Mechanised Divisions Pakistan Army

[Basel]

i meant 12.7mm compared to 25mm or 30mm on an AFV.



The talha/M-113 can be modified in different ways. Maaz with Green Arrow and 12.7mm.

View attachment 439335

The three main aspects of an AFV. Fire power, mobility and protection. In this case, transport also which both IFV and APC are capable of.

IFV's are usually less armoured than an MBT, except a few like IDF APC/IFV Namer. This makes them vulnerable in direct combat. This is where the difference between direct confrontation and just a battle taxi role comes into play. The weight of an AFV increases as more armor, weapons, ammo, electronic gadgets are put onto it for protection and modernisation. The T-55 MBT started at around 35-56 Ton. The modernised variants are over 40 T. Namer IFV is 60 T. Acharzit APC is based on T-55 and is 44T.
This gives an idea that PA is confident bringing in 36+ Ton AFV like T-59, T-69 etc into direct combat. The other MBt's are 40+ T.

VN-17 is based on light tank VT-5. This light tank has been made out of necessity to operate in regions where heavier MBT's find difficult to operate. Still the Chinese brought it up to 33+ T weight category taking it to 36 T with armor upgrade package which makes it equal to T-59 in weight. VN-17 is 30 T in weight with 1000 HP engine so adding more weight (armor) and bringing it upto 35-36 T should not affect its mobility to a great extent.

VN-17 has a reactive armor, what kind? ERA or NERA. It shouldnt be ERA which is harmful to infantry.

Coming to fire power, VN-17's ATGM capability is good against armored targets and its 35mm auto cannon can be a good AAA weapon to combat UAV's or light helicopters just like AD Bofors guns. Against ground targets it could take out light vehicles and provide fire power at a good range. The 7.62mm can be used to engage infantry.

The major issue still stays.

If the IFV is lost in direct combat, how will the soldiers be transported to keep pace with the advance. Although this can still apply to M-113 also which can be lost in combat to mines and indirect fire but the probability of M-113 survival remains more because it might not be used in direct combat. The Maaz series don't carry troops so losing an ATGM carrier is still a loss but wont affect operational capability to a massive extent.

The cost and price factor will always be there.
Firstly because VN-17 carries lesser troops than M-113 so a VN-17 mechanised battalion would require more vehicles than an M-113 mechanised battalion.
Secondly, the cost price of a VN-17 is more than that of M-113. PA can probably raise 3-4 M-113 battalions instead of 1-2 VN-17 battalions. Conversely, PA can raise another MBT regiment instead of raising 1-2 VN-17 battalions. And this another factor to be considered, at nearly the same cost, PA can modernise more T-59 to AZ standard than inducting new VN-17's. Inducting an MBt will increase PA's offensive capability than inducting an IFV.

Another point is that the need of the hour is an MRAP, not exactly an IFV.

How would you place a mix of APC/IFV in a mechanised brigade or mechanised division considering operational capabilities?


The discussions which i have had with you in the past and the intelligent calibre that you possess, i expected a better reply from you



A-10 uses gattling cannon which is different. Also A-10 angle of attack is from top aiming for turret top where armor is thinnest.

Then 40 or 60mm gun can be adopted to enhance effects of DU rounds.

 

[Avijit]

Some time back a member asked me if there are any armour regiments in Pakistan Army's mechanised divisions so i have some info to share.

Pakistan Army has 2 Mechanised Divisions, 25th Mechanised Division and 26th Mechanised Divisions. The 17th and 14th still carry the designation of Infantry Divisions.

Theoretically the 25th and 26th are mechanised divisions but in fact these 2 divisions are heavily armoured and have more strength (in infantry) than even 1st Armoured and 6th Armoured Divisions of Pakistan Army. The reason the 25th and 26th Mechanised Divisions are called Mechanised because naming them Armoured Divisions will cause concern to India as well as to USA that:

1. PA has stationed an Armoured Division (26th Mechanised Div) near to border in Bahawalpur, Southern Punjab. Placing an armoured division next to border is the intent of attacking an enemy otherwise armoured assets considered as offensive forces are not kept next to borders. This is another reason why the 6th Armoured Division is placed in Gujranwala and not in Sialkot, whereas its main area of action is considered to be Sialkot region.

2. PA will have 4 Armoured Divisions (1st and 6th, 25th and 26th) while IA has 3 Armoured Divisions and this will cause further alarm in India and bring pressure from USA to downsize strength. This is why the V-Corps has a few Independent Armoured Brigades and it is considered that V-Corps Armoured assets will be used under one HQ in war as an Armoured Division.

PA's Mechanised Division:

A Brigade: Armoured Regiment + Armoured Regiment + Mechanised Infantry Battalion.

B Brigade: Armoured Regiment + Armoured Regiment + Mechanised Infantry Battalion.

C Brigade: Armoured Regiment + Mechanised Infantry Battalion + Mechanised Infantry Battalion.

Thats 5 X Armoured Regiments and 4 X Mechanised Infantry Battalions in one Mechanised Division. I havent included Support Brigades and Divisional troops. Each Mechanised Infantry Battalion has 50 APC.

Those who consider that Rahim yar Khan is an area where IA CSD can succeed should keep in mind that the whole stretch is protected by a Division which has 220 MBT at its disposal. plus an Independent Armoured Brigade having 88 MBT.

@Ulla @Northern @django @Mentee @Khafee @tps77 @CriticalThought @Baloch Pakistani

India has 7-8 Armoured Divisions by that logic. 3 Armd Divs and 4-5 RAPIDs (which are Mech Divs, basically). India has a 44-battalion strong Mech force. That's 5 Divs. Add to that 60+ Armd Regts. Some are obviously distributed amongst various other Inf Divs and Independent Armd/Inf Bdes and Bde Gps. Also, India is expanding its Mech force by making more RAPIDs.

 

[Signalian]

Cannon can fire HE fragmentation as well as armour piercing tungsten rounds. That is much more firepower than a 12.7mm.

Agreed,the utilisation of a bigger cannon is certainly there. PA already uses a combination of mortars and RPG to provide effective firepower to take out all targets.

As per my understanding, ATGM mounted M113 (or derivatives) are meant to target enemy tanks while employing some camouflage methods (bushes or natural obstacles). The pic I posted is of an in service Maaz, not an illustration.

Maaz is used as a defensive weapon. It needs to stand still to fire ATGM. Can HJ-12 fire on the move?

How many tank regiments does PA have??

Not enough, unfortunately.

Considering that PA wants to induct heavier tanks (say Oplot with 1500 hp engine), the M113's will not catch up with Oplot's speed in the desert.

If its a race, then yes.
MBT has a much bigger role to play, being an offensive weapon it stays ahead of APC so needs to be faster. While the APC needs to get from point A to pint B, the MBT has to attack, flank, maneuver to engage enemy etc.

I feel a new IFV platform is inevitable. VN-17 is just a suggestion from my side. It's power to weight ratio is good enough.

VN-17 is a good suggestion no doubt. An indigenous platform of SAAD APC with an extra road wheel and bigger engine is also available as a platform.

If you look at Indian RAPIDs, there are 2x tank regiments (100 MBT) + 2x IFV regiments (100 BMP). It is possible that PA will mirror a similar arrangement with independent armoured brigade groups - as the initial MBT order is to be for 100+ tanks. IFV (with 7 troops) packs more firepower than an APC (with 11 troops).

Most modern armies use the 3+1 config instead of 2+2 in armored brigades. Thats 3 armor regiments and 1 mechanised infantry battalion. The addition of an extra armored regiment gives additional punch.

Regarding the loss of transport to infantry, I have the opinion that in any contact with enemy, troops will be lost as well besides armoured assets.

Its a bit easier to send in troops as reinforcement rather equipment, which is usually short. There are half million reserve men to fill in for suffered casualties but not much replaceable equipment.

Then 40 or 60mm gun can be adopted to enhance effects of DU rounds.

why not just use a 125mm gun

India has 7-8 Armoured Divisions by that logic. 3 Armd Divs and 4-5 RAPIDs (which are Mech Divs, basically). India has a 44-battalion strong Mech force. That's 5 Divs. Add to that 60+ Armd Regts. Some are obviously distributed amongst various other Inf Divs and Independent Armd/Inf Bdes and Bde Gps. Also, India is expanding its Mech force by making more RAPIDs.

The "logic" was political, not statistical.

 

[alimobin memon]

if i have learned right. 12.7mm is capable of penetrating IFV type armors.

 

[Basel]

Agreed,the utilisation of a bigger cannon is certainly there. PA already uses a combination of mortars and RPG to provide effective firepower to take out all targets.

Maaz is used as a defensive weapon. It needs to stand still to fire ATGM. Can HJ-12 fire on the move?

Not enough, unfortunately.


If its a race, then yes.
MBT has a much bigger role to play, being an offensive weapon it stays ahead of APC so needs to be faster. While the APC needs to get from point A to pint B, the MBT has to attack, flank, maneuver to engage enemy etc.

VN-17 is a good suggestion no doubt. An indigenous platform of SAAD APC with an extra road wheel and bigger engine is also available as a platform.


Most modern armies use the 3+1 config instead of 2+2 in armored brigades. Thats 3 armor regiments and 1 mechanised infantry battalion. The addition of an extra armored regiment gives additional punch.


Its a bit easier to send in troops as reinforcement rather equipment, which is usually short. There are half million reserve men to fill in for suffered casualties but not much replaceable equipment.


why not just use a 125mm gun


The "logic" was political, not statistical.

125mm DU rounds will be used by PA tanks and APC need lighter caliber then 125mm to have space, also see how effective Bradleys are with 25mm guns.

PA also have 105mm DU rounds to tackle enemy armour, to me 60mm is good caliber as USSR have also used it on its BMPs too.

 

[Gryphon]

Maaz is used as a defensive weapon. It needs to stand still to fire ATGM. Can HJ-12 fire on the move?

Not enough, unfortunately.


If its a race, then yes.
MBT has a much bigger role to play, being an offensive weapon it stays ahead of APC so needs to be faster. While the APC needs to get from point A to pint B, the MBT has to attack, flank, maneuver to engage enemy etc.

Not much details about HJ-12 available.

Al-Khalid: 324 (7 regiments)
T-80UD: 320 (7 regiments)
Al-Zarrar: 504 (11 regiments)
Type 85-IIAP: 267 (6 regiments)
Al-Khalid 1: 21* (1 regiment - to receive more tanks).
So, that is 32 regiments. How many left with Type 59/69 given that hundreds of such tanks were transferred to FC?

If PA acquires MBTs with better mobility, won't slower APC's force tanks to move slow as well - as infantry is required for most missions?

 

[Signalian]

Not much details about HJ-12 available.

Al-Khalid: 324 (7 regiments)
T-80UD: 320 (7 regiments)
Al-Zarrar: 504 (11 regiments)
Type 85-IIAP: 267 (6 regiments)
Al-Khalid 1: 21* (1 regiment - to receive more tanks).
So, that is 32 regiments. How many left with Type 59/69 given that hundreds of such tanks were transferred to FC?

If PA acquires MBTs with better mobility, won't slower APC's force tanks to move slow as well - as infantry is required for most missions?

You have been ignoring most of my questions while im replying to all of yours Chalo, kher hay.

M-60 had 750 HP Engine and was supported by 275 HP engined M-113.

M1 Abrams has 1500 HP engine supported by M2 Bradley having 600 HP engine.
Thats a difference of 900 HP between MBT and IFV/APC.

Now compare USA armor with PA armor.
T-80 UD has 1000 HP Engine supported by 275-330 HP engined Talha. Difference is 670- 725 HP.
AK has 1200 HP Engine supported by 275-330 HP engined Talha. Difference is 870-925 HP
AZ has 730 HP Engine supported by 275-330 HP engined Talha. Difference is 400-455 HP.

The power to weight ratio is good, i doubt the APC would be slow. The APC's should be able to keep up. The top speeds also match for MBT and APC, almost around 65-70 km/h.
If a bigger engined APC is required, SAAD is built in-house having 450 HP engine. VN-17 is built on Light tank design which is why it has a 1000 HP Engine.
If PA goes for a 1500 HP MBT, even then an APC having 500-700 HP should be suitable.

MBT have a bigger engine because their responsibility and scope is much more than of an APC. They are required to do more tasks, which i mentioned before. APC usually has to travel from point A to point B, then sit tight in rear till dismounted infantry and MBT's clear the area of enemy.So while the MBT sees constant action, the APC just transports infantry.

The Type-59 and Type-69 MBT have been used with Armor regiments of infantry Divs for infantry support. Somewhere around 500 Type-59 and 400 Type-69, after AZ upgrade. Subtract a few hundred more of these which were given to FC and the figure could be 500-600 both types.

125mm DU rounds will be used by PA tanks and APC need lighter caliber then 125mm to have space, also see how effective Bradleys are with 25mm guns.

PA also have 105mm DU rounds to tackle enemy armour, to me 60mm is good caliber as USSR have also used it on its BMPs too.

Bradley M2 was designed to take on the BMP-2, the 25mm can damage a BMP-2 but cannot take out a MBT. If it could take out a MBT with 25mm then there would be no need to fit in TOW launchers. Then the distance is another factor. At a longer range, the MBT frontal armor could deflect the 25mm. TOW has a range of 4000m, a good distance to take out enemy MBT.

MBT's armor is not same everywhere.The three places where the MBt armor is thinnest is:
Turret top (vulnerable to top attack ATGM)
Rear, where the engine is (Vulnerable to ambush by infantry)
Bottom/floor (Vulnerable to mines)

If the M2 Bradley gets behind MBT and attacks its rear with 25mm, a probable chance that it will destroy the MBT. Attacking MBT from the front or sides, M2 itself has more chances of being destroyed if it runs out of TOW and MBT detects it and fires it main gun 125mm.

35/40/50/60 mm cannons are good as AAA or against light armored vehicles like APC. If you keep increasing caliber, the space for ammo keeps getting cramped up and smaller amounts of ammo can be carried then.

 

[Gryphon]

You have been ignoring most of my questions while im replying to all of yours Chalo, kher hay.

Except when I have a similar opinion, all of your comments are replied by me.

Regarding ERA/NERA on VN-17, there is dearth of reliable information available online, though steel+NERA is plausible.

M-60 had 750 HP Engine and was supported by 275 HP engined M-113.

M1 Abrams has 1500 HP engine supported by M2 Bradley having 600 HP engine.
Thats a difference of 900 HP between MBT and IFV/APC.

Now compare USA armor with PA armor.
T-80 UD has 1000 HP Engine supported by 275-330 HP engined Talha. Difference is 670- 725 HP.
AK has 1200 HP Engine supported by 275-330 HP engined Talha. Difference is 870-925 HP
AZ has 730 HP Engine supported by 275-330 HP engined Talha. Difference is 400-455 HP.

The power to weight ratio is good, i doubt the APC would be slow. The APC's should be able to keep up. The top speeds also match for MBT and APC, almost around 65-70 km/h.
If a bigger engined APC is required, SAAD is built in-house having 450 HP engine. VN-17 is built on Light tank design which is why it has a 1000 HP Engine.
If PA goes for a 1500 HP MBT, even then an APC having 500-700 HP should be suitable.

Sounds good. Thank you.

The Type-59 and Type-69 MBT have been used with Armor regiments of infantry Divs for infantry support. Somewhere around 500 Type-59 and 400 Type-69, after AZ upgrade. Subtract a few hundred more of these which were given to FC and the figure could be 500-600 both types.

PA had 42 tank regiments some years back. If the number is same today, that would be 42-32=10 regiments of Type 59/69 (i.e. upto 500 tanks need to be replaced asap).

Assuming that 20 regiments are with 2x Armoured Div's & 2x Mech. Div's, that leaves 22 regiments which give a total of 11 Independent Armoured Brigades.

So, one IABG with each Corps and 2 each with V Corps & XXX Corps.

 

[Reichsmarschall]

@Signalian @Gryphon how 1650 T-90s and 2410 T-72s(which are very good) will be confronted by our mere 1500 modern tanks?

Pakistani Top Tanks

@Areesh @DESERT FIGHTER @naveedullahkhankhattak

 

[CoffeeByte]

Out of 1650 T-90s, 1322 delivered so far.
T-90 production has significantly picked up though.
While 227 were delivered till June 2013, 435 more were delivered between Jun 2013-Nov 2017.

 

[Gryphon]

@Signalian @Gryphon how 1650 T-90s and 2410 T-72s(which are very good) will be confronted by our mere 1500 modern tanks?



View attachment 441770
Pakistani Top Tanks
View attachment 441771
@Areesh @DESERT FIGHTER @naveedullahkhankhattak

Pakistan can't match India in numbers though a sizable number of Indian tanks are deployed near the Chinese border. India maintains more (and larger) tank regiments.

To counter every Indian armoured/mech. brigade stationed near the border, PA has deployed an armoured/mechanized/anti-tank brigade.

Light anti-tank (LAT) regiments have 4x4 jeeps equipped with Baktar-Shikan ATGM's while heavy anti-tank (HAT) regiments use M901/M113 with TOW/Talha with Baktar-Shikan.

Still, it's not enough as IA will mobilize it's Strike Corps deployed in Central India. In recent years, PA reportedly raised few more tank regiments to have a total of 49. Regiments with Type 59/69 have been attached to infantry divisions while the armoured div's/mechanized div's and few Independent armoured/mechanized brigades have T-80UD/AZ/Al-Khalid/T-85IIAP.

As such, the situation calls for better tanks with 1500 hp engine which can outmanoeuvre any tank IA fields.

@Signalian @Ulla

 

[Reichsmarschall]

Pakistan can't match India in numbers though a sizable number of Indian tanks are deployed near the Chinese border. India maintains more (and larger) tank regiments.

To counter every Indian armoured/mech. brigade stationed near the border, PA has deployed an armoured/mechanized/anti-tank brigade.

Light anti-tank (LAT) regiments have 4x4 jeeps equipped with Baktar-Shikan ATGM's while heavy anti-tank (HAT) regiments use M901/M113 with TOW/Talha with Baktar-Shikan.

Still, it's not enough as IA will mobilize one of it's Strike Corps deployed in Central India. In recent years, PA reportedly raised few more tank regiments to have a total of 49. Regiments with Type 59/69 have been attached to infantry divisions while the armoured div's/mechanized div's and few Independent armoured/mechanized brigades have T-80UD/AZ/Al-Khalid/T-85IIAP.

As such, the situation calls for better tanks with 1500 hp engine which can outmanoeuvre any tank IA fields.

@Signalian @Ulla

we desperately need more tanks or results will be devastating we cannot afford to lose a war
, why can't they pace up the production of AK?

 

[Mrc]

any one seen what happened to T72S in Syria??

educate your selves

 

[Reichsmarschall]

any one seen what happened to T72S in Syria??

educate your selves

they are also inducting more advance FnF ATGM will our tanks survive against them?

 

[Basel]

@Signalian @Gryphon how 1650 T-90s and 2410 T-72s(which are very good) will be confronted by our mere 1500 modern tanks?



View attachment 441770
Pakistani Top Tanks
View attachment 441771
@Areesh @DESERT FIGHTER @naveedullahkhankhattak

Tanks are not just confronted with tanks, there are ATGMs, Attack helicopters, different type of artillery, mines etc are also used tackle tanks.