Pak Army's mass mobilization strategy

[HAIDER]

I wonder if PAF has enough Cargo Aircraft for such Operation. No of Aircraft is most important aspect here.

LOC has hundreds of weak points , where Indian troops can't stand even a day. Moutain warfare is the most roughest when population of that particular area is not on your side. Even German with good sniper crew never went Italian alps . Lots of soldiers or units been wipe out when stuck in mountain, when locals cut the supply lines. But , in such situation Indian will try to open the front through sleeper cells or Rajhistan sector or region around lahore.

 

[Silverblaze]

Need to raise an independent mountain strike corps in Gilgit. The gilgit and rawalpindi corps can also be combined to make a separate field army. Expanding this concept, a whole unified combatant command including the air force can be also be formed.

A Northern military command along the loc would have great power projection capabilities and the adversary will think twice before violating the ceasefire agreement.

 

[ravi gupta]

71 loss was desired by elites that is why they created situation to get rid of East Pakistan, also defence of East Pakistan was not Possible from West Pakistan, it was stupid strategy.

We have balls that is why Operation Gibraltar and Kargil happened, did India have balls to do that?? Since 2002 we have seen how impotent India is when it comes to balls.

What did they achieve by Operation Gibralter and Kargil,India has balls thats why both the operation objective get failed badly ,Inbetween you also miss Siachin.

 

[GR!FF!N]

LOC has hundreds of weak points , where Indian troops can't stand even a day. Moutain warfare is the most roughest when population of that particular area is not on your side. Even German with good sniper crew never went Italian alps . Lots of soldiers or units been wipe out when stuck in mountain, when locals cut the supply lines. But , in such situation Indian will try to open the front through sleeper cells or Rajhistan sector or region around lahore.

Pakistan believed in same $h!t when then paradropped their SSG in Kashmir on 1965. I wonder how many returned home from that mission.

You perhaps don't know,but Air assault is the hardest form of battle.Paratroopers are lightly armed and provisioned troops which can never beat a provisioned regulars in enemy territory.And that too without proper armor and air support.Blabbering here in PDF and performing proper action in battlefield is whole different stories,that too heavily in militarized border of the world.Germany learned it in Crete,Allies learned it during Marketgarden,and hopefully Pakistan learned it in 1965.Good luck.

 

[Super Falcon]

There is no airborne/air-assault infantry formation in PA except SF.

It is biggest mistake army which claims it is most professional and don't have airborne brigade is in itself a big question mark

 

[Storm Force]

It's not illusion, PA have done it in 65 war and that doctrine have evolved since then, ask any high ranking IA officer and he will tell you that. PA have always maintained it's capability to go in that deep, hold and defend till ceasefire, to counter that Cold Start was created but now once again PA have updated it's rapid deployment / response capability.

We have balls that is why Operation Gibraltar and Kargil happened, did India have balls to do that?? Since 2002 we have seen how impotent India is when it comes to balls.

Without winning air supremacy over the battlefield the Pakistani army will not even leave their bunkers LET alone go 50km into indian territory. Before you step foot into indian land you need to have won the air battle OTHERWISE the indian mirages & jaguars will annilhate your forward columns .Your entire military is a defensive /reactionary military short range fighters modest transport planes and helicopters.

Your military is hold and fight

AS FOR HAVING BALLS - I suggest you read saichen 1984 how the Indians snatched the heights from you.

DONT FORGET BASEL the Pakistanis are the ones whosome want Kashmir - FOR WHICH you have to fight for it - At the moment you talk AND throw mortars over BUT nothing else.

 

[hacker J]

extremly unrealistic on current capabilities and for future lets look at some analysis that I have done

the transport aircraft in pak airforce
C 130- payload 20.4 tonnes for 130H
il 78- payload 85 tonnes of fuel(lets assume tanks as i am not sure weather it can drop tanks or not as it can carry cargo)

so its pretty clear that as of now c130 can not be used to tranfer tanks beause of lower payload but it can only tranport troops or para drop them on special missions

lets go to tanks
al zarrar- 40 tons
al khalid- 46 tons
T 80- 53-55 tons
type 69- 37 tons
type 63- 22 tons plus
type 59- 36 tons
t 54-55- 36 tons
M48 pattons- 50 tons

I have taken into cosideration the weight of base versions of tanks higher versions have a higher weight due to significant improvements. So its obvious if you are dropping armour behind enemy lines it should be most modern of your equipment hance only al zarrar, al khalid and t 80UD are left. Now T 80UD are alot heavy with upgrades and hence not very viable for air drop due to significant difficulties and support equipments and forces can not be dropped
Left are al khalid as the best choice with 46 tonnes of combat weight and with all support equipment and additional supplies for air drop some where around 50 tons.

Now present il 78 can drop them but pak uses them for refuelling and only has 4 hence i don't see any point in using them as airial refulling is much more important task and they can't risk using all 4 of them to drop one tank each and instead be risk of being destroyed by indian airforce, AD
as you would need atleast a formation of 8-12 tanks to fire any massive assault on any base else they can be repelled very easily by anti tank missiles vehicles, attack helis, and hand held anti tank missile launcher(with multiple attack)

Conclusion
PAK would need atleast 6 dedicated heavy transport aircraft's if it really wants to transfer some heavy armour quickly and options available are
il 76MD 90A- 60 tons
y 20- 50-55 tons( will be increased to 66 + tons with W 20)
and it would be a lot of investment

any other thoughts ??

 

[sady]

Sooner or later PA will have to mix it up.

 

[Signalian]

Sir didn't every officer who pass out from PMA is do paratrooper course??

Its on voluntary basis, no compulsion.

 

[Signalian]

extremly unrealistic on current capabilities and for future lets look at some analysis that I have done

the transport aircraft in pak airforce
C 130- payload 20.4 tonnes for 130H
il 78- payload 85 tonnes of fuel(lets assume tanks as i am not sure weather it can drop tanks or not as it can carry cargo)

so its pretty clear that as of now c130 can not be used to tranfer tanks beause of lower payload but it can only tranport troops or para drop them on special missions

lets go to tanks
al zarrar- 40 tons
al khalid- 46 tons
T 80- 53-55 tons
type 69- 37 tons
type 63- 22 tons plus
type 59- 36 tons
t 54-55- 36 tons
M48 pattons- 50 tons

I have taken into cosideration the weight of base versions of tanks higher versions have a higher weight due to significant improvements. So its obvious if you are dropping armour behind enemy lines it should be most modern of your equipment hance only al zarrar, al khalid and t 80UD are left. Now T 80UD are alot heavy with upgrades and hence not very viable for air drop due to significant difficulties and support equipments and forces can not be dropped
Left are al khalid as the best choice with 46 tonnes of combat weight and with all support equipment and additional supplies for air drop some where around 50 tons.

Now present il 78 can drop them but pak uses them for refuelling and only has 4 hence i don't see any point in using them as airial refulling is much more important task and they can't risk using all 4 of them to drop one tank each and instead be risk of being destroyed by indian airforce, AD
as you would need atleast a formation of 8-12 tanks to fire any massive assault on any base else they can be repelled very easily by anti tank missiles vehicles, attack helis, and hand held anti tank missile launcher(with multiple attack)

Conclusion
PAK would need atleast 6 dedicated heavy transport aircraft's if it really wants to transfer some heavy armour quickly and options available are
il 76MD 90A- 60 tons
y 20- 50-55 tons( will be increased to 66 + tons with W 20)
and it would be a lot of investment

any other thoughts ??

You have put in a good effort and researched well.

I doubt Pakistan will Para drop Armoured forces through transport aircrafts, for that matter even lighter M-113 or any other vehicle. Firstly because heavier armoured vehicles like MBT or M-113 will not be used in Mountain sector. In Northern Punjab/southern kashmir sector around Jammu, a strike Corps is already present which will take ground route.
Secondly, A para drop doesnt seem feasible in desert sector where armoured forces can exploit the terrain on their own instead of being para dropped.

Pakistan believed in same $h!t when then paradropped their SSG in Kashmir on 1965. I wonder how many returned home from that mission.

You perhaps don't know,but Air assault is the hardest form of battle.Paratroopers are lightly armed and provisioned troops which can never beat a provisioned regulars in enemy territory.And that too without proper armor and air support.Blabbering here in PDF and performing proper action in battlefield is whole different stories,that too heavily in militarized border of the world.Germany learned it in Crete,Allies learned it during Marketgarden,and hopefully Pakistan learned it in 1965.Good luck.

If i may have the liberty to point out a few mistakes in your post.

Firstly, An amphibious assault is even harder than an airborne or air assault ops.

Secondly, Air assault operation doesnt include Para troopers, it includes infantry riding in helicopters and dropped at Landing Zone through touch down or rappel. An Airborne operations includes para troopers who are para dropped through parachutes by transport planes on Landing zone.

Thirdly, Air Assault troops can carry powerful weapons with them like ATGM, Mortar, SAM etc which can give them a lethal punch against enemy. These weapons help them engage heavily entrenched enemy in bunkers or hardened shelters, tanks and other armoured vehicles. In some cases, Gunships also accompany air assault troops and provide devastating fire power.

Fourthly, do yourself a favour and get out of the past. Doctrines and strategies are constantly evolving. This can be seen through Military excercises and relevant training.

 

[CriticalThought]

extremly unrealistic on current capabilities and for future lets look at some analysis that I have done

the transport aircraft in pak airforce
C 130- payload 20.4 tonnes for 130H
il 78- payload 85 tonnes of fuel(lets assume tanks as i am not sure weather it can drop tanks or not as it can carry cargo)

so its pretty clear that as of now c130 can not be used to tranfer tanks beause of lower payload but it can only tranport troops or para drop them on special missions

lets go to tanks
al zarrar- 40 tons
al khalid- 46 tons
T 80- 53-55 tons
type 69- 37 tons
type 63- 22 tons plus
type 59- 36 tons
t 54-55- 36 tons
M48 pattons- 50 tons

I have taken into cosideration the weight of base versions of tanks higher versions have a higher weight due to significant improvements. So its obvious if you are dropping armour behind enemy lines it should be most modern of your equipment hance only al zarrar, al khalid and t 80UD are left. Now T 80UD are alot heavy with upgrades and hence not very viable for air drop due to significant difficulties and support equipments and forces can not be dropped
Left are al khalid as the best choice with 46 tonnes of combat weight and with all support equipment and additional supplies for air drop some where around 50 tons.

Now present il 78 can drop them but pak uses them for refuelling and only has 4 hence i don't see any point in using them as airial refulling is much more important task and they can't risk using all 4 of them to drop one tank each and instead be risk of being destroyed by indian airforce, AD
as you would need atleast a formation of 8-12 tanks to fire any massive assault on any base else they can be repelled very easily by anti tank missiles vehicles, attack helis, and hand held anti tank missile launcher(with multiple attack)

Conclusion
PAK would need atleast 6 dedicated heavy transport aircraft's if it really wants to transfer some heavy armour quickly and options available are
il 76MD 90A- 60 tons
y 20- 50-55 tons( will be increased to 66 + tons with W 20)
and it would be a lot of investment

any other thoughts ??

Good analysis. But you need to analyze all of my scenarios, one of which involves a two pronged attack. Please take into account the following and try the numbers again.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/flight/a21418/chinas-air-force-largest-military-aircraft-y-20/

@Sarge Sir the AK could become airborne if we had some of these.

 

[m haris khan]

Are these going to happen or not

 

[Armoured Division]

LOC has hundreds of weak points , where Indian troops can't stand even a day. Moutain warfare is the most roughest when population of that particular area is not on your side. Even German with good sniper crew never went Italian alps . Lots of soldiers or units been wipe out when stuck in mountain, when locals cut the supply lines. But , in such situation Indian will try to open the front through sleeper cells or Rajhistan sector or region around lahore.

On 70% of LoC we hold the higher ground, putting Pakistan at a severe disadvantage

 

[SQ8]

Pakistan does not suffer from the same mobilisation issues as India, All the main cantonments are within a day's ride(in terms of slow and cumbersome military mobilisation) of critical border. What it suffers from currently is having its forces(and associated resources) spread thin due to the War on Terror.

 

[CriticalThought]

Pakistan does not suffer from the same mobilisation issues as India, All the main cantonments are within a day's ride(in terms of slow and cumbersome military mobilisation) of critical border. What it suffers from currently is having its forces(and associated resources) spread thin due to the War on Terror.

Sir, having the option opens up many interesting possibilities for cutting off their territory from within. There is also the case for using such a capability to avoid radioactive areas. The question is, although we have the ability for nuclear war, do we have the preparation for such a war? Finally, projecting power within Afghanistan is another case for such capability.