CBU 105 the real threat to our armored columns

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

I wonder what type of seeker we have in raad (antiship version) ... May be infrared seeking technology is easy to grab but issue is miniturisation of such seeker ...

Anyways thanks for such a detailed response ...

I don't know about the Ra'ad, but miniaturizing the seeker may not be a big deal these days. Roketsan has an IIR seeker in the works for the UMTAS, which isn't far from what a "HAFR-mini" would be in size and weight.

 

[Arsalan]

Guided skeets (i.e. the triple layered guided puck munitions) are probably very difficult to emulate, but they might be able to try adding a guidance seeker, rocket and control surfaces to the Hafr-1 or Hafr-2. It mean less munitions than what the CBU-105 can deploy, but it might get the job done.

Boss i don't think this will work.
Harf-1 will be single warhead solution, adding guidance to it mean getting our self an anti-tank missile. Why not opt for one directly rather than this lengthy route? Harf-1 wont be able to delivery sub munitions to the target area let alone the target vehicles. CBU-105 is unique in a way that it is a bomb that will delivery multiple guided shots to multiple targets. We need some weapon system that can deliver multiple munitions (that is the easy part) and then try to find an easier alternative way to get those sub munitions be as accurate as possible (the tough part ).

 

[The SC]

No need of air superiority ... it will be enough to stop our army thrust into enemy's territory ... so in cases where we have upper hand and try to aquire enemy territory cbu105 are sufficient to stop us infact to destroy us ...

Not with a TOR and Pantsir-like systems are moving with the columns.. anyway that is not the Pakistani doctrine to go inside India's territories...but most important , only the US seems to have the CBU-105..does India have it?
I have seen a Russian equivalent of it though..

 

[The Accountant]

Not with a TOR and Pantsir-like systems are moving with the columns.. anyway that is not the Pakistani doctrine to go inside India's territories...but most important , only the US seems to have the CBU-105..does India have it?
I have seen a Russian equivalent of it though..

In a war when there is a opportunity you grab it by moving inside the enemy territory that is a way to defend ... you push enemy away from your boundries so they cannot concolidate after a defeat in a particular battle ...

So in case of war we have to move on the other side of the border ...

India do have cbu105 that is the reason we are discussing it at this thread

 

[The SC]

In a war when there is a opportunity you grab it by moving inside the enemy territory that is a way to defend ... you push enemy away from your boundries so they cannot concolidate after a defeat in a particular battle ...

So in case of war we have to move on the other side of the border ...

India do have cbu105 that is the reason we are discussing it at this thread

You move into enemy territory the smart way..to not fall in a trap.. there are many traps that lure one to take it as an opportunity.. so without air cover, it is much prudent to not go in, and with air cover, there should be confirmed intelligence that it is a genuine opportunity to go in and surround you enemy forces or hit hard at them..but you can not stay there indefinitely, for that you need air superiority if not air supremacy..
IMHO, a short to medium range mobile air defence system accompanying the armoured divisions can be a good response to the use, or rather preventing the use of the CBU-105 by downing the carrying fighters..

 

[The Accountant]

You move into enemy territory the smart way..to not fall in a trap.. there are many traps that lure one to take it as an opportunity.. so without air cover, it is much prudent to not go in, and with air cover, there should be confirmed intelligence that it is a genuine opportunity to go in and surround you enemy forces or hit hard at them..but you can not stay there indefinitely, for that you need air superiority if not air supremacy..
IMHO, a short to medium range mobile air defence system accompanying the armoured divisions can be a good response to the use, or rather preventing the use of the CBU-105 by downing the carrying fighters..

We dont have truly mobile medium range sam ... 24 hours air cover is impossible as we dont have that many planes ... cbu 105 can be launched from height and have a bit of range so even near border artilery is not safe ... we got to found alternative ...

 

[Path-Finder]

Chinese Sensor Fuzed Munition?

 

[The SC]

We dont have truly mobile medium range sam ... 24 hours air cover is impossible as we dont have that many planes ... cbu 105 can be launched from height and have a bit of range so even near border artilery is not safe ... we got to found alternative ...

Then there is a need for a long range air defense system too, and mobile preferably like the Antay..The best is if these mobile Short-medium-long range systems can be produced locally..

 

[Path-Finder]

Russian.

 

[The Accountant]

Chinese Sensor Fuzed Munition?

Whats the name of this system

 

[Path-Finder]

Whats the name of this system

not sure about the name but it's been in service since 2012 I think.

 

[MastanKhan]

You want to reduce Pakistan army to soldiers for hire? It was a mistake on part of Gen. Zia to get involved in US vs Russia war in Afghanistan and we are paying heavily for it till now, we cannot repeat the same mistake again. Besides, army has been stretched thin fighting insurgency, tackling India and Afghanistan and generally doing the job of every nonfunctional civil Govt. department and you think it would have been a good idea to send a division to Gulf?

Hi,

So another one wants to start this " for hire " . Stop this B S about " for hire : SOB STORY.

What are you doing at the UN ---how many for hire pak military is at UN.

Read up on the history---all militaries are " for hire " one time or another---.

This alliance was to get pakistan ready for the coming war in the next 5 to 10 years---when Iran would get stronger with conventional weapons.

Zengi made a pact with Salahuddin---he asked Salahuddin to come help him when the crusaders were attacking his capitol---was Salahuddin's army a for hire army---.

How about Tariq Bin Ziyyad's army going to spain---.

To me---you or anyone else who mentions that pak military is not for hire---sounds like a traitor of pakistan to me---.

Because doing that---you have kept the military weaker---because if gone to Yemen---the numbers of military would have increased by around 150000---add the extra equipment---and look at its location on a map---what a power position to be in---just completely neutralized the primary enemy.

Plus total control of jobs in GCC by being in the most dominant position---a job creation of at least 2--3 million people in pakistan---.

Only the TRUE ENEMY of PAKISTAN would have been against this alliance.

 

[CriticalThought]

Hi,

So another one wants to start this " for hire " . Stop this B S about " for hire : SOB STORY.

What are you doing at the UN ---how many for hire pak military is at UN.

Read up on the history---all militaries are " for hire " one time or another---.

This alliance was to get pakistan ready for the coming war in the next 5 to 10 years---when Iran would get stronger with conventional weapons.

Zengi made a pact with Salahuddin---he asked Salahuddin to come help him when the crusaders were attacking his capitol---was Salahuddin's army a for hire army---.

How about Tariq Bin Ziyyad's army going to spain---.

To me---you or anyone else who mentions that pak military is not for hire---sounds like a traitor of pakistan to me---.

Because doing that---you have kept the military weaker---because if gone to Yemen---the numbers of military would have increased by around 150000---add the extra equipment---and look at its location on a map---what a power position to be in---just completely neutralized the primary enemy.

Plus total control of jobs in GCC by being in the most dominant position---a job creation of at least 2--3 million people in pakistan---.

Only the TRUE ENEMY of PAKISTAN would have been against this alliance.

If it had been just limited to Yemen, I would be all for it. But based on recent development, the government and Pakistan army have shown great prudence and far-sightedness in predicting that this is escalating into a sectarian Iran vs. rest of the world conflict. Last time, Iraq, an upsurging Muslim power was used as a pawn and the result was dragging back the economies of both Iraq and Iran for many years. Expensive weapons were sold to both sides by international powers, yet the result was merely a stalemate. Now, Saudi Arabia is being sucked into another round. This is not Saudi Arabia's war, it is a war that is designed by major world powers to further their interests. Everyone who engages in this war will be worse off and will become economically backward. This is one game we should not be playing at all.

 

[Hulk]

Hi,

Pakistan is broke--they can't buy aircraft---saudia arabia is broke---where the f--- you indians come up with your stupid thinking---.

WTF amount do you think it is costing the saudis / GCC right now for this war in yemen---. It is costing GCC close to 10-20 billion dollars a year---and that too with poor results.

They just signed a deal for 100 billion and it could grow to as much as 350 billion dollars---.

Mastan bhai Pakistani Army ko agar paisa dikh raha hota na, chodte nahi. That much you should trust them.

 

[PaklovesTurkiye]

the only way we should support is for peace keeping mission accepted by both KSA and Iran ...

Has Iran ever asked Pakistan about anything? Why the fuk we will oblige to Iran?

KSA and Iran are not equal for us. Time to deal with them separately.