Mechanised Divisions Pakistan Army

[Signalian]

@Signalian ,. Having so many T59/69 or perhaps AZs as reserves would be a very interesting thing and I believe PA cmdrs will be tempted too. Just like the 34TDU at Sulemanke

Reserve should be the tanks in front line use like AK and VT-4 considering they are the mainstay of the PA armor in the future. Even putting T-85s after 2 decades and T-80s after 3 decades in reserve wouldn't mean much. A regiment losing 10-15 AKs while the replacements show up as T-59s. Its just numbers to fill in, T-59 is not a solid tank for the desert. We haven't seen AZ operating in the desert regularly too. Its more worrisome for the 1st Armored Div losing T-80UDs.

 

[iLION12345_1]

Yep, they are AZs. And since it's Kharian, then these will be of either 17 or 37.. PAVOs perhaps.

@iLION12345_1 , wdy think, will the AZs being replaced by VT4s be used to in turn replace the T59s of 30 Corps? While T59s of 16,14 and perhaps 35 will be replaced directly by VT4?


@Signalian ,. Having so many T59/69 or perhaps AZs as reserves would be a very interesting thing and I believe PA cmdrs will be tempted too. Just like the 34TDU at Sulemanke


EU is not that stupid. They won't risk anyth over Ukraine or perhaps even Poland

Given PAs record, I think both the Type 59s and any Retiring AZs will be kept in cold storage for a long time to come to be activated as reserves. At least a decade, depending on how much space there is.
If the VT-4s replace AZs anywhere, those AZs will likely be transferred to replace Type 59s and 69s elsewhere depending on their condition.

As for having them in reserve, I agree with the above. The type 59s and 69s don’t deserve to be in there. The Al-Zarrars can stay simply because they’re quite a bit better than what the Indian reserve holds at the moment (Stock T72s). Obviously the reserve is only really good if it has the same tanks as the frontline however.

 

[Raja Porus]

Reserve should be the tanks in front line use like AK and VT-4 considering they are the mainstay of the PA armor in the future. Even putting T-85s after 2 decades and T-80s after 3 decades in reserve wouldn't mean much. A regiment losing 10-15 AKs while the replacements show up as T-59s. Its just numbers to fill in, T-59 is not a solid tank for the desert. We haven't seen AZ operating in the desert regularly too. Its more worrisome for the 1st Armored Div losing T-80UDs.

I doubt replacing tanks that a regt operates with another type would be prudent. Training, ammo, maint etc. Even in 65 we didn't do such things (apart from the ones which had different tanks since peacetime). For example, at Chawinda the Pattons of the Guides were given to 19 Lancers while Guides were completely equipped with Shermans.
Also, by using reserves I meant raising new formations( Especially squadron lvl) for rear activities such as defending gun positions, tac hqs instead of using newer tanks for these purposes.

T-80s after 3 decades in reserve wouldn't mean much

This I highly doubt.

 

[Signalian]

I doubt replacing tanks that a regt operates with another type would be prudent. Training, ammo, maint etc. Even in 65 we didn't do such things (apart from the ones which had different tanks since peacetime). For example, at Chawinda the Pattons of the Guides were given to 19 Lancers while Guides were completely equipped with Shermans.
Also, by using reserves I meant raising new formations( Especially squadron lvl) for rear activities such as defending gun positions, tac hqs instead of using newer tanks for these purposes.

This I highly doubt.

A regiment losing a full squadron of T-80UDs (15 x tanks). It lost 33.33% of its fighting power, what will happen to that regiment like how will it be used in war next ?

Also, by using reserves I meant raising new formations( Especially squadron lvl) for rear activities such as defending gun positions, tac hqs instead of using newer tanks for these purposes.

Tanks are offensive weapons, not well suited for defensive Ops mostly sitting ducks or dug in. There are better defensive options such as ATGMs or lighter handheld AT weapons. Gun positions are defended with own security echelon of the regiment.

This I highly doubt.

I hope we are alive by that time.

 

[CLUMSY]

A regiment losing a full squadron of T-80UDs (15 x tanks). It lost 33.33% of its fighting power, what will happen to that regiment like how will it be used in war next ?


Tanks are offensive weapons, not well suited for defensive Ops mostly sitting ducks or dug in. There are better defensive options such as ATGMs or lighter handheld AT weapons. Gun positions are defended with own security echelon of the regiment.


I hope we are alive by that time.

Tanks can be very useful in defensive warfare, just a matter of employment.

 

[Reichmarshal]

If u knew how long our armor div. Are suppose to last according to PA war games, then u would get the shock of ur life

 

[Raja Porus]

Tanks are offensive weapons, not well suited for defensive Ops mostly sitting ducks or dug in

Sure. But there's ambiguity in this. Tanks are excellent for mobile defence. Chawinda?
It may sound attractive at tactical level but not at operational. For example if a holding corps commander employes his armour for counter attack or even a spoiling attack, it would be be counted as an attack only at tactical level, because the operational objective is still defence. What do you think is the purpose of armd bdes with Inf div?

Also, I don't support ad-hocism etc and I'm speaking only as someone sitting in GHQ would feel during war time. Imagine yourself as a CC 31 Corps, defending for example Bahawalpur. Now if GHQ gives you newly raised reservist inf and tank regts, you and your GOC can start taking some risks, perhaps throw another bde to the frontline or even counter attack because you have your main objective is somewhat secure.

If u knew how long our armor div. Are suppose to last according to PA war games, then u would get the shock of ur life

It would be interesting. Nice thing that army is preparing for the worst. But I believe a good GOC will always make his formation available after handing captured territory to inf.

 

[Signalian]

Sure. But there's ambiguity in this. Tanks are excellent for mobile defence. Chawinda?
It may sound attractive at tactical level but not at operational. For example if a holding corps commander employes his armour for counter attack or even a spoiling attack, it would be be counted as an attack only at tactical level, because the operational objective is still defence. What do you think is the purpose of armd bdes with Inf div?

Also, I don't support ad-hocism etc and I'm speaking only as someone sitting in GHQ would feel during war time. Imagine yourself as a CC 31 Corps, defending for example Bahawalpur. Now if GHQ gives you newly raised reservist inf and tank regts, you and your GOC can start taking some risks, perhaps throw another bde to the frontline or even counter attack because you have your main objective is somewhat secure.


It would be interesting. Nice thing that army is preparing for the worst. But I believe a good GOC will always make his formation available after handing captured territory to inf.

I think you and I are not on the same page maybe or I didnt get you.

CO 25 Cav was attacking in Chawinda scenario, he wasn't defensive. If you are thinking of pitting Pattons against T-72 or T-90, it's not a good idea. It's better to hand them over to FC based on examples of Turkish usage of M-60 Pattons in their war against insurgents, but eventually Turks had to bring in Leo2A4s too.

Secondly, in 1965, India also didnt have a MBT to maneuver freely in the desert for long distance engagements and the infrastructure to support it though Centurion would have fared well with an excellent logistics support and a spirited commander like Rommel to threaten Sindh cut off from Punjab. This hold true today with T-90.

Thirdly, India hadnt exercised war games of Division and Corps level in desert to throw Centurions in the desert under its armored divisions. Today, its different, India can pitch a Corps level armored offensive in the desert region from Badin to south of Okara (Bahawalnagar) , and protection of that corridor by T-59s and M-48s even as reserve is impossible. You need highly mobile forces (MBTs with big engines/filters/logistics as well as Gunships and UCAVs which can cover distance with in minutes, not hours ).

Fourthly, even if you put defensive lines of M48s and T-59s, Indian armored forces will be more mobile than them and just like 1971, they will by-pass strong points and attack from rear or flanks to decimate these forces.

Fifth, intel wasnt strong in 1965. India didnt know that only a lone regiment divided in 3 x squadrons is blocking an entire division. That fog of war is not there anymore. India has very good satellite, intel and recon capabilities today.

Sixth, M-48s used to bog down and so do T-59s in different terrain, even in Northern Punjab. So if you think they will make a difference in the desert, its difficult to ascertain. PA will start with a force of 100 MBTs of each type and in the end 75 or 80 will be deployed due to bogging and breakdowns. This is not expected from modern MBTs.

Tanks can be very useful in defensive warfare, just a matter of employment.

If they are AKs and VT-4 yes, but not M48s and T-59s.

 

[Reichmarshal]

The threat to tanks has increased many folds specially in the last decade, from atgm with top attack capability, to ucav, loitering munitions, precidion guided rockets, just to name a few.
For tanks to operate freely in a battlefield they need very favorable conditions, which in a contested battle field between to equally matched enemies or at the very least two well equipped enemies has become increasingly unlikely.
So tough days ahead for tanks

 

[Signalian]

The threat to tanks has increased many folds specially in the last decade, from atgm with top attack capability, to ucav, loitering munitions, precidion guided rockets, just to name a few.
For tanks to operate freely in a battlefield they need very favorable conditions, which in a contested battle field between to equally matched enemies or at the very least two well equipped enemies has become increasingly unlikely.
So tough days ahead for tanks

This is why sending MBTs without AD cover is disastrous and why the combines arms doctrine is useful as all arms protect and compliment each other.

 

[farooqbhai007]

This is why sending MBTs without AD cover is disastrous and why the combines arms doctrine is useful as all arms protect and compliment each other.

Yea PA was supposed to get korkuts as well since they trialed em, any update on that.

 

[Reichmarshal]

This is why sending MBTs without AD cover is disastrous and why the combines arms doctrine is useful as all arms protect and compliment each other.

AD is over rated.
More then any things the tactics to employ armor need to be over hauled n need to be brought in accordance with the challenges of 21st century as right now in the 21st century battle field tactics of armor thrust n mass movement of armor n armor holding terrority have become tricky to say the least.

 

[Signalian]

AD is over rated.
More then any things the tactics to employ armor need to be over hauled n need to be brought in accordance with the challenges of 21st century as right now in the 21st century battle field tactics of armor thrust n mass movement of armor n armor holding terrority have become tricky to say the least.

Evolution of any weapon system will always bring a counter for it. How effectively that counter is deployed is up to the user.

 

[Reichmarshal]

Evolution of any weapon system will always bring a counter for it. How effectively that counter is deployed is up to the user.

One I can think of is an emp device small enough to protect a tank.
But before they come on line n become effective better tactics can go a long way in the extending the lease on life of a tank in the modern battlefield

 

[CLUMSY]

There are already man portable anti drone devices. A well organized force would set up proper air defence for armor while advancing.