Featured SH15 Artillery in Pakistan

[vi-va]

You may add the weight of the transporter vehicle as well. Plus it's traverse radius.

I am confused. SH-15 is wheeled self propelled howitzer.

 

[PanzerKiel]

Actually, am more concerned about the weight... Most of the bridges in mountains seldom tolerate above 15 tonnes.

 

[vi-va]

Actually, am more concerned about the weight... Most of the bridges in mountains seldom tolerate above 15 tonnes.

That you knew better than me. But it's possible to improve. I heard PA is working on it.

 

[Pakistani Fighter]

Actually, am more concerned about the weight... Most of the bridges in mountains seldom tolerate above 15 tonnes.

Sir I was reading through net. India is getting M777 and Dhanush Towed Artillery. Also it is upgrading many of its existing ones and replacing old ones. No news regarding Towed Artillery upgradation from our side. We are using very old artillery guns

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Sir I was reading through net. India is getting M777 and Dhanush Towed Artillery. Also it is upgrading many of its existing ones and replacing old ones. No news regarding Towed Artillery upgradation from our side. We are using very old artillery guns

There was news of Hanwa to upgrade old towed howitzers

https://www.defenseworld.net/news/1...ers_From_S__Korean_Hanwha_For_Possible_trials

Sir I was reading through net. India is getting M777 and Dhanush Towed Artillery. Also it is upgrading many of its existing ones and replacing old ones. No news regarding Towed Artillery upgradation from our side. We are using very old artillery guns

KH179 howitzer is a conversion of the US M114A1 howitzer which we have in our inventory.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

AH-4 and M777 is not easy to shift firepower quickly(less than 2 minutes). It will take quite a while, it's risky.

PLA produced AH-4 for export (UAE), but didn't use it at home at all. One reason is China lack heavy transportation Helicopter, the other reason it's not an easy job to redeploy artillery in Kashmir by Helo.

A few AH-4/M777 won't help much, we need SH-15 in big numbers to suppress rival.

@PanzerKiel better answered. Using helo and M777 is a not an easy tactic. India Army like fancy stuff, bling bling, like a woman. While PLA and PAF are pragmatic.

I think the M777 and AH4 are more for deploying artillery against non-state actors, and not at a tactical level, but strategic. For the US, the point was to get artillery to remote places ASAP -- and without low-end enemies knowing (because transport is via helicopter, not road).

So, for Pakistan, the value of the AH4 isn't so much against India in Kashmir, but for rapid artillery deployment at peaks along the Afghan border. Neither the Taliban or Afghan Army have the weapon locating and response, so AH4 can be a solution.

However, Pakistan has a huge trove of older artillery that is "good enough" for counterinsurgency ops and use on the Afghan border, so the 'need' for AH4 isn't urgent.

 

[waz]

Towed artillery can be addressed easily due the AH-4 so there is no need to fret now, it will happen in time. The focus is on the armoured divisions.

 

[Zarvan]

Dear, a big consignment of SH15 and T5-52 guns was approved last year. One of these guns is purely for our offensive formations, while the other is for our defensive formations.



SP Artillery, c since it is overall a vehicle, so it can't go everywhere, especially hilly or mountainous terrain. Arranging its fuel and oils is another thing. It's also difficult to maintain it, since the crew has to maintain the gun as well as the vehicle itself. Then it's much heavier than towed Artillery. Difficult to hide as well. More attractive target. Just some points.

Wait ??? We are buying two SP Artillery Guns ????

 

[lcloo]

With modern counter artillery radars ( aka Counter battery radar) becoming common, a tow artillery has a lesser chance of surviving. The enemy can quickly calculate the location of your artillery positions with these radars and respond within few minutes.

I think this happened to the Syrian artillery positions a few years ago when they fired some rounds across into Turkey. Turkey responded quickly and eliminated the Syrian guns.

Self propelled artillery on truck has the advantage of moving away to new position quickly after firing 3 to 5 rounds, and before the artillery rounds from the enemy landed on the old position.

 

[Path-Finder]

Dear, a big consignment of SH15 and T5-52 guns was approved last year. One of these guns is purely for our offensive formations, while the other is for our defensive formations.

Das sind Neuigkeiten

 

[PanzerKiel]

That you knew better than me. But it's possible to improve. I heard PA is working on it.

Maybe, but then it's just not possible, at many places within narrow mountain valleys, to construct heavy bridges.

Sir I was reading through net. India is getting M777 and Dhanush Towed Artillery. Also it is upgrading many of its existing ones and replacing old ones. No news regarding Towed Artillery upgradation from our side. We are using very old artillery guns

Could be that, keeping in our capabilities in view, we must still be comfortable.

Wait ??? We are buying two SP Artillery Guns ????

Intention was there.

Das sind Neuigkeiten

Überall viele Neuigkeiten, mein freund.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Maybe, but then it's just not possible, at many places within narrow mountain valleys, to construct heavy bridges.

I don't usually jump into military discussions knowing my own limitations in this sphere, but if you would indulge me.

If building more/stronger bridges and roads is necessary to deploy assets such as those in discussion, then, from a defensive perspective, don't you leave yourself open to basically having those assets be useless if the enemy targets that infrastructure?

From an offensive perspective, assuming the enemy is not able to damage said infrastructure on our side, what happens to these assets once you're on the move on the enemy side? What if the enemy doesn't have the same infrastructure (roads wide enough, bridges strong enough) or destroys it during retreat, or we destroy it during the initial part of the hostilities to prevent enemy reinforcements?

Basing a defensive or offensive strategy primarily on such assets would appear to require a fair degree of confidence that transport infrastructure would survive (or be quickly replaceable/repaired) during a conflict.

 

[bananarepublic]

If AH-4 is on the table for Pakistan then I would also suggest the Singaporian SLWH Pegasus. In my opinion Pakistan needs to diversify its procurement and I am sure we can strike a deal with Singapore to further develop it for our use. A bit like what turkey has done for its Altay program or fitna program, HIT and its related industries can surely absorb the technology.
Diversification of our procurement can give us a strong leverage in our future procurement programs and what @Bilal Khan (Quwa) always talks about.

 

[PanzerKiel]

I don't usually jump into military discussions knowing my own limitations in this sphere, but if you would indulge me.

If building more/stronger bridges and roads is necessary to deploy assets such as those in discussion, then, from a defensive perspective, don't you leave yourself open to basically having those assets be useless if the enemy targets that infrastructure?

From an offensive perspective, assuming the enemy is not able to damage said infrastructure on our side, what happens to these assets once you're on the move on the enemy side? What if the enemy doesn't have the same infrastructure (roads wide enough, bridges strong enough) or destroys it during retreat, or we destroy it during the initial part of the hostilities to prevent enemy reinforcements?

Basing a defensive or offensive strategy primarily on such assets would appear to require a fair degree of confidence that transport infrastructure would survive (or be quickly replaceable/repaired) during a conflict.

This is really how it is.

You have an armored division in Multan, but the enemy airforce, instead of targeting the tanks, targets the tank transporters. Result, a big dilemma for the GOC, only option left is that tanks will have to go on their own tracks till the border, ruining the roads and expending their fuel as well, God knows how many times they'll have to be refuelled.....additional logistics problems. This was just an example.

Every critical asset, such as tanks, AD, PAF, navy etc, has a VULNERABILITY. Superior maneuver, as we call it in military terms, can be that instead of targeting head-on these critical assets which will surely be well defended as well, you target their VULNERABILITIES, basically the needs of these critical asset. This way, you can isolate the critical asset and it will not be able to perform like it was planned to be.

Similarly, if, between the present location of an asset and its intended location, there are a number of bridges, then one can be sure that an attempt will be made to destroy those bridges from outset, maybe by the rival airforce. Measures to mitigate such actions include, strong AD around the bridges, placing of additional engineer bridges at the sites to replace or construct a new one rapidly, or.....our airforces can take out or suppress the airfields from where the enemy aircraft are supposed to sortie out. Multiple solutions are there.

From an offensive point of view, an offensive formation, keeping in view its intended area of operation of future, always, as part of good planning, takes necessary number of engineer bridges with itself in order to construct in case there are no bridges on the way or the enemy destroys its own bridges.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

If AH-4 is on the table for Pakistan then I would also suggest the Singaporian SLWH Pegasus. In my opinion Pakistan needs to diversify its procurement and I am sure we can strike a deal with Singapore to further develop it for our use. A bit like what turkey has done for its Altay program or fitna program, HIT and its related industries can surely absorb the technology.
Diversification of our procurement can give us a strong leverage in our future procurement programs and what @Bilal Khan (Quwa) always talks about.

It'll be tough with Singapore since it has strong ties with India. But the South Africans have a handle of sorts on artillery technology. Their G7 LEO is a 105 mm gun, but it has the terminal velocity of the 155 mm system, and it weighs 3,800 kg. So, we do have the option to partner or draw on their expertise to develop our own lightweight guns, tracked guns, etc.