Pakistan needs to create an entire Division of Anti-Tank Troops

[blain2]

In my humble opinion, there is no need to create an entire Div's worth of Anti-tank capability. Usually infantry bns have trained hunter-killer teams with AT capability. In Pakistan, the Anti-tank capability exists in three forms. At Infantry unit level, they have their own AT weapons (RPG-7s etc.). Then you have the LAT (Light AT) units with jeep (Defender 90) mounted BakterShikan/Green Arrow ATGWs and then HAT (Heavy AT) with ITOW (improved TOW) capability (also known as M901s) or TOWs mounted on M-113 APCs. These units are attached to various brigades/divs on an as-needed basis based on adversary's armour threat perception.

 

[Bull]

In my humble opinion, there is no need to create an entire Div's worth of Anti-tank capability. Usually infantry bns have trained hunter-killer teams with AT capability. In Pakistan, the Anti-tank capability exists in three forms. At Infantry unit level, they have their own AT weapons (RPG-7s etc.). Then you have the LAT (Light AT) units with jeep (Defender 90) mounted BakterShikan/Green Arrow ATGWs and then HAT (Heavy AT) with ITOW (improved TOW) capability (also known as M901s). They are attached to various brigades/divs on an as-needed basis based on adversary's armour threat perception.

Good info, thanks

 

[niaz]

In my humble opinion, there is no need to create an entire Div's worth of Anti-tank capability. Usually infantry bns have trained hunter-killer teams with AT capability. In Pakistan, the Anti-tank capability exists in three forms. At Infantry unit level, they have their own AT weapons (RPG-7s etc.). Then you have the LAT (Light AT) units with jeep (Defender 90) mounted BakterShikan/Green Arrow ATGWs and then HAT (Heavy AT) with ITOW (improved TOW) capability (also known as M901s) or TOWs mounted on M-113 APCs. These units are attached to various brigades/divs on an as-needed basis based on adversary's armour threat perception.

Thanks Blain,

Anti tank divisons are ideally suited to counter a massive armoured thrust with say 1000 tanks ( a tank army) such as on Russian front during WW2 or the Ardennes offensive. Such a concentrated armoured thrust would punch a deep enough hole in the enemy defences that could be very damaging to the defenders, thus there was a need for concentration of anti tank weapons.

With the availablity of dedicated helo gunships and armoured attack aircraft such as A-10 or Su- 24 , I doubt that a divsion or even a regiment dedicated to anti tank role is the best use of man and material.

 

[Mercenary]

Ya But Pakistan doenst have Anti-Tank Gun Ships nor does it have A-10 Talbots

I still think creating an Anti-Tank division and dispersing it around the front is a good idea to countering the threat of Indian Tanks

 

[JK!]

The prelude to any Campaign is marked by massive aerial bombardments as seen in the Iraq conflict.

It would be better to focus our attention on air defence systems of medium or high altitude capability rather than anti tank weapons of which we have a sufficient capability.

To improve any capability should focus on getting the best out of what we have so the best way would be numbers 1 and 2 from the suggestions I gave.

What is the point of such a large formation when our traditional enemy could bomb the living daylights out of it.

 

[zraver]

But look how effectively Egyptians took out Israeli Tanks in the initial phase of the Yom Kippur War.

Also for creating an entire Division of Anti-Tank Troops. They shouldn't be grouped together in one area but dispersed in Batallion or Company size forces all along the front.

I said division because we need atleast 15,000 Men to do this.

1 Missile for 3 soldiers, that translates to 5,000 Missiles to take care of India's 4,000 Tanks.

Hezzbollah fired hundreds of various ATGM's and didn't hard kill a single merkava III or IV. What pakistan need sis the same thing india needs a true MBT. Who gets one en masse first will have a decisve battlefeild advantage. ATGM's are defensive in nature and you don't win by defending.

 

[blain2]

Hezzbollah fired hundreds of various ATGM's and didn't hard kill a single merkava III or IV. What pakistan need sis the same thing india needs a true MBT. Who gets one en masse first will have a decisve battlefeild advantage. ATGM's are defensive in nature and you don't win by defending.

Heavy MBT has to be appropriately supported by infrastructure which is poor on both sides. Secondly, the numbers you are talking about is in the low thousands
that each side would require making them cost prohibitive.

 

[zraver]

Heavy MBT has to be appropriately supported by infrastructure which is poor on both sides. Secondly, the numbers you are talking about is in the low thousands
that each side would require making them cost prohibitive.

India is building that infastructure and can support the Arjun. They hav ethe rail cars and class 70 double span assault bridges. Pakistan needs to get on the ball, or risk getting completely outclassed.

 

[JK!]

India is building that infastructure and can support the Arjun. They hav ethe rail cars and class 70 double span assault bridges. Pakistan needs to get on the ball, or risk getting completely outclassed.

There are numerous marks of Western Leopard tanks, Challenger 1 and 2 as well as M1, IPM1, M1A1 and M1A2 Abrams tanks.

Personally I think that the Al Khalid is a good base vehicle that we can build upon and I remind you of Al khalid 2 which may have a more Western influence so work is in progress.

With the issue of tanks I would rather see a more commonality in our heavy armour fleets. Most western tanks have loads of variants as well particularly in engineering.

In my copy of Janes Armoured vehicles there are loads of potential variants of Arjun listed such as Air defence carrier, AVLB, ARV, AEV and an artillary piece.

If there were more variants available of Al Khalid it could help sales by selling packages that would include support elements.

 

[zraver]

Pics I ahve seen show a ZTZ-99 pre-production prototype beign considered as the AK II.

 

[Keysersoze]

Pics I ahve seen show a ZTZ-99 pre-production prototype beign considered as the AK II.

Well I guess the question should be asked can a 120mm western gun gun be retrofitted to the turret, the type of suspension they will use. And also whether they can fit a turret with improved safety features (blow out panels etc)

 

[zraver]

Well I guess the question should be asked can a 120mm western gun gun be retrofitted to the turret, the type of suspension they will use. And also whether they can fit a turret with improved safety features (blow out panels etc)

yes, and no if you recast the turret to add a buslte rack storage and cassette autoloader you can. Ukraine did this, as did Russia with the Black Eagle mod although it is still 125mm.

 

[blain2]

India is building that infastructure and can support the Arjun. They hav ethe rail cars and class 70 double span assault bridges. Pakistan needs to get on the ball, or risk getting completely outclassed.

It ain't happening. I wager a bet.