Mechanised Divisions Pakistan Army

[Tipu7]

Giant Boston Dynamics mules? Terrain hugging, load-bearing quadcopters? Design ammunition/supply crates such that they can be hooked onto these quadcopters?

Welcome Back pal.

Stop, STOP.

Where have you been hiding? I thought the coast was clear.

Welcome back Sir ...

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

The Russian vs Ukraine fight has shown importance of having proper Mechanized ground force , the speed at which Russia entered into Ukraine caused it to feel full impact of incursion

A person commented on usage of UAV for anti Tank role , yes the tool can help in certain situation but every battlefield has different counter units. So a well balanced approach is needed

> Units using , manual , anti air machines , are a bit outdated , they won't be able to counter a fast moving Jet or Missile

Modernization certainly is important aspect.

Considering Ukraine does manufactures lot of ground units and certain weaponry their fall so quickly is quite astonishing

The introduction Modern assets are vital to keeping Pakistani Army moving in right direction

a) VT4s introduction
b) T-129 to Z-10 introduction
c) Appropriate number of UAV machines to Supplement

 

[Signalian]

8 men in a Bradley and the inside stink like high heaven, I can't imagine what 13 men inside a M113 would be like. ...

17:00 onwards. Not getting too cozy.

 

[jhungary]

17:00 onwards. Not getting too cozy.

I think at least I can say this in a Bradley

"I know which one of you farted....."

I don't think you will ever know if you are in a M113.....

Is this a valid assessment?

 

[Raja Porus]

If world's largest exporter is facing complications in supplying fuel to its mechanised forces then what will happen to the largest importers.

 

[Signalian]

I think at least I can say this in a Bradley

"I know which one of you farted....."

I don't think you will ever know if you are in a M113.....

Is this a valid assessment?

Wouldn’t the combat doctrine of IFV differ from APC in the sense that PA M-113s are battle taxis, while M2 Bradley is a proper IFV, therefore M-113 will try to unload soldiers ASAP and reverse to assembly area whereas Bradley will keep carrying soldiers longer while engaging head on with enemy in direct combat.

What has actually upset me now is as follows :

1. US army infantry division operates IFVs while PA Mechanised formations still operate APCs.

2. M-113 is frontline weapon system for PA.

If world's largest exporter is facing complications in supplying fuel to its mechanised forces then what will happen to the largest importers.

You are talking about stalling of Russian forces north of Kyiv ? The long convoy ?

 

[Oldman1]

Wouldn’t the combat doctrine of IFV differ from APC in the sense that PA M-113s are battle taxis, while M2 Bradley is a proper IFV, therefore M-113 will try to unload soldiers ASAP and reverse to assembly area whereas Bradley will keep carrying soldiers longer while engaging head on with enemy in direct combat.

What has actually upset me now is as follows :

1. US army infantry division operates IFVs while PA Mechanised formations still operate APCs.

2. M-113 is frontline weapon system for PA.

Bradleys are IFVs, not tanks, so the doctrine will not allow them to go an engage the enemy in direct combat, hence combine with tanks. So with M113s, you work with your tanks. Just like tanks need infantry to clear buildings instead of being sent into urban combat with armor alone.

 

[Signalian]

Bradleys are IFVs, not tanks, so the doctrine will not allow them to go an engage the enemy in direct combat, hence combine with tanks. So with M113s, you work with your tanks. Just like tanks need infantry to clear buildings instead of being sent into urban combat with armor alone.

Bradley has tank kills and AFV Kills. Don’t expect that from PA’s M-113 which dismount soldiers for combat.

I think Bradley has firing ports too ?

 

[Oldman1]

Bradley has tank kills and AFV Kills. Don’t expect that from PA’s M-113 which dismount soldiers for combat.

I think Bradley has firing ports too ?

Don't think so.

 

[Raja Porus]

You are talking about stalling of Russian forces north of Kyiv ? The long convoy

No, the many Russian AD systems and tanks left behind because of low fuel.

Bradley has tank kills and AFV Kills. Don’t expect that from PA’s M-113 which dismount soldiers for combat.

I think Bradley has firing ports too ?

Bradley has only two rear firing ports، rest were removed.

How about BSWS.

 

[Mrc]

Bradley has tank kills and AFV Kills. Don’t expect that from PA’s M-113 which dismount soldiers for combat.

I think Bradley has firing ports too ?

I hope every one has seen videos of American supplied ifv in Afghanistan and what simple rocket launchers did to them

Ifv or apc will never b as armored as an mbt so better to keep them in role of battle taxis with limited support role

Dismounted infantry with modern shoulder fired weapons is far more dangerous than a single shooting turret of an ifv plus far less would b killed in a single shot than if a packed ifv gets hit

US has just not faced a competent enemy for a while that's it

 

[jhungary]

Wouldn’t the combat doctrine of IFV differ from APC in the sense that PA M-113s are battle taxis, while M2 Bradley is a proper IFV, therefore M-113 will try to unload soldiers ASAP and reverse to assembly area whereas Bradley will keep carrying soldiers longer while engaging head on with enemy in direct combat.

What has actually upset me now is as follows :

1. US army infantry division operates IFVs while PA Mechanised formations still operate APCs.

2. M-113 is frontline weapon system for PA.


You are talking about stalling of Russian forces north of Kyiv ? The long convoy ?

We don't have a traditional APC role anymore after we move on from the M113, M2 Bradley is a IFV while M3 Bradley is a scout vehicle.

The doctrine different is mostly on how to advance alongside your Ironside (Armor) With Bradley, we move ALONG with the Abrams, either in a mix/match which mean we will have 2 M1 up front and 2 Bradley on either side, or in a phase line operation, which mean M1 is going to roll first, Bradley follow and brought up the troop. Bradley is being used as screen and security for Armor formation and its infantry are used as dismounted mechanised infantry.

Tradition APC doctrine is to bring in troop after the area is secured by any firepower you have. Basically it's the same as inserting infantry in any other way (like Air Assault or bring in with Truck) In today US Military, that roles goes to M1126 Stryker, it can carry similar troop configuration (IIRC it's 9) and we called them Infantry carrier, they are used for Infantry Assault when you bring in 9 Stryker (45 men, a platoon), Which mean APC is used for Infantry Support, while Bradley used more like mechanized infantry and used for Armor support.

M113 would probably used in PA the same way we use Stryker. I supposed.

I am not familiar with how PA Armor regiment work, but conventionally, you would want something more heavily armed and armoured to travel with your tank and act as Mech Infantry to provide support and security of Armor, but you will also need troop carrier that can deliver troop safely and exploit any gain with your armor regiment..

In short, if PA don't have a designated IFV, you probably need to get one.

 

[PanzerKiel]

Wouldn’t the combat doctrine of IFV differ from APC in the sense that PA M-113s are battle taxis, while M2 Bradley is a proper IFV, therefore M-113 will try to unload soldiers ASAP and reverse to assembly area whereas Bradley will keep carrying soldiers longer while engaging head on with enemy in direct combat.

What has actually upset me now is as follows :

1. US army infantry division operates IFVs while PA Mechanised formations still operate APCs.

2. M-113 is frontline weapon system for PA.

Thousands of M113s are still being used by IDF. Its all about our respective doctrines. If doctrine requires IFVs, we will get IFVs. M113s are supposed to dismount troops away from enemy's anti armor weapons. Otherwise, they are toast.

Bradley has tank kills and AFV Kills. Don’t expect that from PA’s M-113 which dismount soldiers for combat.

BSWS /TOW mounted carriers have the potential though.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I think at least I can say this in a Bradley

"I know which one of you farted....."

I don't think you will ever know if you are in a M113.....

Is this a valid assessment?

I WOULDN'T like to know, or to be in a position where I might like to know.

What has actually upset me now is as follows :

1. US army infantry division operates IFVs while PA Mechanised formations still operate APCs.

2. M-113 is frontline weapon system for PA.

What would upset your friends across the Radcliffe - you do have some - would be that these tin boxes run faster than 10 km/hour on good roads. They would like to see some speed governors put in where they might do the most good.

 

[jhungary]

I WOULDN'T like to know, or to be in a position where I might like to know.


What would upset your friends across the Radcliffe - you do have some - would be that these tin boxes run faster than 10 km/hour on good roads. They would like to see some speed governors put in where they might do the most good.

I would want to know.......But then, I was in charge, so I can dish it and I don't need to take it...