Pakistan (non nuclear)plan to counter cold start

[Falcon26]

The AH-1 F/S/Z, Mi-24 and UCAV Burraq using Barq, are very mobile.



The 105mm Gun is already used in MBT's. The dedicated Anti-tank RR has 106mm which are being used on western border. PA also uses SPG-9 though not in dedicated AT role.

View attachment 440811

I don’t think you can substitute an MBT for a tank destroyer. Tank destroyers combine speed, mobility and firepower in a way an MBT simply can’t. The SPG-9 seems outdated. Hopefully they address this gap. Mobility and firepower is what wins wars.

By the way, UCAVs are good for tactical reasons, don’t expect them to have any meaningful role during any possible Indian blitz across the international border. Helicopter gunships will prove vital as will any CAS platforms

 

[Signalian]

I don’t think you can substitute an MBT for a tank destroyer. Tank destroyers combine speed, mobility and firepower in a way an MBT simply can’t. The SPG-9 seems outdated. Hopefully they address this gap. Mobility and firepower is what wins wars.

By the way, UCAVs are good for tactical reasons, don’t expect them to have any meaningful role during any possible Indian blitz across the international border. Helicopter gunships will prove vital as will any CAS platforms

Never did say MBT is a substitute for TD. I was surprised though considering 105mm in TD role rather than ATGM.

whats your take on this?

1.Suitability of 105mm gun in tank destroyer role. how would you rate L-7 105mm or M68 105mm against modern MBT?

2. ATGM platform like M-901/Maaz/ Green Arrow Defender in TD role. Better than cannon?

I also think that MGS provides fire support using HE type of rounds too, it isnt a dedicated TD role platform

 

[Rajput_Pakistani]

It is not as simple and nor it works out like that.
1. India does not enjoy absolute superiority in numbers nor in quality
2. Any brigade size or more maneuver could not go unnoticed in current age of technology and Pakistan possess enough eyes to know where the threat is coming from, hence nullifying the concept of blitzkrieg style strike, which would disturb Pakistani military OODA loop
3. Pakistan-India border is not a "unlimited" stretch of land, which can provide unlimited opportunities to carry out a strike (time and place of one's own choosing). Pakistan military ORBAT clearly split command in Corps, each having its own AoR and required resources to meet challenges for that specific terrain and threat.
4. Launching an armored attack need a launch pad, a spring-board. One must be foolish to think that Pakistan military dont have knowledge of existing road/rail nodes of India, which would become the launching pad of Indian military campaigns.
5. PA exactly know, in which sectors, we would HOLD, FIX, DESTROY, COUNTER-MANEUVER or WITHDRAW.
6. Lastly, if one is in a defensive position waiting for an armored attack, there are minefields/tank ditches ahead. Air borne anti-armor platform has range in excess of 8kms. In first step, it would get in action then AT missiles having ranges ~4kms, if still it is unable to beat the attack, then it comes to MBT, IFV or RR rifles having effective firing ranges upto 3 kms. In next phase, the attackers would be in "hand to hand" fight.
These are the steps, filters between capturing a fortified position.
In previous wars, all Anti tank weapons has a range of not more then 1 km. So defenders would wait for attackers to come in range. Now the time has changed, defensive weapons are far more lethal and effective at longer ranges. Thats why many experts believe that armored warfare is dead because its too costly.

 

[alimobin memon]

its been time since induction of Type 85 tanks they must be updated even further. Our Al zarrar if not are protected well enough but they do have the gun to penetrate side and rear armor at least of T72 and T90. In case of war who shoots first matters. since both armies deploy tanks with ERA protection and almost identical guns namely 2A46. both have similar firepower and not to forget ATGM fired from tanks are from same origin or at least incorporate similar tech. Beside that 1000's of ATGM systems inducted by both the armies is even another factor. IMHO its more of a luck that will decide whose tanks are out first. My estimate is that Pakistan has atleast 1400 tanks that can give equal(comparable in terms of firepower) to indian tanks. Alzarrar around 400, 300 type 85, 320 t80UD, 350 Al Khalids. But its an over exaggerated statement that we maintain 1:2. that was old case not now. we maintain force between 40 to 50% in terms of armor. while indian tanks comprise of 3000+ tanks that can fight most of Pakistan armor. In reality its more going to rely on Man portable ATGM's. both have in thousands. whether equipped mannely or in IFV.

 

[Signalian]

This is stryker dedicated AT platform, Not MGS

@Falcon26

 

[Trango Towers]

If you take out all the Type 59, 69 and even 85s, how many tanks does Pakistan actually possess that have the necessary stopping power against the T-90 if your scenario has to play out in your favour?

If we are so weak why haven't you crossed the border

 

[Areesh]

If we are so weak why haven't you crossed the border

Because talk is cheap on an online forum.

 

[Falcon26]

Never did say MBT is a substitute for TD. I was surprised though considering 105mm in TD role rather than ATGM.

whats your take on this?

1.Suitability of 105mm gun in tank destroyer role. how would you rate L-7 105mm or M68 105mm against modern MBT?

2. ATGM platform like M-901/Maaz/ Green Arrow Defender in TD role. Better than cannon?

I also think that MGS provides fire support using HE type of rounds too, it isnt a dedicated TD role platform

I had something like the AMX 10 RC or the
M1128 Mobile Gun System in mind. Something analogous to these systems will do wonders. They can run in circles around any Indian tank and knock them off the battlefield quicker and efficiently than the Type-85s and older tanks Pakistan operates. Especially in Punjab and Sindh. Maybe @Bilal Khan (Quwa) can provide a perspective as to why this option hasn’t been pursued

If we are so weak why haven't you crossed the border

CSD is brought to you by the same people that brought you LCA Tejas, Arjun and host of other stuff that will never see the light of day. Don’t waste your time on it.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

I had something like the AMX 10 RC or the
M1128 Mobile Gun System in mind. Something analogous to these systems will do wonders. They can run in circles around any Indian tank and knock them off the battlefield quicker and efficiently than the Type-85s and older tanks Pakistan operates. Especially in Punjab and Sindh. Maybe @Bilal Khan (Quwa) can provide a perspective as to why this option hasn’t been pursued



CSD is brought to you by the same people that brought you LCA Tejas, Arjun and host of other stuff that will never see the light of day. Don’t waste your time on it.

I think the availability of the al-Zarrar and being able to remanufacture obsolete T-59s into relatively close analogues squeezed the idea of a dedicated tank destroyer - be it using wheeled AFV or new tracked IFVs. However, it would be a natural route provided the Army switches to newer platforms (e.g. 8x8 AFV and/or next-gen tracked IFV), cheaper than trying to rely solely on MBT production.

 

[Falcon26]

I think the availability of the al-Zarrar and being able to remanufacture obsolete T-59s into relatively close analogues squeezed the idea of a dedicated tank destroyer - be it using wheeled AFV or new tracked IFVs. However, it would be a natural route provided the Army switches to newer platforms (e.g. 8x8 AFV and/or next-gen tracked IFV), cheaper than trying to rely solely on MBT production.

What could be the value of the Al-Zarrars over a dedicated tank destroyer?

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

What could be the value of the Al-Zarrars over a dedicated tank destroyer?

Probably cheaper to procure. Using a 125 mm cannon.

 

[Gryphon]

Anyone know why Pakistan Army hasn’t invested in dedicated tank destroyers like
M1128 Mobile Gun System? Weapon systems like this can blunt sudden incursions due to their mobility and lethal firepower. This has always intrigued me.

The area where Pakistan remains vulnerable to a Cold Start assault is South Punjab and Upper Sindh. Wheeled platforms lose their mobility advantage in the desert.

The formations deployed in this area have tracked M-113 APC, M901/M-113/Maaz ATGM carrier's and MBT's. Same is the case with the Indian side: MBT's and BMP-2 IFV. Even the Namica ATGM carrier is tracked.

For the Punjab plains and Sindh desert areas where Indian army is most likely to deploy its armored divisions, Pak should build fortifications. In the northern areas and Kashmir, the terrain makes it harder to mobilize and carry out an armored assault, which is why a vast majority of Indian army would try to thrust into Pak territory through Punjab and Sindh. During WWII France had followed a similar strategy by building fortifications to stop/slow German armoured assault. This is known as the Maginot Line. Something like that should slow the initial Indian offensives enough to give Pak a chance to mobilize a counter offensive.

Not very effective in the desert because the sand dunes aren't a static feature.

 

[Trango Towers]

Because you guys are doing a damn good job killing each other. One of the main reasons why military action was not considered after the 2008 attacks.

I hope you didn't waste a braincell thinking that crap up.

 

[omega supremme]

Because you guys are doing a damn good job killing each other. One of the main reasons why military action was not considered after the 2008 attacks.

Yes, that's why you people in your ego moved your forces close to border and than went back by seeing Pakistan's resolve against your forces and the similar thing also happened in 2002 when 5000 of your troops died during mobilisation without a bullet fired from Pakistan and then you people just went back. This shows the supremacy and power of Pakistan that a country sevens times bigger than us tried and went back without pitching a fight against Pakistan.
And if you need another example than Kargil is also another example of Pakistan's might, when we went into your country and you people didn't even dare to cross the border and the good part is that, we are still holding one of your peak point 5353 in that area.

NOTE: Like it or not we are a force to reckon with and you indians have to accept it every now and then and if you have any queries you can check your own media sources, although your media mostly spews Bs and propaganda but you people have accepted it that you people are in no position to challenge Pakistan on militarical grounds. It is without any doubt a great humility for the self proclaimed SUPA PAWA india to not be able to do anything against a small state like Pakistan.

 

[Signalian]

I had something like the AMX 10 RC or the
M1128 Mobile Gun System in mind. Something analogous to these systems will do wonders. They can run in circles around any Indian tank and knock them off the battlefield quicker and efficiently than the Type-85s and older tanks Pakistan operates. Especially in Punjab and Sindh. Maybe @Bilal Khan (Quwa) can provide a perspective as to why this option hasn’t been pursued

Light armor on such wheeled platforms is an issue. Adding more armor will affect mobility.

PA will send MBT in direct combat to make contact with enemy, so the crew is saved and more chances of putting a damaged/partially destroyed MBT into action. like this example of AZ, if you know its history.

Sending any other platform to make direct contact with enemy whether wheeled (stryker/AMX-10 types etc) or light armoured IFV/APC (M-113 variants) is not suitable. Even the US Army doesn't put a 120mm smooth bore gun on Stryker, such as M256 which has produced good results and is a decent gun for TD role.

Tank vs tank battle cannot be avoided but T-85 III with its 125mm gun can give hard time to T-72 or T-90. T-59 and T-69 can stand their ground through proper strategy in battle if encountering enemy MBT's. The L-7 gun has low penetration (compared to 125mm), specific 105mm sabot rounds have higher penetration but at small ranges than normal (less than 1500m). Such ranges are possible in northern punjab and southern kashmir due to natural obstacles and semi-hilly terrain.
In saying that, the T-59 and T-69 are mostly used for infantry support. They are not usually expected to specifically combat enemy armor, which is the job of ATGM teams, whether armored/wheeled/dug in.

Desert is a different story where combat at longer ranges (2000+ m) are expected so MBT's armed with 125mm gun like AK, T-80 UD are used, which have better penetration using niaza rounds.

It was a trend in WW2, where as putting a high velocity bigger calibre gun on a thinly armored vehicle produced good results but nowadays ATGM teams are excellent Tank destroyers due to many reasons, firstly because they are defensive weapons. All platforms are cheaper to operate and light in armor giving good mobility. The light armor is compensated with ambush and camouflage techniques (such as used in defensive/dug in positions).