) spread out over some 1.5-2 km. That's the biggest target NASR can hope to aim for. Not big enough for a "Corps Killer", is it?

Next, the IA has been drilling for NBC warfare since the 80s, and tactics have been developed to continue operations right through a contaminated battlefield, if need be..

I know warfare more than you can imagine. You post sounds like shi*t written from a war movie and discovery channel. No reality. See my answers to your bold statements above:

1) Please don't teach me American division strength and formation. I think I know it a LOT more than you. What you clearly missed, is NATO and the US forces don't always follow same tactics. The US military is very dynamic in nature. They create and practice strategies according to the threat perception. This would become a separate topic if I kept writing about it so let's leave it to the concept.

2) 1.5-2 KM is not that much of an area, its like 1 mile. Generally speaking, you take out half of that one mile....you've destroyed the core strength of the entire unit. If there are damaged vehicles stuck in many different places, whatever left out of the unit, can't move, has half the core destroyed and majority of tanks taken out. See what happened to the Iraqi military. So learn the reality instead of your perception of what reality should be.

3) War in a contaminated battlefield.....really?? See the above 2 points, damaged and stopped strike corps (whatever is left out of those), will not be moving forward and will see more attacks. When you have people in panic, with majority of armored protection gone, you expect them to actually do "Warfare" in a large "contaminated" area???? What are you 4 years old? with what? supermen using rifles and sub machine guns beating the hostile weather?

The reality is, the Indian threat has been neutralized by Pakistan and China. Next war with India, will actually be a two front war due to the tighter economic integration between Pakistan and China. Pakistan is on its way to become one of the top 20 military powers, starting in the next 3-5 years.

So at this time, India will have to join the "peace process". Otherwise, All India, All Pakistan and about half of China will be gone in a nuclear exchange. Not sure if it makes any sense to write jingoistic, macho crap on here in favor of IA for some mental retarded supremacy that actually no longer exist in reality!!!

 

[Didact]

I know warfare more than you can imagine. You post sounds like shi*t written from a war movie and discovery channel. No reality. See my answers to your bold statements above:

1) Please don't teach me American division strength and formation. I think I know it a LOT more than you. What you clearly missed, is NATO and the US forces don't always follow same tactics. The US military is very dynamic in nature. They create and practice strategies according to the threat perception. This would become a separate topic if I kept writing about it so let's leave it to the concept.

2) 1.5-2 KM is not that much of an area, its like 1 mile. Generally speaking, you take out half of that one mile....you've destroyed the core strength of the entire unit. If there are damaged vehicles stuck in many different places, whatever left out of the unit, can't move, has half the core destroyed and majority of tanks taken out. See what happened to the Iraqi military. So learn the reality instead of your perception of what reality should be.

3) War in a contaminated battlefield.....really?? See the above 2 points, damaged and stopped strike corps (whatever is left out of those), will not be moving forward and will see more attacks. When you have people in panic, with majority of armored protection gone, you expect them to actually do "Warfare" in a large "contaminated" area???? What are you 4 years old? with what? supermen using rifles and sub machine guns beating the hostile weather?

The reality is, the Indian threat has been neutralized by Pakistan and China. Next war with India, will actually be a two front war due to the tighter economic integration between Pakistan and China. Pakistan is on its way to become one of the top 20 military powers, starting in the next 3-5 years.

So at this time, India will have to join the "peace process". Otherwise, All India, All Pakistan and about half of China will be gone in a nuclear exchange. Not sure if it makes any sense to write jingoistic, macho crap on here in favor of IA for some mental retarded supremacy that actually no longer exist in reality!!!

Wow, you have very high expectations. the bottom line for everything from Air force, Army, doctrines etc etc is NASR, THE END...of discussion that is.... unless it's the navy, (then it is Nasr on a boat!)

Oh, I understand now what you mean. My apologies for doubting you. But in my defense, I've always been a little slow in picking up social (and now apparently psychological and delusional) cues.

 

[Viper0011.]

Oh, I understand now what you mean. My apologies for doubting you. But in my defense, I've always been a little slow in picking up social (and now apparently psychological and delusional) cues.

Yup, you are right. If you think the IA can fight a battle in contaminated area with majority of the armored protection gone......you must have supermen with rifles that fire kinetic StarTrek type weapons, each LASER can vaporize everything in front of it and supermen win (in contaminated battle space) . Time to really put down the Tom Clancy novel and look around you....and face the reality as difficult as it might be!

 

[MilSpec]

Yup, you are right. If you think the IA can fight a battle in contaminated area with majority of the armored protection gone......you must have supermen with rifles that fire kinetic StarTrek type weapons, each LASER can vaporize everything in front of it and supermen win (in contaminated battle space) . Time to really put down the Tom Clancy novel and look around you....and face the reality as difficult as it might be!

Look up NBC Defense...

@Didact see what I meant.

 

[ACE OF THE AIR]

I know warfare more than you can imagine. You post sounds like shi*t written from a war movie and discovery channel. No reality. See my answers to your bold statements above:

1) Please don't teach me American division strength and formation. I think I know it a LOT more than you. What you clearly missed, is NATO and the US forces don't always follow same tactics. The US military is very dynamic in nature. They create and practice strategies according to the threat perception. This would become a separate topic if I kept writing about it so let's leave it to the concept.

2) 1.5-2 KM is not that much of an area, its like 1 mile. Generally speaking, you take out half of that one mile....you've destroyed the core strength of the entire unit. If there are damaged vehicles stuck in many different places, whatever left out of the unit, can't move, has half the core destroyed and majority of tanks taken out. See what happened to the Iraqi military. So learn the reality instead of your perception of what reality should be.

3) War in a contaminated battlefield.....really?? See the above 2 points, damaged and stopped strike corps (whatever is left out of those), will not be moving forward and will see more attacks. When you have people in panic, with majority of armored protection gone, you expect them to actually do "Warfare" in a large "contaminated" area???? What are you 4 years old? with what? supermen using rifles and sub machine guns beating the hostile weather?

The reality is, the Indian threat has been neutralized by Pakistan and China. Next war with India, will actually be a two front war due to the tighter economic integration between Pakistan and China. Pakistan is on its way to become one of the top 20 military powers, starting in the next 3-5 years.

So at this time, India will have to join the "peace process". Otherwise, All India, All Pakistan and about half of China will be gone in a nuclear exchange. Not sure if it makes any sense to write jingoistic, macho crap on here in favor of IA for some mental retarded supremacy that actually no longer exist in reality!!!

This is in reference to your point #2 & 3. If we look at the Afghan war we see that the US used Daisy Cutter bombs that would clear an area of about the same that you are mentioning. Though these bombs were conventional still they were not used in Iraq. Why?

Comparing the two wars the Afghans were more rag tagged units and did not posses the same kind of Armour divisions the Iraqi Army possessed.

 

[Viper0011.]

This is in reference to your point #2 & 3. If we look at the Afghan war we see that the US used Daisy Cutter bombs that would clear an area of about the same that you are mentioning. Though these bombs were conventional still they were not used in Iraq. Why?

Comparing the two wars the Afghans were more rag tagged units and did not posses the same kind of Armour divisions the Iraqi Army possessed.

I wasn't a commander of the US operations in Iraq or Afghanistan so can't speak to certain reasons. But using Daisy Cutters makes a lot of sense as they were trying to destroy larger areas, including certain caves. And the more TNT you drop, the more damages it would do in a bigger area.

For Iraqi armored corps, there were thousand of Hellfire and Tow missiles, along with A-10's, which through their machine guns can pierce armor nicely. So when you have precision weapons and you want to take out a spread out tank formation, why not use the Apaches, A-10s, Cobras, the Harriers and other air assets, guaranteeing almost a 100% hit to kill ratio?

 

[fatman17]

Depends on how many nuclear armed Nasr Pakistan can deploy. To disrupt an armoured column would require many nuclear warheads. Hopefully it won't come to this MAD scenario.

 

[Stephen Cohen]

@Viper0011.

Cold Start is about massive Firepower superiority

Whether it is ATGM ; MBRL or Tube Arty ; India will always have the advantage

You can also add to it Indian Air Force and Indian Missiles

You may like to READ the following article :

Behind India’s sabre rattling - Asif Ezdi

Now here is an EXCERPT

According to figures given on October 16 by Foreign Secretary Aizaz Chaudhry to the National Assembly’s Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, India had by then fired approximately 36,000 rounds of ammunition in the current cycle of tit-for-tat shooting, while Pakistani troops in response fired about 8,000 rounds. About the same time, “sources close to the Indian home minister” quoted in the India media put the number of rounds fired by India even higher at 50,000. In other words, for every shot fired by Pakistan, India fired about five or six.
The imbalance indicates clearly which side is stoking the fire.

So @Viper0011.

Please understand that India can bring overwhelming firepower superiority to any
battle and front

 

[iby32]

Pakistan using z9 in navy which is helicopter
K8 trainer
F7 fighter
Jf17 fighter
Mbt2000 alkhalid tank
F22p frigates
Hq9 sam
Sh1 self propeld howitzer
And som units of multiple rocket launcher cant remember the name
Ak56 rifles

 

[Dazzler]

Nasr didn't alone neutralized the cold start. Other culprits are:

A100E 300mm mlrs

M109@5 155mm 52 cal

$H-1 155mm 52 cal

E.T.C

@Viper0011.

Cold Start is about massive Firepower superiority

Whether it is ATGM ; MBRL or Tube Arty ; India will always have the advantage

You can also add to it Indian Air Force and Indian Missiles

You may like to READ the following article :

Behind India’s sabre rattling - Asif Ezdi

Now here is an EXCERPT

According to figures given on October 16 by Foreign Secretary Aizaz Chaudhry to the National Assembly’s Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, India had by then fired approximately 36,000 rounds of ammunition in the current cycle of tit-for-tat shooting, while Pakistani troops in response fired about 8,000 rounds. About the same time, “sources close to the Indian home minister” quoted in the India media put the number of rounds fired by India even higher at 50,000. In other words, for every shot fired by Pakistan, India fired about five or six.
The imbalance indicates clearly which side is stoking the fire.

So @Viper0011.

Please understand that India can bring overwhelming firepower superiority to any
battle and front

They were getting rid of expired or soon tobest expired shells at best. You have to think they severely lack quality shells and systems to fire them. Just Bofors as their main arty in last 30 years, pinaka and sketch r fine but the rest is pretty obvious. In a cold start scenario, if it ever occurred, Indian front Columns will be minced in minutes.