PAKISTAN POSITIONING JF-17 FOR GROUND ATTACK ROLE

[Quwa]

There is a barren desert here, and "empty space". The traditional planned scenario is for PA to give ground in this area. If you look at satellite pictures, you will see that the defense lines that PA has prepared is way back, ceding desert territory in case of an attack.

This is where Nasr is planned to be used. What I am saying is that CAS would be very effective as well, and would be a conventional deterrent rather than Nasr.

You have to understand that PA is not giving away any valuable flatlands. They are giving away (and this is their traditional doctrine for the last 50 years) land which is largely not populated, and mostly impassable.

You see, this desert land is not like other deserts. It is a desert that has a very unique kind of sand. The kind of sand that bogs you down. Doesn't allow free movement of armor. Creates bottleneck of troops and armor.

Flat desert. Nowhere to hide. bottlenecked and bogged. Inside enemy territory (for the Indians).

And then a flight of F-7PGs and Mirages show up, dropping precision munition and cluster bombs.

Think of the impact of this. It would be devastating. Think of their supply lines stretching through this inhospitable desert.

You have to have vision to see the benefit in this.

Perhaps @Signalian would be able to add to what the PA is facing in this terrain. It is a very unique terrain and only professional soldiers who have been in this terrain understand it.

Now, future armored warfare against "Cold Start" is expected to take place not only in the desert but the land between the plains of punjab and the desert. You see, the desert does not end abruptly nor the plains begin abruptly. Between this terrain, and in the desert, it is expected that someday, an Indian integrated battle group could show up. PA has been preparing for this in a myriad of ways. Including with both conventional and unconventional Nasr.

What I am adding is that in such a terrain, CAS would be immensely effective as a conventional deterrent. Whether one is lobbing precision munition or cluster munition. One does not need long range for this mission, nor long loiter time.

Even if you lost 10 percent or 20 percent of your CAS aircraft, if you could destroy 30% of enemy armor, you would have achieved enough to have made it worthwhile x 3 times over.

One has to understand that such an armored thrust would be the tip of the spear for India. Damaging that tip would be of vital interest to Pakistan.

The notion of JF-17 Block-1 or Block-2s with LKF601E would be really exciting to the PA I think ... GMTI/SAR with access to AGMs like the YJ-9E and inherent A2A capability to target helicopters/defend against enemy air cover. A CBU-105-like weapon would also be a gamechanger.

 

[Armchair]

The notion of JF-17 Block-1 or Block-2s with LKF601E would be really exciting to the PA I think ... GMTI/SAR with access to AGMs like the YJ-9E and inherent A2A capability to target helicopters/defend against enemy air cover. A CBU-105-like weapon would also be a gamechanger.

Interestingly, many of the new generation of munitions are usable with Mirages and the F-7PGs as well. We may even be able to get the F-7PGs in the ground pounder role with a single fuel tank, as range requirements for our scenario is less.

PGs and Mirages would also be adept at turning IA helicopters, even the Apache into minced meat. An attack helicopter can never compete in a2a with a jet.

 

[MIRauf]

Just get MLRS WS-2b, WS-2C/D, you already have A-100 aka WS-1. With GPS guidance, WS-2C/D can attack 350 - 400KM, heck you can even take on the S-400 batteries if IA / IAF decides to deploy them within 400KM of International boarder.

 

[ziaulislam]

Interestingly, many of the new generation of munitions are usable with Mirages and the F-7PGs as well. We may even be able to get the F-7PGs in the ground pounder role with a single fuel tank, as range requirements for our scenario is less.

PGs and Mirages would also be adept at turning IA helicopters, even the Apache into minced meat. An attack helicopter can never compete in a2a with a jet.

And thus why i think PA should focus on letting PAF getting funds in rather than buying attack helicopters in anti armour role..that role can be carried by cluster ammunition ...
All attack helis with either side willl be turkey shot for BVR equipped fighter jets and even land base SAMs especially with AWECSs and new modern radars

 

[MastanKhan]

And thus why i think PA should focus on letting PAF getting funds in rather than buying attack helicopters in anti armour role..that role can be carried by cluster ammunition ...
All attack helis with either side willl be turkey shot for BVR equipped fighter jets and even land base SAMs especially with AWECSs and new modern radars

Whatttttttt------------------!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Interestingly, many of the new generation of munitions are usable with Mirages and the F-7PGs as well. We may even be able to get the F-7PGs in the ground pounder role with a single fuel tank, as range requirements for our scenario is less.

PGs and Mirages would also be adept at turning IA helicopters, even the Apache into minced meat. An attack helicopter can never compete in a2a with a jet.

Hi,

If you want to use older aircraft---you need pilots who are current in their flying---.

Retd pilots will have to go in reserve duty and even in retirement would have to fly a minimum of certain hours to keep upto date and similarly---the aircraft will have to be maintained---.

See---you can pull back a recent Retd general and give him command & the system will carry him thru---.

But for an aircraft---the pilot needs to be in flying condition and be flying---. You cannot just simply pull them back and put them even in a 3rd gen aircraft and ask them to take charge---.

 

[araz]

This is exactly i have trying to tell this armchair guy. He needs to understand future war is about UAVs and drone swarms but alas he just wouldn't understand.

Whereas I dont agree with what @Armchair has written I also dont agree that the Indo Pak theatre has achieved the necessary sophistication to be using drone swarms either. I suspect the MBRLs and guns would be used in the first instance for large scale area destruction. If failed then Nasr will be used. The capacity of both weapons systems to cause a massive destruction to an advancing column in a cost effective manner is such that it will not be otherwise. Drones and other means to observe the area/plan the attack and direct fire would be where we will use them. Unlike the 65/71 war the destruction of an advancing column of forces would be such fthat the retaliation would be with tactical Nukes. Whoch then brings one to think do you wait for the other party to send some mushroom clouds your way or do you bestow them with a gift of your own.
I am sorry if I dont agree with either party. However I have a view which I have put forward. Unless nd until one party gets complete aerial control over the other's skies the sort of aerial bombardment you guys talk about is not going to happen as no party wants to lose their assetts. If one party gets control of the others sky then its charcoal time for everyone.
People do not think that beyond the odd skirmish the problems of a full fledged war are so daunting that unless it is a matter of life and death you will never indulge in it.
Wassalam
A

 

[Armchair]

Whatttttttt------------------!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Hi,

If you want to use older aircraft---you need pilots who are current in their flying---.

Retd pilots will have to go in reserve duty and even in retirement would have to fly a minimum of certain hours to keep upto date and similarly---the aircraft will have to be maintained---.

See---you can pull back a recent Retd general and give him command & the system will carry him thru---.

But for an aircraft---the pilot needs to be in flying condition and be flying---. You cannot just simply pull them back and put them even in a 3rd gen aircraft and ask them to take charge---.

Hi MK, if you look back at my first few posts, that is precisely what I've been advocating very clearly. Minimizing training using simulators and keeping the training simple. if France can get away with 40 hours on certain types, for one specific role, we can attempt to get away with simulators, etc and say 20-30 hours of training.

It wouldn't hurt trying.

And thus why i think PA should focus on letting PAF getting funds in rather than buying attack helicopters in anti armour role..that role can be carried by cluster ammunition ...
All attack helis with either side willl be turkey shot for BVR equipped fighter jets and even land base SAMs especially with AWECSs and new modern radars

It actually makes a lot of sense. Except for COIN, where attack helos really do have an unsubstitutable role. As is the case for mountaineous terrain, where again they have some critical advantages. But in the general case, CAS aircraft win hands down. The only reason this is not reflected in the USMC and US Army is because of a bureaucratic rule that does not allow the army to have fixed wing CAS to avoid them becoming too much of a rival to the air force. But look at Israel, they suffer from no such handicaps.

 

[MIRauf]

Problem is that France, UK, West, etc are not going to fight anyone that are closer to their capabilities, so using that example is baseless in Pak / India scenario.

Rafale looks good, flies great, has done wonders in Libya, Afganistan etc, except used against which air-force ? At-least F-18, F-15, F-16, M2K, Tornado faced handful of Iraqi Mig-29s etc.

 

[Armchair]

Just get MLRS WS-2b, WS-2C/D, you already have A-100 aka WS-1. With GPS guidance, WS-2C/D can attack 350 - 400KM, heck you can even take on the S-400 batteries if IA / IAF decides to deploy them within 400KM of International boarder.

Long range MLRS cannot deal effectively with a fast moving mobile enemy that has the potential to change vectors at will.

Problem is that France, UK, West, etc are not going to fight anyone that are closer to their capabilities, so using that example is baseless in Pak / India scenario.

Rafale looks good, flies great, has done wonders in Libya, Afganistan etc, except used against which air-force ? At-least F-18, F-15, F-16, M2K, Tornado faced handful of Iraqi Mig-29s etc.

The European theatre is very relevant for us because much of the cold war weapons were developed not to bomb the Third World but to fight the Soviets. This means their strategy, tactics and doctrine where designed to:

1. Deal with a peer opponent rather than a rag tag force
2. Deal with a LARGER opponent, just like Pak
3. fight a battle with limited strategic depth and natural barriers

Thus the relevance.

 

[Basel]

After 2 or 3 planes are shot down in the initial CAS missions on the opening day of war no outdated planes will come for low level flights for rocketing and strafing. Indian point AD is strong and potent. You will have to climb higher, use smart weapons for surgical results. Using out dated planes with out dated tactics and weapons with retired army aviation pilots (lol) inside them is like using 2nd world war tactics in a 21st century air war is the most ridiculous idea ever imagined. it will be bloody costly in terms of life as well as finances and in the end it will prove counter productive.

It will be difficult for both sides, even with good air defense India will not be able to destroy many types of flying projectiles which include anti tank cluster munitions launched from air and land from standoff distance.

The notion of JF-17 Block-1 or Block-2s with LKF601E would be really exciting to the PA I think ... GMTI/SAR with access to AGMs like the YJ-9E and inherent A2A capability to target helicopters/defend against enemy air cover. A CBU-105-like weapon would also be a gamechanger.

JFT already have standoff range munitions Despenser and long range AGMs/PGMs to do CAS, but PA is also adding teeth to strike IA fast moving forces with precision and speed.

Long range MLRS cannot deal effectively with a fast moving mobile enemy that has the potential to change vectors at will.



The European theatre is very relevant for us because much of the cold war weapons were developed not to bomb the Third World but to fight the Soviets. This means their strategy, tactics and doctrine where designed to:

1. Deal with a peer opponent rather than a rag tag force
2. Deal with a LARGER opponent, just like Pak
3. fight a battle with limited strategic depth and natural barriers

Thus the relevance.

China have developed and deployed guided and unguided rockets /munitions to stop advancing forces and hit their command centers deep inside enemy area and its good tactic which can be mated with our doctrine.

 

[Thorough Pro]

What if enemy doesn't take the dessert (where it would be a sitting duck for any air attack) and chooses the plains of Punjab? You don't plan on expecting your enemy to take a specific course for two reasons, one, you don't want to fight a war on enemy's terms or as per enemy's plans and two, you want to surprise the enemy with your own twists. You get in to enemy's head and think of all scenarios that would be most suitable for their purpose and than devise a plan for each scenario. The best time to attack the enemy is before it even starts the attack. When the enemy is gathering its forces and the war is imminent, that's the the time to stake lead and trike, not wait for the enemy to take the initiative.

There is a barren desert here, and "empty space". The traditional planned scenario is for PA to give ground in this area. If you look at satellite pictures, you will see that the defense lines that PA has prepared is way back, ceding desert territory in case of an attack.

This is where Nasr is planned to be used. What I am saying is that CAS would be very effective as well, and would be a conventional deterrent rather than Nasr.

You have to understand that PA is not giving away any valuable flatlands. They are giving away (and this is their traditional doctrine for the last 50 years) land which is largely not populated, and mostly impassable.

You see, this desert land is not like other deserts. It is a desert that has a very unique kind of sand. The kind of sand that bogs you down. Doesn't allow free movement of armor. Creates bottleneck of troops and armor.

Flat desert. Nowhere to hide. bottlenecked and bogged. Inside enemy territory (for the Indians).

And then a flight of F-7PGs and Mirages show up, dropping precision munition and cluster bombs.

Think of the impact of this. It would be devastating. Think of their supply lines stretching through this inhospitable desert.

You have to have vision to see the benefit in this.

Perhaps @Signalian would be able to add to what the PA is facing in this terrain. It is a very unique terrain and only professional soldiers who have been in this terrain understand it.

Now, future armored warfare against "Cold Start" is expected to take place not only in the desert but the land between the plains of punjab and the desert. You see, the desert does not end abruptly nor the plains begin abruptly. Between this terrain, and in the desert, it is expected that someday, an Indian integrated battle group could show up. PA has been preparing for this in a myriad of ways. Including with both conventional and unconventional Nasr.

What I am adding is that in such a terrain, CAS would be immensely effective as a conventional deterrent. Whether one is lobbing precision munition or cluster munition. One does not need long range for this mission, nor long loiter time.

Even if you lost 10 percent or 20 percent of your CAS aircraft, if you could destroy 30% of enemy armor, you would have achieved enough to have made it worthwhile x 3 times over.

One has to understand that such an armored thrust would be the tip of the spear for India. Damaging that tip would be of vital interest to Pakistan.

 

[Aasimkhan]

Hi MK, if you look back at my first few posts, that is precisely what I've been advocating very clearly. Minimizing training using simulators and keeping the training simple. if France can get away with 40 hours on certain types, for one specific role, we can attempt to get away with simulators, etc and say 20-30 hours of training.

It wouldn't hurt trying.



It actually makes a lot of sense. Except for COIN, where attack helos really do have an unsubstitutable role. As is the case for mountaineous terrain, where again they have some critical advantages. But in the general case, CAS aircraft win hands down. The only reason this is not reflected in the USMC and US Army is because of a bureaucratic rule that does not allow the army to have fixed wing CAS to avoid them becoming too much of a rival to the air force. But look at Israel, they suffer from no such handicaps.

Bhai CAS is no substitute for attack helis. There is no substitute for attack helis.. an attack helicopter can loiter on the battle field, it can refuel and rearm on the battle field. It has armour protection, it can merge with the ground clutter, it can use nap of the earth for deadly results, it can stay low at tree top level without coming in enemy radar, it can shoot and scoot in the air, where as importance of CAS can never be over emphasised the importance of attack helis is nonetheless equally as important.

 

[Armchair]

What if enemy doesn't take the dessert (where it would be a sitting duck for any air attack) and chooses the plains of Punjab? You don't plan on expecting your enemy to take a specific course for two reasons, one, you don't want to fight a war on enemy's terms or as per enemy's plans and two, you want to surprise the enemy with your own twists. You get in to enemy's head and think of all scenarios that would be most suitable for their purpose and than devise a plan for each scenario. The best time to attack the enemy is before it even starts the attack. When the enemy is gathering its forces and the war is imminent, that's the the time to stake lead and trike, not wait for the enemy to take the initiative.

If you look at some of the threads of @Signalian - the plains of Punjab are well defended. We have numbers and terrain on our side there. It is moving South that our numbers thin out.

In a Cold Start scenario, Pak would not want to escalate things by attacking forming forces on the Indian side of the border. That would make us the bad guys, the provocateurs. It seems in both these alternative scenarios you've painted, you still are accepting the need for CAS, and disagreeing on where it should be concentrated.

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

If you look at some of the threads of @Signalian - the plains of Punjab are well defended. We have numbers and terrain on our side there. It is moving South that our numbers thin out.

In a Cold Start scenario, Pak would not want to escalate things by attacking forming forces on the Indian side of the border. That would make us the bad guys, the provocateurs. It seems in both these alternative scenarios you've painted, you still are accepting the need for CAS, and disagreeing on where it should be concentrated.

As for the plains of Punjab, History is on your side too - Panipat, BRB canal, Sialkot etc...

 

[Cuirassier]

For those wondering, offensives in the Punjab were very costly for the attacker in '65, thus both sides chose to passively engage in relatively small-scale battles to avoid casualties in '71 Western Front.