Bharat Rakshak

Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
It is currently 20 Oct 2014 14:25

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 4346 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38 ... 109  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 06 Nov 2012 17:48 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 2154
Location: NullPointerException
mody wrote:
Ladakh is supposed to get 1 independent Armour brigade, on permanent deployment.

In this case the Arjun can deployed in Ladakh, even if it has to be transported there initially in partially disassembled condition.

Also if they are going to base 1 brigade in ladakh or any kind of tank, they will have to develop the support structure like a repair and spares depot etc.


First they need to get infrastructure in place to get the tanks to where they need to be. Currently it can't get deployed without an infrastructure upgrade.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Nov 2012 21:36 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 11410
Russia will make the Indian T-90 "digital"

Quote:
Kits that make the tank "digital" - an automated control system (ACS), which is based on tank subsystem ESU TK "Constellation-2M". The set allows commanders to control units on the battlefield in real time, connecting all armored vehicles into a single information network.

- The tanks are displays showing all the tactical information about the location of friendly forces and enemy forces. With ACS commanders of all units receive tasks from higher headquarters, give orders, and control their execution, make changes in the plans. The interface is very similar to a computer game strategy, - he said.

Performed two sets of ACS - for linear and command tanks. Commander's system is more complex, equipped with additional displays. According to the source, the negotiations with India are conducted throughout the year, and the success of the talks facilitated by the fact that the main tank of Indian Army - Russian T-90.

Especially for customers Russians conducted additional tests and screenings "Constellation." Indian military check whether work set in the desert, the mountains, in crossing water obstacles. Most of them concerned whether the transmitter is to break through the dust and rain.

- Not everything went smoothly, the equipment and software had to be replaced. The hardest thing was to integrate our electronic brains with Indian, but we managed - said the defense industry.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2012 09:41 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Posts: 5984
Location: Sergeant Major-No.1 Training Battalion, BR Rifles
jamwal wrote:
mody wrote:

Also if the three strike corpses are not going to be given the Arjun, fine, give them to the pivot corps.

:mrgreen:

There is no way to get Arjun in to Laddakh if bridge capacity is a real issue . Of course it can be dissembled and transported, but it wouldn't be a feasible in an emergency


JJ, the deployment is going to be on permanent basis - so, they can disassemble the tanks and transport it using the heavy lifters. Put them back together in Ladakh and they are ready to go. And as it is, more than the bridges, it is the width of the Srinagar-Leh road and the winding turns which will decide what can be transported by road.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2012 09:49 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Posts: 5984
Location: Sergeant Major-No.1 Training Battalion, BR Rifles
merlin wrote:
mody wrote:
Ladakh is supposed to get 1 independent Armour brigade, on permanent deployment.

In this case the Arjun can deployed in Ladakh, even if it has to be transported there initially in partially disassembled condition.

Also if they are going to base 1 brigade in ladakh or any kind of tank, they will have to develop the support structure like a repair and spares depot etc.


First they need to get infrastructure in place to get the tanks to where they need to be. Currently it can't get deployed without an infrastructure upgrade.


merlin, the tanks can go disassembled in the belly of heavy lifters. That should not be a problem. Also, there was a report which stated that IA has initiated the widening of Srinagar-Leh road to facilitate movement of T-90 tanks. The logistic tail to support armored bde in Ladakh sector should not be a problem at all for the army.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2012 09:59 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 2154
Location: NullPointerException
I was talking about Sikkim. All bridges there are not Class 70 so the Arjun cannot go on them as is. Also there is no airport to transport the tanks in one piece. They need to be dismantled and the pieces carted there and reassembled.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2012 10:04 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 23148
Location: Embarrassed by fresh-off-the-boat Indians
merlin wrote:
I was talking about Sikkim. All bridges there are not Class 70 so the Arjun cannot go on them as is. Also there is no airport to transport the tanks in one piece. They need to be dismantled and the pieces carted there and reassembled.


The interesting to me here, would Chinese heavy tanks be able to enter Indian plains via such bridges and roads?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2012 10:05 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 33213
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
A C17 capable airfield in northern sikkim for running such heavy logistics would be good. need not be a huge infra, just large for heavy planes to fly in and out in the buildup to open conflict.

vital extra amts of ammo, IFVs, ground surveillance radars, WLRs, tanks and artillery could be rushed in if things hit the fan.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2012 10:25 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13
Posts: 5855
shiv wrote:

The interesting to me here, would Chinese heavy tanks be able to enter Indian plains via such bridges and roads?


What would be the political aim of the PRC, that may contemplate such an action on the part of the PLA. Moreover, is the PLA actually capable of overcoming the IA defenses and cross Sikkim in order to enter the plains areas.

I was in Sikkim for my Honymoon, and we tried to reach Nathu la, but due to recent snow fall (for that time) we could not get to it. So we had to be content with a visit to the Zhngu lake. Which is about 18 KMs from Nathu la. On that particular road, it did not look like the IA could be rolled over and brushed aside.

But then me is not a military expert.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2012 10:48 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 33213
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
PLA could use the flat terrain of north sikkim for a 'teach a lesson' blitzkreig thing. capture that and halt at the points where it become hilly again, beat back IA attempts to come up again through these chokepoints, demolish all our camps and burn them, spray paint insulting slogans and then unilaterally withdraw which our dilli dogs will only be too happy to accept so they can focus on core area of looting.

thats why IA plans to induct more armour in north sikkim and keep them there.
http://www.business-standard.com/india/ ... er/486647/

In a first, Indian tank brigades to defend China border
The plan, cleared by MoD, involves raising 6 new armoured regiments, equipped with 348 tanks. In addition, 3 mechanised infantry battalions will be raised
Ajai Shukla / New Delhi Sep 17, 2012, 00:49 IST

The army’s defences on the China border will get a major offensive boost with the impending deployment of two tank brigades, one each in Ladakh and north-east India. This is the first time that India will deploy armoured formations on the China border. Such formations, equipped with main battle tanks and BMP-II infantry combat vehicles, are traditionally used for striking into enemy territory.

Authoritative MoD (Ministry of Defence) sources tell Business Standard that the plan, cleared by the MoD, involves raising six new armoured regiments, equipped with 348 tanks (58 tanks per regiment, including reserves). In addition, three mechanised infantry battalions will be raised, amounting to about 180 BMP-IIs.

The decision to deploy tanks to beef up India’s light, mountain infantry divisions was taken due to doctrinal changes in China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA). The PLA has deployed armoured and motorised formations in both their military regions across the Line of Actual Control, as the de facto Sino-Indian border is called. According to the International Institute of Strategic Studies, Lanzhou Military Region, which faces Ladakh, has 220,000 PLA troops, including an armoured division and two motorised infantry divisions (a division has three brigades). The Chengdu Military Region, opposite India’s north-eastern states, has some 180,000 PLA troops, including two armoured brigades and four motorised infantry divisions.

The Ladakh-based 14 Corps will be allocated an armoured brigade to cover the flat approaches from Tibet towards India’s crucial defences at Chushul. In the Sino-Indian war of 1962, six vintage AMX-13 tanks that the Indian Army had airlifted to Chushul inflicted serious losses and delay on the advancing Chinese.

The second armoured brigade will be located in the Siliguri corridor in Bengal, covering the approaches from Sikkim to the plains. One regiment will be located on the flat, 17,000-feet-high North Sikkim plateau, on which border areas are hotly disputed between China and India.


According to MoD sources, the army has demanded the purchase of additional T-90 tanks for these six armoured regiments. India has already bought 657 T-90S tanks from Russia and obtained a licence to build another 1,000. Now, in addition to these purchases, the army wants the latest version of this tank, called the T-90MS.

Contacted for comments, the army has not responded.

As first reported in Business Standard, India is also raising a mountain strike corps in the northeast, consisting of two mountain divisions with about 40,000 soldiers. The addition of an armoured brigade would add real teeth to the strike corps.

The army demanded such capability because China’s infrastructure build-up in Tibet allows it to rapidly concentrate forces in a sector, overwhelming the Indian defenders there. If China manages to capture a chunk of territory, India will no longer be forced into bloody, Kargil-style, counter-attacks to recapture it. Instead, an Indian strike corps could launch an offensive in an area of its choosing, capturing Chinese territory.

The north-east has already seen a vastly strengthened Indian Air Force (IAF). Sukhoi-30MKI fighters are flying from new IAF air bases in Tezpur and Chhabua, with additional air bases coming up in Jorhat, Guwahati, Mohanbari, Bagdogra and Hashimara. Six squadrons of the anti-aircraft Akash missile will defend north-eastern airspace. The IAF is modernising eight Advanced Landing Grounds, which would support offensive operations in the sector.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2012 10:51 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 33213
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
even well dug in infantry with good ATGMs like javelin/milan2T can be pounded with artillery and bypassed by mobile units, denying them resupply and rendering them useless.

"mixed" units of Namicas, BMP2, Tanks , Rudras of the type Vivek sir is using in his ladakh scenarios are needed and thats what we are getting (I hope a huge order goes for the Nags as well)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2012 10:59 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Posts: 5984
Location: Sergeant Major-No.1 Training Battalion, BR Rifles
shiv wrote:
merlin wrote:
I was talking about Sikkim. All bridges there are not Class 70 so the Arjun cannot go on them as is. Also there is no airport to transport the tanks in one piece. They need to be dismantled and the pieces carted there and reassembled.


The interesting to me here, would Chinese heavy tanks be able to enter Indian plains via such bridges and roads?


Shiv - there is sliver of land in extreme North of Sikkim which is continuation of the Tibetan Plateau. IMO, just about the only piece of land which can support tank action. South of this tract is the mountain chain typical of our border with Tibet. And this area is such that it allows us to have a go at the rear areas of PLA position in Chumbi Valley.

AFAIK, getting tanks here in the first place is a challenge and this is what Merlin is referring to. IMO, apart from this stretch, there is no other area in Sikkim where you can use tanks in classic sense. And I don't see PLA armored columns coming down into Sikkim through the road to this area.

Wikimapia link to the geographical area in question - http://wikimapia.org/#lat=28.0949086&lon=88.6345476&z=13&l=0&m=h

Do use the terrain map feature in Map Type menu to get an idea about lay of the land.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2012 11:17 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 2154
Location: NullPointerException
rohitvats wrote:
shiv wrote:

The interesting to me here, would Chinese heavy tanks be able to enter Indian plains via such bridges and roads?


Shiv - there is sliver of land in extreme North of Sikkim which is continuation of the Tibetan Plateau. IMO, just about the only piece of land which can support tank action. South of this tract is the mountain chain typical of our border with Tibet. And this area is such that it allows us to have a go at the rear areas of PLA position in Chumbi Valley.

AFAIK, getting tanks here in the first place is a challenge and this is what Merlin is referring to. IMO, apart from this stretch, there is no other area in Sikkim where you can use tanks in classic sense. And I don't see PLA armored columns coming down into Sikkim through the road to this area.

Wikimapia link to the geographical area in question - http://wikimapia.org/#lat=28.0949086&lon=88.6345476&z=13&l=0&m=h

Do use the terrain map feature in Map Type menu to get an idea about lay of the land.


Correct, only areas about 45 min to 1 hour north of Thangu can support classic tank operations, being in the Trans-Himalayan areas of the Tibetan plateau. Getting an Arjun there (or for that matter even the T90s in one piece) will be a challenge unless all Class 40 bridges are upgraded to Class 70. PLA tanks also face the same problem coming down. The proposed airport being built in Sikkim is in the south-east far away from northern Sikkim. Building an airstrip in north Sikkim where you want to deploy tanks is a no-go in my civilian eyes, being well within arty range from across the border.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2012 11:21 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 33213
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
so perhaps the 300 "light tanks" that IA is looking for would go there, along with wheeled 20t BMP2/Stryker types?
the polish "anders" light tank has been touted as a soln.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2012 13:17 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Posts: 227
Location: Mumbai, India
I was proposing deployment of Arjun MK-II only for Ladakh and not Sikkim. I have proposed having only 1 brigade or 3 regiments of Arjun MK-II for ladakh region.

For Sikkim, getting the tanks to north sikkim will be very difficult, as the roads leading upto north sikkim are generally in very bad shape.

Plus the altitude in north sikkim is 17,000 ft. You cannot have a permanent deployment at that kind of altitude. The troops would have to be rotated every 2-3 months and it would be very difficult.

I am headed to sikkim on saturday and will be visiting the extreme north, right upto Gurudongmar Lake in the west and Yumthang in the east. At both of these places, the Indian road network comes to an end. Gurudongmar is second highest lake in India (the highest is a further 5 Kms away, but there are no roads to go there) and the 15th highest in the world. The altitude is 17,000 ft plus.

Any kind of offensive maneuver from this region would be almost impossible. One can only have defensive positions.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2012 13:22 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Posts: 5984
Location: Sergeant Major-No.1 Training Battalion, BR Rifles
mody wrote:
<SNIP>Any kind of offensive maneuver from this region would be almost impossible. One can only have defensive positions.


Please to get the pictures of the road network and the northern areas. Thanks.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2012 13:33 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Posts: 227
Location: Mumbai, India
rohitvats wrote:
mody wrote:
<SNIP>Any kind of offensive maneuver from this region would be almost impossible. One can only have defensive positions.


Please to get the pictures of the road network and the northern areas. Thanks.


Sure. No Problem


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2012 17:39 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00
Posts: 2415
I think a combination of Namica + Prahaar would be more indigenous and better. This seems more like a pretext to justify continuing import of T-90s.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2012 17:55 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 13 Sep 2008 22:04
Posts: 313
Location: New Delhi
singha ji Stryker in light tank configration is not successful because of heavytop it becomes unstable during high low manoeuvre.

why DRDO BMP Light tank did not see light of the day is debatable.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2012 19:24 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 2154
Location: NullPointerException
mody wrote:
I am headed to sikkim on saturday and will be visiting the extreme north, right upto Gurudongmar Lake in the west and Yumthang in the east. At both of these places, the Indian road network comes to an end. Gurudongmar is second highest lake in India (the highest is a further 5 Kms away, but there are no roads to go there) and the 15th highest in the world. The altitude is 17,000 ft plus.


Actually there are no "roads" beyond a certain point on the route to Gurudongmar. Only tracks on the Tibetan plateay, loads of them, enough to get someone hopelessly lost if he doesn't know which one to take. Also road definitely goes beyond Yumthang on the other axis, at least upto Zero point. Interestingly, the highest lake (Cho Lhamu) can be reached from both axis. Via Donkia la pass from Zero point and from near Gurudongmar lake from the other axis. A truly beautiful place.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2012 21:43 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21
Posts: 2972
CVRDE has taken out a invitation for EoI for "Production agency for 1500HP diesel engine". Please find the document at DRDO's page for active tenders

Excerpts
Quote:
Considering the complexities and challenges involved in the development of 1500 hp engine, a feasibility study was already carried out by international consultant and formulated system specification and configured all engine subsystems for FMBT. The study indicates that such an engine can be produced within India through Indian production agencies.

Based on the study, CVRDE is in the process of initiating the design and development program with an international consultant and with suitable production partners. It is proposed to manufacture this engine through two production agencies. In view of this, CVRDE is on the lookout to identify suitable production partners from Indian industries. The production agencies are expected to involve right from the beginning of the development program.

The production agencies are expected to procure / manufacture engine parts, test subsystems, assemble the engine, test the engine and deliver the engine. The rate of production is expected to be around 150 engines per annum. Approximately 1240 engines are required for vehicle installation and it is also envisaged that an equal number of engines may be required later towards life time support for about 45 years.


Annexure A
Quote:
Specification of 1500 hp Engine

Engine Type: : 4-stroke, V type, Turbocharged, Intercooled, DI, liquid cooled Diesel Engine
Swept Volume: ≈ 26 dm3
Rated Power: 1500 hp (1100 kW) with potential for upgrade to 1800 hp
Rated speed: ≈ 2700 rpm
Torque backup (minimum): 18% (at 60% - 65% of rated engine Speed)
SFC at peak torque speed: 210 g/kW.hr (max)

Approximate engine packaging dimensions
Engine Length: 1550 mm
Engine Height: 1100 mm
Engine Width: 1170 mm
Fuel: Diesel ‘DHPP- A’
Oil Sump: Dry sump
Permissible inclination of Engine: 350 in any direction
Max dry weight of engine: ≈ 2100 kg
Fuel Injection system: Common Rail
Inline pump / Unit pump as fall back option
Air filtration system: Conventional / self cleaning system
Cylinder block: Cast Iron block, 1350 mm (Apprx) long, separate
bearing cap, wet liners
Crank shaft: Forged / fully machined from solid, 1450 mm (Apprx) long
Cylinder head: Cast Iron, Individual head / Slab head, 4 valve / cylinder
Timing drive: Gear drive
Peripherals mounted on the engine: Starter, generator, coolant tank, oil tank, engine oil
cooler, air filtration system etc..
Engine life: 8000 kms / 1200 Hrs
Other points: Design to cater for family of engines.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2012 21:51 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 20 Sep 2000 11:31
Posts: 1175
vic wrote:
This seems more like a pretext to justify continuing import of T-90s.


:(( :(( :(( :((


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Nov 2012 06:28 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 23148
Location: Embarrassed by fresh-off-the-boat Indians
Pratyush wrote:
shiv wrote:

The interesting to me here, would Chinese heavy tanks be able to enter Indian plains via such bridges and roads?


What would be the political aim of the PRC, that may contemplate such an action on the part of the PLA. Moreover, is the PLA actually capable of overcoming the IA defenses and cross Sikkim in order to enter the plains areas.



If there are broad highways that tanks can use, they can be used both by an invading and by a defending force. If you build great roads right up to the border, then a loss at the border would allow enemy columns to use the roads you built to chew off your inner areas.

I would have thought that any battle is not necessarily fought exactly at the bordr visible on maps but along terrain features that offer either force an advantage. A road is a terrain feature that offers and advantage to either side depending on who controls the road.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Nov 2012 06:40 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 23148
Location: Embarrassed by fresh-off-the-boat Indians
rohitvats wrote:

Shiv - there is sliver of land in extreme North of Sikkim which is continuation of the Tibetan Plateau. IMO, just about the only piece of land which can support tank action. South of this tract is the mountain chain typical of our border with Tibet. And this area is such that it allows us to have a go at the rear areas of PLA position in Chumbi Valley.

AFAIK, getting tanks here in the first place is a challenge and this is what Merlin is referring to. IMO, apart from this stretch, there is no other area in Sikkim where you can use tanks in classic sense. And I don't see PLA armored columns coming down into Sikkim through the road to this area.



Yes I realise that. I thought that the point Merlin was making was that there are no good roads to get the tanks there but I thought that once those tanks are taken there and reserves stocked up they even can be used across the border in Tibet if need be. :mrgreen: But if there are 4 lane highways built to take the tanks there, loss of that sliver of land will allow Chinese vehicles to come down those highways. In the absence of such highways, any invading armor will get bottled up in that sliver of land and can be picked out at leisure.

The argument on BRF (and in the media) IIRC has always been "India has been negligent in not building roads right up to the border like China has done" I was questioning the validity of that argument. If defensive positions are built up in peacetime in the absence of good roads up to the border, an enemy will not be able to use your roads to attack your interior even if he is able to overwhelm your defending forces.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Nov 2012 07:22 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 33213
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
but this build no roads was taken to an extreme. until lately the border posts in parts of arunachal were days march from nearest roadheads and there were few if any E-W roads in such a large state.

roads are not just for army but for govt and people to deliver and avail of services. per capita income and HDI is directly linked to the presence of roads, villages near roads have higher income than those in the outback.

so let us quit this dhoti shivering mode of chinese tanks pouring into the interior and for once plan on using the "excellent 4 lane" infra within tibet to do the same to the chinese. build good infra right upto the border to link up with the tibet infra for deep offensives and to permit optimized peacetime manning with no need to stockpile lot of stuff right at the border at great expense. unlike India where roads would be through deep valleys and across fast rivers, once u hit the tibet roads you can move cross country also across the bone dry soil and use classical armour warfare....there are few if any places to get bottled up on their side.

ironically its SHIV who is stuck in that rutted dhoti shivering lane this time! :mrgreen:

if we are not confident of taking the war into tibet, why are we taking an adversarial posture with Cheen...why not sue for peace, give them whatever they want and become a vassal state?

justifying neglect, inaction and lack of investment in infra of border states saying its needed to prevent the PLA from capturing kolkata and patna is just congressi type straw clutching.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Nov 2012 08:05 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14
Posts: 2510
Havent we learnt anything from our red brothers in CG/JH? Build the roads but embed them with stuff that can be put to use in later years if things go wrong.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Nov 2012 08:34 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 23148
Location: Embarrassed by fresh-off-the-boat Indians
Singha wrote:
if we are not confident of taking the war into tibet, why are we taking an adversarial posture with Cheen...why not sue for peace, give them whatever they want and become a vassal state?

justifying neglect, inaction and lack of investment in infra of border states saying its needed to prevent the PLA from capturing kolkata and patna is just congressi type straw clutching.


Yes. In fact that is a good idea. We should not take an overly aggressive posture with China when we know we are going to have our asses whupped due to our numerous internal deficiencies, some of which you have listed in your post. If it is a toss up between trying to win a war over China that has 5th gen fighters and 400 x 1 megaton bombs we have a choice of either trying to beat them where they are far ahead or suing for peace. If you can't win a war, do not provoke war and prepare to defend if you are attacked.

Keep the borders undeveloped and consolidate the hinterland. That is exactly what has been done so far precisely because we are afraid of China. Human development and heavy military presence at a volatile border means one or the other must compromise. What compromise do you want to take?

This is a cop out, but isn't that exactly descriptive of India as a nation? It is a safe and cheap bet to become a vassal of a nation that scares the crap out of Indians. I would like to hear about the alternatives we have and have not been impressed by what I have heard so far.

If you can offer up anything new I am all ears.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Nov 2012 10:20 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13
Posts: 5855
Shiv, the poor infrastructure is an impediment for all purposes. eg defense, offense, civilians etc. ie, it helps no one. Paying such a price, so that a hypothetical Chinese invasion will be delayed as a result of poor infrastructure is foolish.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Nov 2012 10:31 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 23148
Location: Embarrassed by fresh-off-the-boat Indians
Pratyush wrote:
Shiv, the poor infrastructure is an impediment for all purposes. eg defense, offense, civilians etc. ie, it helps no one. Paying such a price, so that a hypothetical Chinese invasion will be delayed as a result of poor infrastructure is foolish.

My response here
viewtopic.php?p=1361570#p1361570


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Nov 2012 10:37 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 09 Jul 2009 22:06
Posts: 1070
Location: Land of the free
shiv wrote:
If defensive positions are built up in peacetime in the absence of good roads up to the border, an enemy will not be able to use your roads to attack your interior even if he is able to overwhelm your defending forces.

I am not quite content with this assumption.
Lets say a Chinese offensive starts using our roads to move deeper into our territory, cant we sap/mine every mile of it making it a highway to hell? Won't our artillery, Aircraft or LACMs find it easier to ambush/attack enemy advancing on a highway in a line i.e a predictable way?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Nov 2012 11:06 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 33213
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
the roads on our side (good or bad) will be over high passes, deep cut valleys and across swift rivers. so whatever moves in - infantry, armour will be constrained along these predictable lines and be subject to blocks/demolitions/targeting regardless of whether these roads are good or bad. on their side, the infra is over mostly flat land, so not easy to target any of our offensive forces once they break the first line and fan out.

pros of bad roads:
- if they break our line, their advance will be slow and not able to mass the strike forces
cons of bad roads:
- we need to stockpile lot of stuff on the border - at huge cost and effort
- tough to rush in reinforcements if a emergency occurs
- civilians are kept weak and in poverty, depending for army for ration and medical care handouts, poor education etc
- hard for us to swiftly "pivot" forces and enforce breakthroughs whether proactively or in response to a incursion elsewhere
- they can use flat land to mass heavy armour which our weak or no road policy does not let us put heavy armour in say north sikkim etc
(so they hold all the escalatory advantages and we are permanently in defensive mode)..same old story of BMP2 and namicas trying to hold off ZTZ99

pros of good roads:
- negates all the cons of bad roads
- terrain has not changed, we can still pound their incursions on good roads because these are bounded by steep valleys, rivers etc..they cannot easily "fan out" inside India like we can do in tibet!
- better education, medical care and money for local people incl tourism
cons of good roads:
- they cost more money to build and maintain, but some reduced cost in the summer stockpiling effort will compensate somewhat
- "the innocence of the noble savage tribals will be lost" - typical congressi slogan

its a no contest. we are no longer weak and shivering. we need to act our age & size and take steps.

apparently the GOI also agrees hence the rush to build border roads, create mountain strike corps, XM777, armour regiment in north sikkim etc :D

once we hold some escalatory cards, cheen will be more reasonable.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Nov 2012 11:40 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 26 Feb 2008 06:18
Posts: 676
^^
One of the major "cons" of good roads is that the Chinese can use it against Indian forces as well as Indian forces can use it against the Chinese. A case in point is how US Armour brigades came roaring down Iraqi highways like a firestorm. So you had the Iraqi "Intelligence" minister claiming to have defeated US forces and on the other CNN jurno's embedded showing "Baghdad 10 km" sighs sitting pretty on the back of an Abrams tank ! The pace and speed of an enemy's advance helps the enemy build momentum making them dominate the war, fighting it on their terms while serving a secondary purpose as a psychological weapon against defender forces. Unless India can match the Chinese tank for tank and move as boldly as the Chinese with a swift counter attack of Chinese lines in Tibet to any advance into Indian territory, a strategy of defense will lead only to disaster.

Stockpiling will be necessary regardless of the roads because no matter how great the roads are the geography of the region is limiting and with most of the military industrial base on the "mainland" connected to the NE by only a narrow corridor any sustained conflict will necessitate lots of logistical gymnastics.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Nov 2012 13:44 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 33213
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
>> Unless India can match the Chinese tank for tank and move as boldly as the Chinese with a swift counter attack of Chinese lines in Tibet

that is precisely what good infra right upto the border will enable. we dont need to match them tank for tank, just use our best kit and formations. "boldly" depends on the generals - when the political sanction is there , such generals (rommel, guderian) will naturally emerge and put forth their plans sweeping aside the conservative defensive specialists (model, monty etc).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Nov 2012 14:29 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Posts: 25616
Location: NowHere
the shock n awe platform would be an advanced dedicated stealth helina helo, where it can fire a salvo of anti-tank munitions, especially the enhanced nag. more such dedicated platform is a killer force multiplier any army of the world will fear.. for example take the stealth helo used on operation geronimo.. and augment that with multiple helina launch platform... anything about 1:10 kill ratio on tanks will speak volumes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Nov 2012 20:40 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00
Posts: 2415
We should use 65000 crore to provide thermal sights, night sights right down to section level rather than importing more tin cans


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Nov 2012 04:43 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Posts: 1376
shiv wrote:
rohitvats wrote:

Shiv - there is sliver of land in extreme North of Sikkim which is continuation of the Tibetan Plateau. IMO, just about the only piece of land which can support tank action. South of this tract is the mountain chain typical of our border with Tibet. And this area is such that it allows us to have a go at the rear areas of PLA position in Chumbi Valley.

AFAIK, getting tanks here in the first place is a challenge and this is what Merlin is referring to. IMO, apart from this stretch, there is no other area in Sikkim where you can use tanks in classic sense. And I don't see PLA armored columns coming down into Sikkim through the road to this area.



Yes I realise that. I thought that the point Merlin was making was that there are no good roads to get the tanks there but I thought that once those tanks are taken there and reserves stocked up they even can be used across the border in Tibet if need be. :mrgreen: But if there are 4 lane highways built to take the tanks there, loss of that sliver of land will allow Chinese vehicles to come down those highways. In the absence of such highways, any invading armor will get bottled up in that sliver of land and can be picked out at leisure.

The argument on BRF (and in the media) IIRC has always been "India has been negligent in not building roads right up to the border like China has done" I was questioning the validity of that argument. If defensive positions are built up in peacetime in the absence of good roads up to the border, an enemy will not be able to use your roads to attack your interior even if he is able to overwhelm your defending forces.


Would that mean not building infrastructure in "all" bordering areas such as in Gujarat, Rajasthan, Punjab, J&K, etc. or only in the NorthEast (or bordering areas with China)? How far from the border should infrastructure, such as "good" roads, be not built?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Nov 2012 06:44 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 23148
Location: Embarrassed by fresh-off-the-boat Indians
srai wrote:

Would that mean not building infrastructure in "all" bordering areas such as in Gujarat, Rajasthan, Punjab, J&K, etc. or only in the NorthEast (or bordering areas with China)? How far from the border should infrastructure, such as "good" roads, be not built?


Thanks for bringing up a pertinent question that never seems to get addressed on BRF and is even declared unnecessary because of presumed material and numerical Chinese superiority that will negate anything India can do.

Actually one of the biggest issues caused by partition that no one talks about is that the India Pakistan border is not militarily defensible. It is an artificial line drawn across plains with no natural barrier to military invasion. Technically it is possible for Pakistani forces to reach Delhi very quickly if an armored column breaks through. There are no major rivers or mountains where armies can be held back. This is why invaders who crossed the Indus always managed to get Delhi and then move east staying north of the Vindhyas which are another natural barrier.

Punjab is all plains - great tank country. Canals in Punjab have been built not only for irrigation, but to restrict tank movement. Here is my video on the Battle of Asal Uttar where defensive flooding was done by breaching canals to bog down Pakistani tanks and decimate them when they were stuck.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHSVJNNsQ4U&feature=plcp

Rajasthan too is all plains but desert. In the battle of Longewala India escaped by the skin of its teeth. Pakistanis were in a brilliant position to capture the city of Jaisalmer by evening on the first day of attack itself. Luckily we had air support and Pakis did not. See this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fy3XLnWsok&feature=plcp

In the case of Punjab the border itself has been drawn though areas that are developed - though villages in some cases. There is no question of "avoiding" building infrastructure. The area already has a high population. In the case of Punjab and Rajasthan artificial defensive lines have to be created by physical barriers as well as a heavy military presence at the border.

The India China border has natural obstacles. From a military standpoint natural obstacles should be retained if it is an advantage to us, but if it is not an advantage, we need to do something that removes our disadvantage. Exactly how that might be done would depend on the local situation.

But from a rhetorical standpoint, if you tell me that China is superior to India on all counts and in every sphere, I would advise you to be on the defensive and be prepared to lose every battle with China. The question of not retreating, or building infrastructure and spending money on a border population arises only if we have some confidence that we can retain those areas in a war. If those areas are simply going to get occupied by China because of their vast military superiority, then all terrain obstacles should be allowed to remain as obstacles so that the Chinese cannot gain advantage from our infrastructure.

The point I am making is that an accurate and discriminating assessment of Chinese capability is necessary rather than a blanket assessment of complete Chinese superiority in every sphere. If we assume across the board Chinese superiority we have to prepare only for across the board defeat and retreat. In preparing for defeat and retreat it makes eminent sense not to develop border areas where development might offer the Chinese some advantage. The lack of development in Indian border areas may be an admission of Indian weakness which we cannot wish away as "Kangressi thinking". India's focus has been on twin enemies, China and Pakistan. India had war with China in 1962, with Pakistan in 1965 and 1971 and border clashes with China in the 1980s, war again in 1999

With Chinese numbers and the fact that we still have Pakistan to deal with in the west I would like to know what is wrong with a fearfully defensive posture in the east? If it has to be less defensive and a more offensive stance, it has to be based on an assessment of Indian superiority over Chinese forces in a given area. How can we make such an assessment if we assume that the Chinese are always and invariably superior? They might be exactly that, but we must at least pretend to be objective in our assessment. And if we can show that they are superior then our posture must be to remain as defensive as possible.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Nov 2012 07:34 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23
Posts: 5278
Aditya_V wrote:
Pranav_> its not the Tank's job to defend against A2g , thats the job SAM's with the Tank regiment.


Might be possible for a Trophy-like system to intercept supersonic ATGMs as well, needs to be explored.

One the other hand one might also start thinking about stealth ATGMs, made of composites, perhaps. A heavy metal penetrator surrounded by radar-deflecting, -transparent and -absorbing material and geometry.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Nov 2012 20:28 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 11410
Wheeled APC Boomerang

http://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/24923/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 10 Nov 2012 04:30 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 07 Jun 2012 20:26
Posts: 1676
Location: Chaprasi and Bawarchi third gilass, South East corner, aka Agneya
I normally don't post in these threads because my BP goes up
Look at the tender of CVRDE

The jokers there do nothing called research &development
C supposed to be combat
V for vehicleR
R for research
D for development

They have been doing vickers tanks aka vijayanta
They were doing T-72 and now T90
Now. In India
BEML is making Tatra
Tara's make defense vehicles
Ashoka leyland does
DLW Varanasi does locomotive engines

And many more great IITs and IIsc churning out great Technologists can make these

Image

Image[/url]

And we float a global tender?
Just ask BARC they will do it in two months


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 10 Nov 2012 07:39 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 14 Jan 2012 18:00
Posts: 865
^^I think they are just looking for foreign consultants and are otherwise planning to do the R&D and manufacturing here (do inform me if I am wrong).


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 4346 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38 ... 109  Next

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bharats, Gagan, George, Google Feedfetcher, sam witte and 23 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group