Threat to Pakistan from PGMs/CM

[SQ8]

To its credit, the PA is beginning to understand. Yes, the LY-80 is a SARH design (reliant on its radar for mid-course and terminal-stage), it builds on China's massive scale (i.e. lower-cost) and isn't fixed. You can reinforce and reduce Lo-MADS coverage based on needs via the LY-80.

Interestingly though, the PA left the door open to the industry on a second GBADS, i.e. a truly mobile one (to which MBDA tried offering the Spada 2000 during IDEAS 2016, part-way through the LY-80 induction).

Personally, I'm guessing a thought has been given to emulating the SPYDER via an analogous, mobile LoMADS. In 2016 the PN even requested info about the Umkhonto, so it'd be really interesting if the PA and PN Marines get one solution in this regard (building upon the synergy of the LY-80 across land and sea).

Speaking of IDEAS 2016, the PA also began inquiring about the Aselsan Korkut SPAAG which, again worth noting, the Turks have integrated into a mobile LoMADS via the Hisar-A (15 km) and Hisar-O (25 km).

The PA only thought about air defense seriously less than ten years ago. The LY-80 purchase mirrors the Chinese approach for the Ly-80 to complement its Hq-7’s which were also purchased it seems in a mirror of the PLA.

Their effectiveness against PGMs and standoff systems is extremely limited despite the brochures and are going to face serious issues if effective supression and ARM are applied.

The Korkut may be able to provide protection against PGMs but is helpless against the CBU-105 and its skeets.
The only true protection against the CBU-105 is killing the launch aircraft; which means giving Armour consistent protection.

To its credit, the PA is beginning to understand. Yes, the LY-80 is a SARH design (reliant on its radar for mid-course and terminal-stage), it builds on China's massive scale (i.e. lower-cost) and isn't fixed. You can reinforce and reduce Lo-MADS coverage based on needs via the LY-80.

Interestingly though, the PA left the door open to the industry on a second GBADS, i.e. a truly mobile one (to which MBDA tried offering the Spada 2000 during IDEAS 2016, part-way through the LY-80 induction).

Personally, I'm guessing a thought has been given to emulating the SPYDER via an analogous, mobile LoMADS. In 2016 the PN even requested info about the Umkhonto, so it'd be really interesting if the PA and PN Marines get one solution in this regard (building upon the synergy of the LY-80 across land and sea).

Speaking of IDEAS 2016, the PA also began inquiring about the Aselsan Korkut SPAAG which, again worth noting, the Turks have integrated into a mobile LoMADS via the Hisar-A (15 km) and Hisar-O (25 km).

The PA only thought about air defense seriously less than ten years ago. The LY-80 purchase mirrors the Chinese approach for the Ly-80 to complement its Hq-7’s which were also purchased it seems in a mirror of the PLA.

Their effectiveness against PGMs and standoff systems is extremely limited despite the brochures and are going to face serious issues if effective supression and ARM are applied.

The Korkut may be able to provide protection against PGMs but is helpless against the CBU-105 and its skeets.
The only true protection against the CBU-105 is killing the launch aircraft; which means giving Armour consistent protection from the air which the out numbered PAF cannot do.

 

[surya kiran]

SAAW, Garuthmaa

SAAW has 2 variants. Garuthmaa and Garuda.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

The PA only thought about air defense seriously less than ten years ago. The LY-80 purchase mirrors the Chinese approach for the Ly-80 to complement its Hq-7’s which were also purchased it seems in a mirror of the PLA.

Their effectiveness against PGMs and standoff systems is extremely limited despite the brochures and are going to face serious issues if effective supression and ARM are applied.

The Korkut may be able to provide protection against PGMs but is helpless against the CBU-105 and its skeets.
The only true protection against the CBU-105 is killing the launch aircraft; which means giving Armour consistent protection.


The PA only thought about air defense seriously less than ten years ago. The LY-80 purchase mirrors the Chinese approach for the Ly-80 to complement its Hq-7’s which were also purchased it seems in a mirror of the PLA.

Their effectiveness against PGMs and standoff systems is extremely limited despite the brochures and are going to face serious issues if effective supression and ARM are applied.

The Korkut may be able to provide protection against PGMs but is helpless against the CBU-105 and its skeets.
The only true protection against the CBU-105 is killing the launch aircraft; which means giving Armour consistent protection from the air which the out numbered PAF cannot do.

They ought to consider the Denel Cheetah C-RAM.

In terms of fixed installations and bases, it could be a good complement to LoMADS, ideally set-up with the Umkhonto EIR (35 km), Umkhonto IR (20 km), A-Darter (10 km) and DPG (<5,000 m) - or alternatives from Turkey (i.e. Hisar-A, Hisar-O and Korkut). Basically, a single unit could wield 32 of the CRAAM, so a battery should be 128 missiles.

http://www.janes.com/article/81207/denel-dynamics-unveils-layered-c-ram-system

But for countering the CBU-105 as an armoured formation. Short of trying to down the Jaguar DARIN III, you'll need both tanks with hard-kill APS + a new method of deployment favouring sparseness.

 

[YeBeWarned]

@Oscar what about the Swiss AA guns ? you suggested Korkut can be a good option to deal with SoW's , so how effective these Swiss Automatic AA guns are against CBU-105 ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oerlikon_GDF

 

[The Deterrent]

Frankly, the we have plans attitude of the PAF shows a serious lack of initiative or clear understanding by most who sit at the top.

The ground based radars of the PAF will barely last 48-72 hours if the IAF truly unleashed everything in its ARM arsenal; most airbases are within range of both IAF standoff systems and 15 minute warning -low-hi strikes by IAF aircraft.
Unlike 71, the PA may face a severe mauling from both ground and air without any effective support; ensuring that the conflict goes nuclear.

Exactly, I have no idea why PAF is so confident. Without SAM cover, the Indian PGMs will render the airbases useless in the very first day.

SAAW has 2 variants. Garuthmaa and Garuda.

Um no, SAAW is a 120 kg/100 km range anti-airfield weapon whereas Garuthmaa & Garuda are 1000 kg glide bombs, with 100 km (winged) and 30 km (non-winged) range respectively.

 

[KapitaanAli]

Um no, SAAW is a 120 kg/100 km range anti-airfield weapon whereas Garuthmaa & Garuda are 1000 kg glide bombs, with 100 km (winged) and 30 km (non-winged) range respectively.

Correct.
There's also a 450 kg HSLD bomb:

 

[surya kiran]

Um no, SAAW is a 120 kg/100 km range anti-airfield weapon whereas Garuthmaa & Garuda are 1000 kg glide bombs, with 100 km (winged) and 30 km (non-winged) range respectively.

aah...ok. got confused.

 

[Safriz]

So aside from Brahmos, India has no SOW or REK capability. Nirbhay program still in development?

They have some short range Klub class Russian cruise missiles.

 

[Bilal Khan 777]

They have some short range Klub class Russian cruise missiles.

Club is a formidable SLM in IN arsenal.

 

[ni8mare]

Existing: CBU-105, KH-series missiles, Popeye, KAB-series LGBs, Spice PGM
Upcoming Imports: BrahMos ALCM, SCALP, Hammer
Upcoming Local: SAAW, Garuthmaa (both having 100km SOR)

Personally, I believe CBU-105 is the most lethal as of now. BrahMos & SCALP possibly in parallel with SAAW & Garuthmaa will be devastating.

In addition to SAAW and glide bombs..there is

1. SANT (stand off anti tank)..... which is similar to brimstone

2. NGARM

3. RUDRA II and III AGM

 

[Reichsmarschall]

@Mahmood uz Zaman