What's new

How different is it?

Jango

SENIOR MODERATOR
Joined
Sep 12, 2010
Messages
21,530
Reaction score
99
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan

Start watching from 22:00, for about 7-8 minutes.

My question is, that how much different is this to the way Pak Army fights the Taliban in FATA?

What is the general range of contact, and then is it more man to man than this? i.e, do you just sit there waiting for Artillery or PAF (like in this video mostly), or go closer to the enemy.

Of course the terrain is much more hilly in FATA compared to this to maybe that also comes into play, the guy on top has a advantage. And mountains might also interfere with artillery.

You also see that the rear HQ has a full computer setup and coordinates the attack, does PA also employ technology like this? The coordination center having all these computers etc etc etc?

If folks like blain2, Xeric and Icarus etc reply, will be much appreciated. First hand experience.

And is there some PA video like this providing insight?

P.S: those ANA are really kind of bravish, no vests, no helmets!!! no nothing!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.

Start watching from 22:00, for about 7-8 minutes.

My question is, that how much different is this to the way Pak Army fights the Taliban in FATA?

What is the general range of contact, and then is it more man to man than this? i.e, do you just sit there waiting for Artillery or PAF (like in this video mostly), or go closer to the enemy.

Of course the terrain is much more hilly in FATA compared to this to maybe that also comes into play, the guy on top has a advantage. And mountains might also interfere with artillery.

You also see that the rear HQ has a full computer setup and coordinates the attack, does PA also employ technology like this? The coordination center having all these computers etc etc etc?

If folks like blain2, Xeric and Icarus etc reply, will be much appreciated. First hand experience.

And is there some PA video like this providing insight?

P.S: those ANA are really kind of bravish, no vests, no helmets!!! no nothing!

(As per my knowledge.)


Pakistan Army fights generally with worse conditions. Talking about a small company here.
These guys were fighting too far away from the enemy fire, compared to Pakistan.

There are two types of engagements:

Defensive and offensive.

Talking about offensive first, usually the enemy camps/hideouts/training centers are bombed by F-16s. A small position is usually raided with extreme stealth till the point of engage.
If the enemy numbers surplus or it's an large-scale operation, artillery and Cobra are always up and running.

Defensive is usually surprise attack from enemy, where they take you with sudden fires of RPGs. Usually the men at these posts are able to handle the pressure, or call for backup from nearest possible position of QRF in some cases. If the number of enemies surplus your ability, artillery or Cobra is usually in action.

In some cases, for example attack on a position by several hundreds of militants like recently (2-week fight with 300+ militants), it is actively monitored by company commander and commanding officers. They analyse these situations and plan on what to do next.

Let's take imaginary idea of a post in Waziristan with about 30 troops. Suddenly there is an attack starting with RPG fires and ground troops who uses the stealth of terrain and night to close in visual range and start heavy firing. All men respond as soon as possible, and report back to the nearest (respective) base. After short series of questions, the CO is given words of motivation and asked to fight. They kill about 10 men and estimated attackers were guessed to be about 15-30. However there has been no reduction in the intensity of firing or density of militants. They seem to be storming in. The CO calls for backup and the QRF arrives on spot and engages from different point (depending on type of position and terrain/nature). More militants are seen killed and several soldiers face casualties. Some more men arrive at scene and the area is meanwhile being analysed. After some hours of fighting there is no reduction in the intensity of fight even with about 70 active men. Depending on the terrain and nature of engagement again, artillery is called for. After artillery fires, you get en estimate on how many the militants are, say about 200 in this case. The artillery did not satisfy the need and Cobra reports in for pounding. The last part differs.

And latter on what happens is in this video, (PS the titles and comments are wrong):

 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
Nuclear dear, i'l be with you on this soon.
 
.
The defensive part is fine.

But what I wanted to know is that when the PA conducts these kind of patrols, what is the general engagement range for them? And then, when you see the Brits using a com set to contact Rear HQ, then call in precision air strike etc etc and all the flashy computer room thing, does PA have it and does it employ it?

And when patrolling, the difference that I see is the vehicle. PA is Mitsubishi and Toyota, while a MRAP type vehicle is more suitable. Now there are limitations in budget etc etc, but I think that this is a major issue. The old Armor plate on the side does do the job sometimes, but still keeps you exposed.

What I infer is that the PA experience is more rugged, and more close combat than the one seen in the vid and generally Afghanistan. Maybe it's just due to the different terrain.

My personal guess is that PA gets more kills through a soldier killing somebody on the spot, rather than a air-strike or artillery doing the job all the time.
 
. .
The defensive part is fine.

But what I wanted to know is that when the PA conducts these kind of patrols, what is the general engagement range for them? And then, when you see the Brits using a com set to contact Rear HQ, then call in precision air strike etc etc and all the flashy computer room thing, does PA have it and does it employ it?

And when patrolling, the difference that I see is the vehicle. PA is Mitsubishi and Toyota, while a MRAP type vehicle is more suitable. Now there are limitations in budget etc etc, but I think that this is a major issue. The old Armor plate on the side does do the job sometimes, but still keeps you exposed.

What I infer is that the PA experience is more rugged, and more close combat than the one seen in the vid and generally Afghanistan. Maybe it's just due to the different terrain.

While patrolling, they fire at target as soon as it's in sight. The target is ordered to stop and if they flee, they are chased, if they resist, they are shot. And patrolling team usually engages in sight..

Inside the CO's jeep:

27zlwea.jpg
 
.
While patrolling, they fire at target as soon as it's in sight. The target is ordered to stop and if they flee, they are chased, if they resist, they are shot. And patrolling team usually engages in sight..

Inside the CO's jeep:
dcblzn.jpg

Haha, i remember this holder very fondly!!! Had some encounters with it years back!!!:lol:


Nice kit with the soldiers. Is it standard now or only on select units? And there is NVG holder on the helmet, is it also standard now?

Room clearance report! Room clear sir!!:):tup: around 00:20

At 3:00, is that a call to artillery?

Judging from these 2 vids, and comparing both the armies, it seems that PAK army is much more in the face and close up to the Taliban than the ISAF in Afg. Yes, it is just one vid, and generalization may not be very accurate, but it seems like it.

PA seems to go more to the enemy and get them with infantry, while the ISAF vids showed that they just try to hold off the enemy with a MG or something, and then try to hold them off for enough time for the airstrike or artillery.

BTW, Xeric, do you mind telling us your arm? Infantry or Artillery?
 
. . .

Latest posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom