Of course
Indian CSD is completely flawed and is more of a fantasy than reality. India plans to form
10-13 IBGs with about 5-6 inf/armd regts and 3 artillery regts plus supporting arms. That would mean about 7-8 thousand men per IBG. The drawbacks of CSD as conceived by me are :
1)Attainibilty of Objectives:
THe objectiv of CSD is to make shallow incursions of about 70-80 km deep but recent exercises have shown that the IA advanced at a rste of 10km per day. Now if we put them against a real enemy the rate would further decrease to atleast 5km. So 70-80km would require 2 weeks if everything went smoothly and they manage to catch us sleeping
2) Sustenance of objectives:
Even if we consider that IA was successful in making a 70-80km deep penetration even then it would be difficult to to sustain such a force of 13 IBGs not only logistically but those brigade groups would have to fight against the whole of PA before there main strike elements are mobilised.
3)Mindset of field Commanders:
The breed of IA officers that have been groomed according to CSD doctrine will have their aims limited only to the shallow penetrations and if a general war, which would surely, breaks out then they would find themselves in further exploiting their gains and drawing new plans to capture the New objectives that their seniors may assign them.
4) Limited number of IBGs:
only ten to 13 IBGs are being raised and some of them will be against china as well so if we take the amount of IBGs specially against PA to be 10 even then they might not be that much of trouble. They will just oversized brigades and until reinforced by their strike corps(which will tkae atleast 3 weeks) they would have to face the whole of PA.
5) Retreating:
GIven the fact that the initial objective of IBGS would be only 70-80km their commanders would not have that much flexibility especially at tactical level. They would not be able to make tactical retreats as their depth will be to shallow and if they start retreating then the whole op would be a failure.
6) Concentration of PA:
Again related to sustenance of Objective.Historically IA has tried to utilize its numbers by opening new fronts and sectors but in this case their brigade sized forces would be operating in a very limited area. On the other hand PA would be able to concentrate its forces against IBGs and obliterate them.
7)PAF:
Similarly, PAF would be able to concentrate its efforts especially related to CAS in few sectors and will be relieved of providing support to the whole of PA throughout Pakistan. Same goes for army AD and aviation.
8) Conservation of Strike elements of PA:
Recently many indp armd/mech bdes have sprung up in PA which can be used to tie down the IBGs in addition to holding corps while the strike corps can be preserved purely of offensive ops. And if the strike elements of PA are able to make successful attacks on India,IA would have to commit its strike elements against them and wouldn't be able to reinforce the IBGs.
9) Predictable avenues of Approach:
The areas and sectors going to be attacked by the IA can be predicted. The intelligence will also play an important role in this regard. Then, different obstacles/mines can be placed apart from the mobilisation of PA.
10)Last Nail in the Coffin of CSD:
Though I agree that CSD might have been useful between the period 2004-2017 while about 1/3 of our army was deployed in FATA in COIN ops but now we having been successfull in those ops have fully concentrated our efforts against IA. With the restructuring of FC the 11/12 corps are now available as reserves.
11)Condition of IA:
The lack of synergy between the Army and the IAF is one of the foremost concerns among the Indian planners. They are also lacking in spare parts and ammo. As of 2018 IA is also short of about 7000 officers. The lack of SP artillery and AD is also a concern. Induction of 100 k9s hasn't changed much, same goes for apaches as the PA will be able to concentrate its AD as explained above.
Also I don't understand why why the Indians compare CSD with blitzkrieg. They are two totally different concepts. I think that they consider anything involving amrour and inf in coordination with airforce as blitzkrieg.
@PanzerKiel @Signalian @Inception-06 and everyone else, feel free to criticize.
So @Desert Fox 1 keep bringing in scenarios that he can present as outdated in the first 5 slides of his presentation 
