SorryNotSorry
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2017
- Messages
- 1,530
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Here for the off topic 1965 debate.
Indian Army Tanks vs Pakistan Army Tanks : Who would win?
- Thread starter INDIAPOSITIVE
- Start date
Indus Pakistan
BANNED
- Joined
- May 7, 2012
- Messages
- 20,487
- Reaction score
- 182
- Country
- Location
India has nearly 7 times greater population then Pakistan. I think it is safe to say Pakistan cannot be even considered a "near peer competitor".
No I would not but that does not mean I am not intrigued as to why India did not do that over six decades. Surely it has size. Use it and settle the problem once for all time. That is what they did to Germany.
Cybernetics
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2016
- Messages
- 841
- Reaction score
- 48
- Country
- Location
That was in the context of the 1965 Indo-Pakistan War, you mentioned 60's right? India fielded about 3 times more troops than Pakistan with a comparable armoured force.
In the mountain regions, India will have a hard time effectively fielding its population advantage over Pakistan. In the deserts India and Pakistan had a comparable armoured force. A deciding factor would be doctrine, organisation, anti-tank and air/anti-air assets.
The question is that will India be able to mount a desert storm like operation against Pakistan? It requires coordination of many high tech weapon systems. China developed "assassin's mace" weapons to destroy the cohesive core of such an operation. A half-assed assault on Pakistan would yield little results. Anything short of a desert storm operation wouldn't be able to have a chance against Pakistan. India lacks many of the backbone infrastructure and technologies to facilitate a desert storm operation, a tank on tank war will not be decisive in the current context of Pakistan and India.
Last edited:
Joe Shearer
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2009
- Messages
- 27,493
- Reaction score
- 162
- Country
- Location
You never cease to jolt people into thinking properly and out of any lazy analysis.
In very short, the Indian political leadership has always lacked the killer instinct. Instances:
- in 1948, with the Indian Army threateningly close to Muzaffarabad, Nehru dumped his case into the lap of the UN, and ensured perpetual enmity with Pakistan. There are reasons to respect what Nehru did for India in the domain of building democratic values and building democratic process (Kerala was an ugly exception), but he was clueless and clumsy in his assessment of a strategic situation, and that is putting it mildly.
- In 1965, with 2/3 of war materials remaining, the then COAS, who had helped to heal the Indian Army that was traumatised by defeat at the hands of the Chinese, reported to Shastri that it might not be possible to continue for more than a week or ten days longer. In the ensuing peace negotiations, Haji Pir Pass was returned to Pakistan, and still continues to offer a position of domination of Indian lines.
- In 1971, it was clearly understood: it was creation of space for a Bangladesh interim government and nothing more. Only the unexpected field leadership of operational commanders, revelling in the availability of resources hitherto denied them on every single occasion, the unexpected collapse of the Pakistani leadership in East Pakistan, and the sense of strategic restraint that Indira Gandhi wisely exercised, with the understanding and cooperation of her military commanders, kept India out of West Pakistan, and a good thing too. This was a fit case for restraint, although the peace agreements at Simla were not helpful.
- In 1999, the IAF was ordered to stick strictly to the Indian side of the LOC. This was at a time that the PAF was at a disadvantage; no preparation, the airfield at Skardu not fit for forward operations, spares in short supply, munitions in short supply. However, in that tense atmosphere, that was perhaps the right decision; alternative history is seductive but not productive.
Your point is valid.
However, so, too, is another point of view; maybe that is a good thing. Maybe an Indian leadership determined to drive things to a favourable conclusion might have created an eternal injustice. I don't think that Pakistan deserved, or deserves to be broken in war or in peace. I agree that it makes for a boring military spectacle.
@Cybernetics
Thank you for your excellent, rational and objective analysis. Your posts were very good, and it was a pleasure reading them. They also displayed a thorough knowledge of the facts, and that made them all the more interesting.
1. Limited petroleum reserve.
2. Limited ammunition reserve
3. Limited spare parts
4. Pressure From UN and Super Powers.
5. No one want to annex pakistan .
Vapnope
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2015
- Messages
- 6,646
- Reaction score
- 15
- Country
- Location
1971, 1984 and now trying for an isolation. What else is called an annexation?
Cuirassier
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2017
- Messages
- 1,218
- Reaction score
- 10
- Country
- Location
Asal Uttar was won more due to well implaced anti tank gunners with recoiless rifles, not tanks themselves. Plus the terrain was also utilized to bog down the incoming tanks.
U got the meaning of annexation completely Wrong. Google it
Chaosmaster
BANNED
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2017
- Messages
- 244
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
These were the tactics and this is exactly why battle of asal uttar was mentioned to show the benefits of sound tactics.
khanmubashir
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2014
- Messages
- 1,889
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
What bs
There is no deployed arjun mk2 it's project still in infancy
As for. Armor protection agianst apfsd does that mean it's superior to m1and leopard 2 as they were taken out by single atgm strike of decades old variant and writer bs Ing about Arjun can take multiple hits of anti tank more of bs from bsers
There is no deployed arjun mk2 it's project still in infancy
As for. Armor protection agianst apfsd does that mean it's superior to m1and leopard 2 as they were taken out by single atgm strike of decades old variant and writer bs Ing about Arjun can take multiple hits of anti tank more of bs from bsers
Joe Shearer
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2009
- Messages
- 27,493
- Reaction score
- 162
- Country
- Location
A dissolution of a nation-state; a complete substitution of the annexed nation's or annexed region's institutions by the annexing nation's institutions.
Nothing happened in 1971 to West Pakistan; that wasn't by accident.
I don't know what you think could have happened in 1984 to see it as a possibility of annexation.
Isolation as a rogue state does not mean annexation. Not at all.
Signalian
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2015
- Messages
- 10,608
- Reaction score
- 305
- Country
- Location
@kahonapyarhai
Going down the comparison lane of an MBT vs MBT will still leave lots of doubts in head. You can dig deep into the threads of information on various type of MBT's and have a look yourself. As soon as AK is discussed, it will be immediately compared with T-90 and when AZ is discussed a query will rise about its performance against T-72 or T-90. Many members have in mind that AK will just pulverize T-72's and slice them like knife through warm butter or maybe only T-90 can give a tough time to AK, specifications can make anybody think like that. Lesser armor, poor auto loader, smaller engine, no night fighting capability, ERA or no ERA, active CM's or not...everything can be and has been compensated through training over and over again, through discipline, through ethics of maintaining an MBT, through understanding the MBT by driving , firing, loading, reloading, repairing, taking orders under pressure and i'm talking about both armies. These armies are not western armies with almost perfect and up to date weaponry, with almost flawless procedures and contingencies in place for handling weapons. In PA and IA, if a JCO has to take his medal-riddled decorated uniform shirt off to clean an MBT for an inspection, he will not think twice and make a rag out of that shirt which holds his name, rank, medals and formation sign; the most proudest achievements of his life.
Some members satisfy themselves by insisting on a 1 on 1 scenario to prove that a certain MBT is better than the other, such a scenario will be very very rare. Two lone tanks meeting each other miles away from all the action? away from their unit? do you know what that concludes? Either they are deserters or very bad navigators. Military condemns both and trains its soldiers to give best output. This scenario reflects badly on their respective Troop leader, squadron commander, 2IC, CO, their regiment and the Military they represent. Getting cut off from your formation is considered a liability which no one would want on himself.
1965, Pakistan Army's 1st Armored Division landed in an ambush set-up by IA infantry and lost many MBT's. The lack of Pakistani infantry support was cited as a cause. But- Pakistan Army's lone regiment, 25 Cavalry, thwarted IA's 1st Armored Division's attack without any infantry. Do you see what I'm trying to say? In Khem Karan scenario, infantry was seen inevitable for success, however no one talked about infantry in Chawinda because the MBT's of 25 Cavalry stood on their own.
Its the deployment of assets. Its the training regimen. Its the field commander's leadership. Its the soldier's morale.
Both PA and IA have formidable MBT's, they may have differences in specifications and armor but they have mobility, fire power and protection which qualifies them as MBT's. It now depends upon their function and deployment in operational combat by their respective armies. Indian Army following the CSD doctrine will use IBG's consisting of Armor and Mechanised infantry armed with T-72/90 and BMP-2 to penetrate different locations inside Pakistan whereas Pakistan Army will use its MBT's to find a soft spot in Indian Army's lines and exploit it to tilt the tide in its favor. For PA, it will be undesirable to lose MBT's in a defensive posture as its the main offensive weapon which is supposed to cross over into Indian territory. Now, IA enjoys this luxury. Since IA has a large inventory of MBT's as well as a large reserve also, IA can use this weapon with much more flexibility than PA. If PA loses a few regiments of T-80 and AK, it will have to go on defensive in the desert. No other PA MBT currently has mobility in the desert which fits the combat doctrine perfectly for a commander commanding a formation in the desert. T-85 III's have been seen training in semi-desert areas many times. T-85 III could be a last resort used by PA to fill in the gaps, but the desert area is quite huge, its not just a chunk, its a massive piece of land. For this reason PA is willing to use AH-1 Gunships and UCAV's to cover this land. PAF has made a new base close to the desert also. If IA infiltrates with lets suppose 4 x armor formations, brigade sized, just in Sindh, the whole 5-Corps will spring into action and will remain engaged for the rest of the war. In order to avoid using the strike elements of 5-Corps such as 25th Mechanised Div, PA will use infantry formations to hold intersections, Aviation to seek out and destroy IA armor in hit and run tactics and keep MBT's in reserve to counter-attack the flanks of Indian advance or just go after the supply lines to halt the advance and dry the Indian armor of ammo and fuel. If all else fails, PA might use tactical nukes to thwart further pouring of Indian Army into Pakistani territory. Once the Indian formation is tied down (whether conventionally or through use of nuclear weapon), then Pakistan Army will try to infiltrate and hold any area inside Indian territory to engage the main Indian thrust which maybe division sized or Corps sized. This is the main aim of Pakistan Army in any case, to not let India cross into Pakistan and keep the battle on the Indian side.
Facing each other, the MBT's will score direct hits or lucky hits, using any type of ammunition, whether ATGM's firing from long range, AP rounds at decent range or even HEAT rounds at very short ranges (if out of AP rounds). The Army which wins a skirmish will need to re-collect itself again and carry on the attack, which will be very difficult without reinforcements. Damaged MBT's may take hours and days to get fixed. The more an Army advances into enemy territory, the stiffer the resistance will become. PA and IA specialize in defensive postures, unfortunately, to my disappointment at least. AK will destroy T-72, T-90 and Arjun ; and vice versa. Nether AK nor Arjun is invincible. How their respective armies cover their weaknesses and bring forth their strengths is whats to be seen. Once PA starts losing its main MBT's, then even T-72's will be seen a formidable threat against T-59 II and it will become a numbers game. PA has roughly 300 upgraded M-48 in reserve, IA has roughly 1000 MBT in reserve. So overall, IA carries edge in numbers of MBT's. Expecting upgraded M-48's to face T-90 or T-72 will again be asking too much from the Pattons. It is very much expected from PA to use a mix of MBT, ATGM equipped APC, SAM's gunships and small number of artillery to delay advance of IA armor or lure it towards entrenched PA infantry. Its further expected that PA will use ATGM teams to stop Indian Armor attacks instead of committing strike formations unless necessary.
Pakistan is also looking for a newer MBT, OPlot or VT-4. Both are great MBT's and PA conducts strenuous tests with high standards for induction of MBT's. The comparison of these two MBT's have been discussed to death on different threads. The induction of any one of these MBT's will add a much needed punch for PA armor. AK-II is also in the making and once inducted should be able to take over the mainstay MBT role for PA. This will make finally solve the constant problem of using different types of MBT's by PA. AK-II will be able to take on any MBT in IA inventory. The reserve problem of PA will also get solved. Al-Zarrar MBT is under estimated; if looked closely it carries a very effective cannon 125mm, it is aptly armored and the engine has also been upgraded. The only drawback is its size limitation which hinders installation of a bigger engine for excellent mobility, although current mobility with 730 hp engine is decent. T-59's and T-69's are in retirement stage and will prove handy in infantry formations with good fire support characteristics through L-7 gun.
While T-90 seems to have formed the mainstay of IA, Arjun II should be able to take over this role in the future, although it depends upon Army's interest in Arjun since T-90 is a promising candidate in fulfilling all kinds of roles required by IA. The induction of K-9 SP Artillery is another major step in modernizing IA Armor punch. It plugs a gap which has been evident since decades. AH-64 is an excellent anti-armor platform, if it compliments the IA Armor contingent either in defending territory or advancing inside Pakistan, the much needed attack helicopter cover will be suitably solved. BMP-2 is already a capable IFV-APC with fire support role while transporting troops. Its not just the MBT, but all these supporting factors make IA Armor capability a force to reckon with.
@Ulla @Tipu7
@Joe Shearer
Going down the comparison lane of an MBT vs MBT will still leave lots of doubts in head. You can dig deep into the threads of information on various type of MBT's and have a look yourself. As soon as AK is discussed, it will be immediately compared with T-90 and when AZ is discussed a query will rise about its performance against T-72 or T-90. Many members have in mind that AK will just pulverize T-72's and slice them like knife through warm butter or maybe only T-90 can give a tough time to AK, specifications can make anybody think like that. Lesser armor, poor auto loader, smaller engine, no night fighting capability, ERA or no ERA, active CM's or not...everything can be and has been compensated through training over and over again, through discipline, through ethics of maintaining an MBT, through understanding the MBT by driving , firing, loading, reloading, repairing, taking orders under pressure and i'm talking about both armies. These armies are not western armies with almost perfect and up to date weaponry, with almost flawless procedures and contingencies in place for handling weapons. In PA and IA, if a JCO has to take his medal-riddled decorated uniform shirt off to clean an MBT for an inspection, he will not think twice and make a rag out of that shirt which holds his name, rank, medals and formation sign; the most proudest achievements of his life.
Some members satisfy themselves by insisting on a 1 on 1 scenario to prove that a certain MBT is better than the other, such a scenario will be very very rare. Two lone tanks meeting each other miles away from all the action? away from their unit? do you know what that concludes? Either they are deserters or very bad navigators. Military condemns both and trains its soldiers to give best output. This scenario reflects badly on their respective Troop leader, squadron commander, 2IC, CO, their regiment and the Military they represent. Getting cut off from your formation is considered a liability which no one would want on himself.
1965, Pakistan Army's 1st Armored Division landed in an ambush set-up by IA infantry and lost many MBT's. The lack of Pakistani infantry support was cited as a cause. But- Pakistan Army's lone regiment, 25 Cavalry, thwarted IA's 1st Armored Division's attack without any infantry. Do you see what I'm trying to say? In Khem Karan scenario, infantry was seen inevitable for success, however no one talked about infantry in Chawinda because the MBT's of 25 Cavalry stood on their own.
Its the deployment of assets. Its the training regimen. Its the field commander's leadership. Its the soldier's morale.
Both PA and IA have formidable MBT's, they may have differences in specifications and armor but they have mobility, fire power and protection which qualifies them as MBT's. It now depends upon their function and deployment in operational combat by their respective armies. Indian Army following the CSD doctrine will use IBG's consisting of Armor and Mechanised infantry armed with T-72/90 and BMP-2 to penetrate different locations inside Pakistan whereas Pakistan Army will use its MBT's to find a soft spot in Indian Army's lines and exploit it to tilt the tide in its favor. For PA, it will be undesirable to lose MBT's in a defensive posture as its the main offensive weapon which is supposed to cross over into Indian territory. Now, IA enjoys this luxury. Since IA has a large inventory of MBT's as well as a large reserve also, IA can use this weapon with much more flexibility than PA. If PA loses a few regiments of T-80 and AK, it will have to go on defensive in the desert. No other PA MBT currently has mobility in the desert which fits the combat doctrine perfectly for a commander commanding a formation in the desert. T-85 III's have been seen training in semi-desert areas many times. T-85 III could be a last resort used by PA to fill in the gaps, but the desert area is quite huge, its not just a chunk, its a massive piece of land. For this reason PA is willing to use AH-1 Gunships and UCAV's to cover this land. PAF has made a new base close to the desert also. If IA infiltrates with lets suppose 4 x armor formations, brigade sized, just in Sindh, the whole 5-Corps will spring into action and will remain engaged for the rest of the war. In order to avoid using the strike elements of 5-Corps such as 25th Mechanised Div, PA will use infantry formations to hold intersections, Aviation to seek out and destroy IA armor in hit and run tactics and keep MBT's in reserve to counter-attack the flanks of Indian advance or just go after the supply lines to halt the advance and dry the Indian armor of ammo and fuel. If all else fails, PA might use tactical nukes to thwart further pouring of Indian Army into Pakistani territory. Once the Indian formation is tied down (whether conventionally or through use of nuclear weapon), then Pakistan Army will try to infiltrate and hold any area inside Indian territory to engage the main Indian thrust which maybe division sized or Corps sized. This is the main aim of Pakistan Army in any case, to not let India cross into Pakistan and keep the battle on the Indian side.
Facing each other, the MBT's will score direct hits or lucky hits, using any type of ammunition, whether ATGM's firing from long range, AP rounds at decent range or even HEAT rounds at very short ranges (if out of AP rounds). The Army which wins a skirmish will need to re-collect itself again and carry on the attack, which will be very difficult without reinforcements. Damaged MBT's may take hours and days to get fixed. The more an Army advances into enemy territory, the stiffer the resistance will become. PA and IA specialize in defensive postures, unfortunately, to my disappointment at least. AK will destroy T-72, T-90 and Arjun ; and vice versa. Nether AK nor Arjun is invincible. How their respective armies cover their weaknesses and bring forth their strengths is whats to be seen. Once PA starts losing its main MBT's, then even T-72's will be seen a formidable threat against T-59 II and it will become a numbers game. PA has roughly 300 upgraded M-48 in reserve, IA has roughly 1000 MBT in reserve. So overall, IA carries edge in numbers of MBT's. Expecting upgraded M-48's to face T-90 or T-72 will again be asking too much from the Pattons. It is very much expected from PA to use a mix of MBT, ATGM equipped APC, SAM's gunships and small number of artillery to delay advance of IA armor or lure it towards entrenched PA infantry. Its further expected that PA will use ATGM teams to stop Indian Armor attacks instead of committing strike formations unless necessary.
Pakistan is also looking for a newer MBT, OPlot or VT-4. Both are great MBT's and PA conducts strenuous tests with high standards for induction of MBT's. The comparison of these two MBT's have been discussed to death on different threads. The induction of any one of these MBT's will add a much needed punch for PA armor. AK-II is also in the making and once inducted should be able to take over the mainstay MBT role for PA. This will make finally solve the constant problem of using different types of MBT's by PA. AK-II will be able to take on any MBT in IA inventory. The reserve problem of PA will also get solved. Al-Zarrar MBT is under estimated; if looked closely it carries a very effective cannon 125mm, it is aptly armored and the engine has also been upgraded. The only drawback is its size limitation which hinders installation of a bigger engine for excellent mobility, although current mobility with 730 hp engine is decent. T-59's and T-69's are in retirement stage and will prove handy in infantry formations with good fire support characteristics through L-7 gun.
While T-90 seems to have formed the mainstay of IA, Arjun II should be able to take over this role in the future, although it depends upon Army's interest in Arjun since T-90 is a promising candidate in fulfilling all kinds of roles required by IA. The induction of K-9 SP Artillery is another major step in modernizing IA Armor punch. It plugs a gap which has been evident since decades. AH-64 is an excellent anti-armor platform, if it compliments the IA Armor contingent either in defending territory or advancing inside Pakistan, the much needed attack helicopter cover will be suitably solved. BMP-2 is already a capable IFV-APC with fire support role while transporting troops. Its not just the MBT, but all these supporting factors make IA Armor capability a force to reckon with.
@Ulla @Tipu7
@Joe Shearer
Joe Shearer
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2009
- Messages
- 27,493
- Reaction score
- 162
- Country
- Location
Electrifying.
This post, and that earlier posted by @Tipu7, ought to be framed in gold, and any member wishing to take part in discussions of this sort - Pakistan Army, Indian Army, armoured forces, doctrine, strategy and practical constraints, the scenarios possible today, additional scenarios tomorrow - should be asked to qualify through a short quiz on the material.
My sincere and deep respect to you both.
This post, and that earlier posted by @Tipu7, ought to be framed in gold, and any member wishing to take part in discussions of this sort - Pakistan Army, Indian Army, armoured forces, doctrine, strategy and practical constraints, the scenarios possible today, additional scenarios tomorrow - should be asked to qualify through a short quiz on the material.
My sincere and deep respect to you both.
Similar threads
