Pakistan Army Infantry - Support from other Arms

[kursed]

Pakistan Army has been investing in stuff like Alcotan and very long range rocket assisted arty shells as well as FACs. As far as jointness is concerned, 15 years of WOT must have changed the scene there? Else, all that hoopla around Azm e Nau etc won’t mean much.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Firstly, excellent thread. Thanks Signalian.

PA unfortunately does not have a "JF-17 Doctrine" - a doctrine that deals with the seething problems of a third world force. Rather, it is a typical third world military that is a former colony of a gora army. It acts out of those old habits not out of rational military thought.

This is why there are glaring irregularities with its doctrine and ideology.

Regarding supporting infantry with enough firepower from CAS and artillery, the lessons from WWI, WWII and later wars all indicate their critical importance. PA unfortunately never learned anything meaningfully as the military education it imparts is route learned parroting of textbooks to pass grades, and then go to Sandhurst to get a pat in the back from their real masters.

Had they two brain cells to think with, they would have long ago realized the importance of mass production and providing simple (even crude) armor and artillery to the 500,000 troops.

This is not possible if all the critical infrastructure is controlled by generals who don't know the first thing about managing heavy engineering. Heavy Industries Texila is a prime example of mismanagement. This should have been churning out large quantities of armour and artillery, even if they were simple solutions.

But sadly, even a simple fire arm needs to be imported from abroad. And most issues related to arms imports line the pockets of the good dogs who send this ill gotten money back to their masters land - to a London haveli or a Swiss bank account.

Then there is the basic issue about how a country facing a much larger enemy keeps an all professional force and stops any attempt to have a conscript / volunteer force to support it. One wonders why virtually no thinking army in the world that faces a David vs Goliath situation does this.

But everything is possible in the land of the mentally retarded peacocks that strut about like they own Pakistan. Pakistan was meant to have an armed forces. It seems the British Indian Army instead got a country.

With 70-75 percent of the budget going to salaries and basic upkeep and the little money left wasted by incompetent generals running Heavy Industries Texila, POF, etc. One ends up with an army that will face off against India, 3x times its size, with a giant disparity in armour, artillery and air support.

How simple would it have been to build a modern equivalent of a T-34 and mass produce it? Or simply buy tons of T-59s and upgrade them to Zarrar?

How simple would have been a simple, rugged CAS aircraft. Could have been a propeller driven plane, would have bombed Indian armour just the same. Does one imagine that in a peer vs peer conflict CAS aircraft or attack helicopters won't get shot down? They will, but they will take giant chunks of the enemy with them you dumb fools!

A simple CAS aircraft locally built would have cost about 5 million dollars a piece. For 500 million USD one could have had about 100 to 150 (based on economies of scale). If you exported 50 of those you could have recouped a good amount of the investment itself.

Suddenly with a little smart investment, India would have been facing 100-150 CAS aircraft that would decimate Indian concentrations, making any assault on Pakistan near impossible. They could have faced 5000 additional tanks, at the cost of about 1 million dollars each.

As far as artillery is concerned, PA has made some reasonable choices. More would have been better but I can't find a serious flaw with their Artillery strategy.

Some other elements are less discussed but reasonably important. Heavy mortars and heavy machine guns. The latter provides effective suppression during assault. The former provides a massive advantage prior to an assault.

PA for some odd reason has a weakness in their heavy mortar department. I am puzzled why this is so as the impact of heavy mortars are well known by their gora masters.



Excellent analysis, and mirrors my own but much more positively worded. Just want to say that China offers much mainly from NORINCO but NORINCO sells rubbish. The MBT-2000s Bangladesh bought - they leak when it rains. The rifles they sold, they jamm. Norinco sells garbage, and will not last very long, and will become ultimately a burden for PA. However, they do line pockets very well.

PA has to do better than go to the Chinese to buy junk. PAF has Chengdu. Unfortunately the PA only has Norinco to deal with, which is nothing like CAC.

The armed forces also lack the mindset for standardization.

So, for example, the PAF went ahead with the AW139 to replace its Alouette IIIs, but the Army and Navy are still not yet decided on how to supplant their Alouette IIIs. In one sense, the PAF basically left the PA and PN with no choice but to go for AW139 (so as to get more yield out of AW139 MRO), but in another sense, we now have a missed opportunity. They could have taken a page from India, and settled on 5-6-ton utility helicopter whose core (i.e., engines, transmission, dynamic parts, etc) can double as an attack helicopter.

Say what you will about HAL, but to be frank, the Dhruv paid off both in terms of a standard utility helicopter (for military and civil use) and attack asset. In terms of the latter, you have the armed Dhruv, but also the dedicated Light Combat Helicopter (LCH). The LCH isn't pretty, but hey, it offers Z-10ME-like capability in large numbers -- I would be less worried about the AH-64E (while a big threat) than the droves of LCHs hovering over IA armour.

If in 2004 the PAF, PA and PN got together and said, "we need a standard 6-ton utility helicopter whose platform can double as an attack helicopter," they would be on track to building a heavy CAS, troop carrying, SAR, etc element.

The solution could have been as crude as the Chinese Z-9 and Z-19 (which offers at least AH-1F/S payload), or as sophisticated as joining Turkey's T625 and T629 (aka indigenized ATAK). In either scenario, you can pool with China or Turkey to manufacture lots of units at as low a cost as possible.

 

[StormBreaker]

If in 2004 the PAF, PA and PN got together and said, "we need a standard 6-ton utility helicopter whose platform can double as an attack helicopter," they would be on track to building a heavy CAS, troop carrying, SAR, etc element.

The solution could have been as crude as the Chinese Z-9 and Z-19 (which offers at least AH-1F/S payload), or as sophisticated as joining Turkey's T625 and T629 (aka indigenized ATAK). In either scenario, you can pool with China or Turkey to manufacture lots of units at as low a cost as possible.

Lack of ambition...
Thunder was born out of ambition and severe sanctions...

 

[Armchair]

The armed forces also lack the mindset for standardization.

So, for example, the PAF went ahead with the AW139 to replace its Alouette IIIs, but the Army and Navy are still not yet decided on how to supplant their Alouette IIIs. In one sense, the PAF basically left the PA and PN with no choice but to go for AW139 (so as to get more yield out of AW139 MRO), but in another sense, we now have a missed opportunity. They could have taken a page from India, and settled on 5-6-ton utility helicopter whose core (i.e., engines, transmission, dynamic parts, etc) can double as an attack helicopter.

Say what you will about HAL, but to be frank, the Dhruv paid off both in terms of a standard utility helicopter (for military and civil use) and attack asset. In terms of the latter, you have the armed Dhruv, but also the dedicated Light Combat Helicopter (LCH). The LCH isn't pretty, but hey, it offers Z-10ME-like capability in large numbers -- I would be less worried about the AH-64E (while a big threat) than the droves of LCHs hovering over IA armour.

If in 2004 the PAF, PA and PN got together and said, "we need a standard 6-ton utility helicopter whose platform can double as an attack helicopter," they would be on track to building a heavy CAS, troop carrying, SAR, etc element.

The solution could have been as crude as the Chinese Z-9 and Z-19 (which offers at least AH-1F/S payload), or as sophisticated as joining Turkey's T625 and T629 (aka indigenized ATAK). In either scenario, you can pool with China or Turkey to manufacture lots of units at as low a cost as possible.

True.

Interestingly, a vote was taken for the most popular CAS platform among US grunts, and the answer was a resounding win for the A-10. CAS planes are much cheaper and yet are faster, more survivable and carry a far heavier load with much greater loiter time (if we hold other factors such as cost of build constant).

WW2 was won wih Sturmoviks and T-34s, yet today third world armies, instead of going with a simple and rugged CAS plane that would cost a fraction of an attack helicopter, insist on copying the US army and going with attack helos.

Really a shame and a gigantic missed opportunity.

Loving the recent use by TSK of drones to destroy the SAA. At least they had the vision to do this. Where did the dodos in the PA go? Will anybody lose their jobs for missing out on the UAV game changer? No they won't, they have cushy lifetime employment. They just need to act all knowing and prance around saying garbage.

 

[StormBreaker]

True.

Interestingly, a vote was taken for the most popular CAS platform among US grunts, and the answer was a resounding win for the A-10. CAS planes are much cheaper and yet are faster, more survivable and carry a far heavier load with much greater loiter time (if we hold other factors such as cost of build constant).

WW2 was won wih Sturmoviks and T-34s, yet today third world armies, instead of going with a simple and rugged CAS plane that would cost a fraction of an attack helicopter, insist on copying the US army and going with attack helos.

Really a shame and a gigantic missed opportunity.

Loving the recent use by TSK of drones to destroy the SAA. At least they had the vision to do this. Where did the dodos in the PA go? Will anybody lose their jobs for missing out on the UAV game changer? No they won't, they have cushy lifetime employment. They just need to act all knowing and prance around saying garbage.

Pak Armed Forces should consider a project of a heavy attack UAV helicopter/bird. This is the future. Attack helis are getting old now, their uses will be very limited eventually.

In place of one heli, you can Field 3-4 UAVs with PGMs, ATGMs. Plus you have the advantage of safety of crew

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

True.

Interestingly, a vote was taken for the most popular CAS platform among US grunts, and the answer was a resounding win for the A-10. CAS planes are much cheaper and yet are faster, more survivable and carry a far heavier load with much greater loiter time (if we hold other factors such as cost of build constant).

WW2 was won wih Sturmoviks and T-34s, yet today third world armies, instead of going with a simple and rugged CAS plane that would cost a fraction of an attack helicopter, insist on copying the US army and going with attack helos.

Really a shame and a gigantic missed opportunity.

Loving the recent use by TSK of drones to destroy the SAA. At least they had the vision to do this. Where did the dodos in the PA go? Will anybody lose their jobs for missing out on the UAV game changer? No they won't, they have cushy lifetime employment. They just need to act all knowing and prance around saying garbage.

In one sense, I'm glad the PAF dropped the idea of another off-the-shelf fighter to help pick-up the maritime and deep-strike element (albeit, it was compelled due to a lack of finances). Yes, Project AZM will offer the solution for those requirements, the drop leaves the door open to take UAVs much more seriously.

The future of deep-strike should center on UAVs. The PAF would be wise to re-use parts of AZM (e.g., engine, the composites, low RCS design, etc) to develop a strike-capable UAV to directly supplant the Mirages. With long-range UAVs, the PAF will gain more flexibility in the targets it can engage (eliminate the risk of losing aircrew and, if need be, force the UAV to double as an ALCM if it's in danger of getting shot down).

For the strike UAV idea, it once again boils down to, "how do we make it as cheap, but effective as possible?"

 

[StormBreaker]

In one sense, I'm glad the PAF dropped the idea of another off-the-shelf fighter to help pick-up the maritime and deep-strike element (albeit, it was compelled due to a lack of finances). Yes, Project AZM will offer the solution for those requirements, the drop leaves the door open to take UAVs much more seriously.

The future of deep-strike should center on UAVs. The PAF would be wise to re-use parts of AZM (e.g., engine, the composites, low RCS design, etc) to develop a strike-capable UAV to directly supplant the Mirages. With long-range UAVs, the PAF will gain more flexibility in the targets it can engage (eliminate the risk of losing aircrew and, if need be, force the UAV to double as an ALCM if it's in danger of getting shot down).

For the strike UAV idea, it once again boils down to, "how do we make it as cheap, but effective as possible?"

For deep strike,
I have my own concept,
On the basis of GIDS-REK, How about, an Air Launched Missile, fitted on a manually controlled REK type vehicle but with addition of an IRST/Heat Seeker to launch the ME from a distance and altitude, similar to concept of UAV but to smaller scale...

 

[Armchair]

In one sense, I'm glad the PAF dropped the idea of another off-the-shelf fighter to help pick-up the maritime and deep-strike element (albeit, it was compelled due to a lack of finances). Yes, Project AZM will offer the solution for those requirements, the drop leaves the door open to take UAVs much more seriously.

The future of deep-strike should center on UAVs. The PAF would be wise to re-use parts of AZM (e.g., engine, the composites, low RCS design, etc) to develop a strike-capable UAV to directly supplant the Mirages. With long-range UAVs, the PAF will gain more flexibility in the targets it can engage (eliminate the risk of losing aircrew and, if need be, force the UAV to double as an ALCM if it's in danger of getting shot down).

For the strike UAV idea, it once again boils down to, "how do we make it as cheap, but effective as possible?"

That is an interesting thought. I remember a PAF officer once wrote a paper about just such a strike UAV. Back in 2005-2010 period somewhere.

While strike is an element that can definitely go to UCAVs, true CAS has to have manned platforms due to the nature of the business. definately can be supplemented by UAVs / UCAVs though.

UCAVs can not only revolutionize a2g but can also do the same for a2a. Check out:


So basically, to summarize for others on the forum, there are different kinds of combat aircaft:
1. Strike aircraft. We are suggesting these should be replaced with UCAVs. Currently PAF uses F-16s and Mirage III/V
2. CAS (Close Air Support). These are aircraft like A-10, Su-25, AH-1 Cobra, T-129 Atak, etc. Closest thing PAF ever owned was A-5. PA used Cobras but in insignificant numbers. I am suggesting a home grown rugged, low cost Tucano equivalent, supplemented by UAVs.

There are other roles, like air superiority, recon, etc.

 

[Ahmet Pasha]

What if PAA was given their own CAS jets? like the marines have their own.

What's done can't be undone,WoT and Kargil are text book case of infantry fighting against all odds without proper fire support.Here are few issues which i would like to highlight due to lack of FS.
-No fire support means higher number of casualties and rise in no of WIA leading to lose in troops moral.
-Wastage of ammo for achieving objective.
-Wastage of time,which may lead to achievement being invalidate due to delay.
Here are my few suggestions for increasing fire support in short term while keeping budget issue in mind.
-Laser guided ammo for mortars(60mm,81mm and 120mm).
-Getting precious guided and laser guided arty ammo for artillery guns.
-Indroduction of MBGL at sq level for COIN ops in every inf unit.
-Equipping inf battallions with Shmel type weapon for conventional and unconventional warfare,they help a lot in clearing fortifications.
-Developing a cost effective ATGM for usage by inf units.
-Fusing target designating elments(UAV,OP's) with assault elements.
-Each Brig having UAV element for recce and target designation,that can be either an independent unit or part of Arty.
-Precious strikes are surely going to help in objectives completion as compared to firing volly of shells.
Long term FS increase
-Induction of new gunships in numbers they help both in COIN and conventional war.
-Russian Ka-52 is a great weapon platform which can both act as a CAS aircraft and gunship.
-Dedicated CAS units of AF for provision of FS at tactical and strategic level.
-UCAV's for CAS and Recce armed with ATGM's and laser guided rockets having good on-station time.
-AD for troops protection, a mix of SAM and AC's fused togather.

It depends upon type of ops inf is engaged in;
-In COIN ops sending merely infantry can yield results depending upon type of geography,strength of opponents,weapon being used by them and tactics.
-In conventional warfare sending inf today without proper FS,CAS and AD is tantamount to sending them into slaughter house though they may have chance against an inf unit without any FS,CAS and AD.

Firstly, excellent thread. Thanks Signalian.

PA unfortunately does not have a "JF-17 Doctrine" - a doctrine that deals with the seething problems of a third world force. Rather, it is a typical third world military that is a former colony of a gora army. It acts out of those old habits not out of rational military thought.

This is why there are glaring irregularities with its doctrine and ideology.

Regarding supporting infantry with enough firepower from CAS and artillery, the lessons from WWI, WWII and later wars all indicate their critical importance. PA unfortunately never learned anything meaningfully as the military education it imparts is route learned parroting of textbooks to pass grades, and then go to Sandhurst to get a pat in the back from their real masters.

Had they two brain cells to think with, they would have long ago realized the importance of mass production and providing simple (even crude) armor and artillery to the 500,000 troops.

This is not possible if all the critical infrastructure is controlled by generals who don't know the first thing about managing heavy engineering. Heavy Industries Texila is a prime example of mismanagement. This should have been churning out large quantities of armour and artillery, even if they were simple solutions.

But sadly, even a simple fire arm needs to be imported from abroad. And most issues related to arms imports line the pockets of the good dogs who send this ill gotten money back to their masters land - to a London haveli or a Swiss bank account.

Then there is the basic issue about how a country facing a much larger enemy keeps an all professional force and stops any attempt to have a conscript / volunteer force to support it. One wonders why virtually no thinking army in the world that faces a David vs Goliath situation does this.

But everything is possible in the land of the mentally retarded peacocks that strut about like they own Pakistan. Pakistan was meant to have an armed forces. It seems the British Indian Army instead got a country.

With 70-75 percent of the budget going to salaries and basic upkeep and the little money left wasted by incompetent generals running Heavy Industries Texila, POF, etc. One ends up with an army that will face off against India, 3x times its size, with a giant disparity in armour, artillery and air support.

How simple would it have been to build a modern equivalent of a T-34 and mass produce it? Or simply buy tons of T-59s and upgrade them to Zarrar?

How simple would have been a simple, rugged CAS aircraft. Could have been a propeller driven plane, would have bombed Indian armour just the same. Does one imagine that in a peer vs peer conflict CAS aircraft or attack helicopters won't get shot down? They will, but they will take giant chunks of the enemy with them you dumb fools!

A simple CAS aircraft locally built would have cost about 5 million dollars a piece. For 500 million USD one could have had about 100 to 150 (based on economies of scale). If you exported 50 of those you could have recouped a good amount of the investment itself.

Suddenly with a little smart investment, India would have been facing 100-150 CAS aircraft that would decimate Indian concentrations, making any assault on Pakistan near impossible. They could have faced 5000 additional tanks, at the cost of about 1 million dollars each.

As far as artillery is concerned, PA has made some reasonable choices. More would have been better but I can't find a serious flaw with their Artillery strategy.

Some other elements are less discussed but reasonably important. Heavy mortars and heavy machine guns. The latter provides effective suppression during assault. The former provides a massive advantage prior to an assault.

PA for some odd reason has a weakness in their heavy mortar department. I am puzzled why this is so as the impact of heavy mortars are well known by their gora masters.



Excellent analysis, and mirrors my own but much more positively worded. Just want to say that China offers much mainly from NORINCO but NORINCO sells rubbish. The MBT-2000s Bangladesh bought - they leak when it rains. The rifles they sold, they jamm. Norinco sells garbage, and will not last very long, and will become ultimately a burden for PA. However, they do line pockets very well.

PA has to do better than go to the Chinese to buy junk. PAF has Chengdu. Unfortunately the PA only has Norinco to deal with, which is nothing like CAC.

Your assessment of the continuation of the gora mindset in Pakistan Army and continuing to live in WW2 era, infantry diving head first into combat state of mind is so damning and comical at the same time.

 

[Armchair]

What if PAA was given their own CAS jets? like the marines have their own.




Your assessment of the continuation of the gora mindset in Pakistan Army and continuing to live in WW2 era, infantry diving head first into combat state of mind is so damning and comical at the same time.

That is a reform that is much needed. The reason the US army does not have its own fixed wing CAS is politics and nothing else. It desperately wanted them but didn't get them because of USAF lobbying. Ultimately, they had to settle for attack helos alone.

Sadly, our babus thought since the US doesn't do it, we shouldn't either, not understanding that the decision was not a technical choice but a political one.

The reason why Pak needs CAS aeroplanes is:
1. Cheap and can be built in numbers
2. Easy to manufacture and maintain
3. Harder to shoot down in a peer vs peer conflict particularly in plains and deserts

Right now there are no helos flying during the Turkish intervension in idlib. They shot down some helos and the helos got grounded. Tried shooting down a CAS aeroplane and missed multiple times.

The reason for this is speed and acceleration, which is life in a peer vs peer conflict. Same reason why Turkey is not using attack helos, and when it tried, had negative results.

Now, I am not saying attack helicopters do not have a role. They do, particularly in the mountains and to escort heliborne troops. But the main issue of CAS, in its breadth and numbers, needs a cheap, rugged, easy to maintain CAS aeroplane.

This is why the British build the Harrier. However, they made it too complex. Instead of VTOL they could have gone with a simple design. PA basically needs something between a Harrier and a Tucano, minus the VTOL capability.

Now, I don't wish to degrade the positions i have outlined, but going out on a limb, I must say that I've been researching a few things and believe I can build CAS aeroplanes for as little as $1 million a plane.

This is how:

Type A: less numerical, used for training pilots and low intensity conflict. Uses piston engines or turbofan engines

Type B: low cost, low MTBF. Used mainly during war, as they do not have durability with low flight hours. Uses a combination of a two stroke aero engine and a modernized pulse jet. The poor fuel economy of the two stroke aero engine is compensated by channeling the unburnt fuel to the pulse jet engine.

This technology route was not taken by the West after WW2 because, although near the end of WW2 the UK had invested heavily in 2 stroke technology, the advent of the jet age and later turbofans closed off the need for the West to develop this line of thinking, which caters to a low cost, cheap solution that sacrifices durability for performance.

Comparability:
Both types should be able to fly faster than AH-1 Cobras in service. Would have greater or equal protection and survivability.

Post Script: The Type B solution allows you to build the engine(s) 100% locally at minimal cost. Engine being the highest costing subsystem.

Post Script 2: It is equally possible to use this Type B engine solution for UAVs, SOWs and Cruise Missiles. In fact, the earliest known cruise missile in WW2 (V1) used part of this solution (primitive pulse jet engine)

 

[Sine Nomine]

What if PAA was given their own CAS jets? like the marines have their own.

That would add up into misrey of opponents.

 

[Ahmet Pasha]

I think even if PAA was to get even Hurkuş or Super Tucano class of cas plane. It would make hell of a difference in an environment where somehow the AD of the advanving enemy has already been neutralized. Couple that with UCAVs or swarms of UCAVS that operate through AI tech(been playing some Ace Combat 7).

Some members here also mentioned unmanned attavk helos. This an area that USA is working on heavily in secret.

That would add up into misrey of opponents.

 

[Signalian]

What if PAA was given their own CAS jets? like the marines have their own.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/pakistan-army-aviation-corps-updated.45739/page-192#post-8058226

Though the topic is not just support from Ground attack aircraft but from other arms of Ground Forces as well as Navy (if possible).

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/pakistan-army-aviation-corps-updated.45739/page-192#post-8058226

Though the topic is not just support from Ground attack aircraft but from other arms of Ground Forces as well as Navy (if possible).

One solution could be to boost the JF-17 Block-III orders to 100+ and, in turn, re-work the 50 JF-17 Block-Is into dedicated close air support and ground attack aircraft. If anything, the A2A capabilities should be OK for guarding armoured formations from Jaguars, Apaches and LCHs. The A2G aspect may be more limited (I don't know, it will depend on what the internal limitations of the Block-I are when it comes to updating the electronics), but if they could make it compatible with the GB6 (Sino-JSOW), SALH YJ-9E, mmW YJ-9E, LGBs, LD-10 ARMs, laser-guided rockets, etc, it could be a respectable solution.

 

[MastanKhan]

I think even if PAA was to get even Hurkuş or Super Tucano class of cas plane. It would make hell of a difference in an environment where somehow the AD of the advanving enemy has already been neutralized. Couple that with UCAVs or swarms of UCAVS that operate through AI tech(been playing some Ace Combat 7).

Some members here also mentioned unmanned attavk helos. This an area that USA is working on heavily in secret.

Hi,

It would take too long for an independent system to be integrated into the army---.

It would be easier to use a well integrated system with a better relationship amongst the 3 wings of the pak military.