Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 30 Jan 2015 13:54

Let me simply post some thoughts about conflict/war - I am not asking anyone to agree with me. I state my views.

The difference between war and an Olympic boxing match is that the Olympic match is arranged between people of similar strength and size. Anyone who wants to wage war would be stupid to wage war against someone who is "similar in strength and size". It is preferable to be much bigger and stronger than an adversary.

As a thought experiment imagine what would happen if a bantamweight boxer had to fight a heavyweight. The former will not want to lose - and if given the choice he would bring a weapon like a sword or a gun to improve his chances. To cut a long story shot, in war every side will do whatever is in its power to avoid losing easily, or even if it loses, it should walk away with some advantage that can be useful later.

Pakistan attempted infiltration in 1947 which failed

In 1965 they planned infiltration to be followed by hot war as the expected that Indians would chicken out and lose

In 1971 they thought they could prevail in in intense war which they would win in the west - allowing them to bargain for something the the east.

By 1999 ideas of hot war had fizzled out and they tried a covert grabbing of territory assuming that India would back down because they had nukes.

After 1999, Pakistan has given up all attempts at hot war with India but has resorted to low grade asymmetric war (terrorism)

Like a bantamweight boxer finding an increasingly powerful adversary, Pakistan have wisely changed tactics knowing that hot war is no use against India. they have a fairly good idea that they can lose a hot war and do not want to start one. But they do realise that India could start a hot war, is provoked enough.

It is widely stated and assumed that Pakistan would be able to fight an intense hot war for two weeks - enough to just hold back defeat by which time they would sue for a cease fire. Obviously India has its own plans to counter this Paki idea. But in actual fact Pakistan has the resources to hold India back for a week or two. For India to smash Pakistani defences - we will have to wear them down as the coalition forces did before the gulf war - with weeks and weeks of hammering from the air and no fly zones so that Iraqi air power and will power were both diminished.

I do not believe we have the air power resources to do this now - although I foresee it likely that India will get there in future. I think that if Pakistan opts for hot war with the plan of "holding India back" India should prolong the war into one of attrition using air power lasting several weeks and then have the choice of either a cease fire on our terms or a land based coup de grace. The nuclear question would remain open in such a war - and that is a choice that Pakis retain. If the use it they lose it. If they don't they will still lose. Even if there is no war they must be made to lose.

sum · Post by **sum** » 30 Jan 2015 13:55

^^ We are rapidly loosing control over even the existing IM population despite all the "secular" and pro-India teachings and pampering at every step.

Shudder to think what will happen when 180m of these brainwashed zombies will join us. J&K example should show us that no amount of pampering/education/shwoing other cheek will get anything out of these people since they have been hardwired that way due to a certain Malsi phenomenon.

rkhanna · Post by **rkhanna** » 30 Jan 2015 14:23

^^ Can you please prove that we are loosing control of 180m 'zombies'?

Also When you say 'secular education' do you refer to the party line of the congress party that has been spewed out for 60 years or actual on the ground education/social evolution for nation building purposes? - because unfortunately that never happened. EVER.

And unfortunately you cannot use J&K as an example to extrapolate to the rest of the country.

sum · Post by **sum** » 30 Jan 2015 14:30

Sir, by zombies i meant 180m of the Pakis outside of our border, not our folks.

Regarding controlling Muslims within India, it is looking pretty grim with loads of guys joining upto to ISIS/IM etc and with the FB age, it isnt tough to notice the Islamist trend among even the "educated" class ( simple scrolling through FB/Twitter of any muslim forums should be enough).
A simple visit to any of the ghettos in any major or minor city in India should be enough to know what is the thought process in those areas.

I believe the same J&K template will happen when numbers reach those percentages elsewhere and si already slowly visible in parts of Kerala/Assam etc. Hope i am wrong.

Anyways, all this is OT for the TSP Arms doctrine thread.

rkhanna · Post by **rkhanna** » 30 Jan 2015 14:40

Sir, by zombies i meant 180m of the Pakis outside of our border, not our folks.

My mistake. Agreed OT. But would love to debate the J&K point at some other time.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 07 Feb 2015 11:07

Obama proposes over $1 billion civil, military aid to Pakistan

WASHIGTON: US President Barack Obama has proposed over $1 billion in civilian and military aid to "strategically important" Pakistan for fighting terror, economic development, safety of nuclear installations and improving ties with India among other objectives.

The budgetary proposals released by the state department after Obama sent them to the Congress show a more than six- fold increase in the foreign military financing (FMF) to Pakistan from $42.2 million in 2014 to $265 million in 2016.

The key elements of the proposed budget include strengthening Pakistani military for its fight against extremism, safety of nuclear installations, stability in Afghanistan, economic development and improving ties with India.

In addition, the Obama Administration proposed $334.9 million for economic support fund and $143.1 million especially for counter-terrorism and non-proliferation efforts.

Pakistan lies at the heart of the US counter-terrorism strategy, the peace process in Afghanistan, nuclear non-proliferation efforts, and economic integration in South and Central Asia, the state department said.

For Pakistan, the budget demonstrates US commitment to fostering stability and prosperity, and provides security assistance that promotes counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency capabilities, the state department said.

The budget continues to support public engagement and partnership programmes in Pakistan and maintains staffing in order to support these critical US priorities, the state department said.

Proposing $265 million for Pakistan under foreign military funding (FMF), the state department argued that this is essential to Pakistan's efforts to increase stability in its western border region and ensure overall stability within its own borders.

FMF will continue to focus on seven priority areas identified and agreed with Pakistan. These include-- precision strike; air mobility and combat search and rescue; counter- improvised explosive device and battlefield survivability; battlefield communications; night operations; border security; and maritime security/counter narcotics in support of counter terrorism aims.

For Pakistan, the overseas contingency operation (OCO) request of $36 million, will support critical US activities such as sustaining close cooperation with Islamabad, working with the country to facilitate the peace process in Afghanistan and promoting improved relations with India.

The state department said the OCO funds will help facilitate increased stability and prosperity in this "strategically important nation".

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 07 Feb 2015 11:09

^^^ from above:

FMF will continue to focus on seven priority areas identified and agreed with Pakistan. These include-- precision strike; air mobility and combat search and rescue; counter- improvised explosive device and battlefield survivability; battlefield communications; night operations; border security; and maritime security/counter narcotics in support of counter terrorism aims.

They are planning the next 26/11

shaun · Post by **shaun** » 07 Feb 2015 12:09

I don't know what Us will benefit from pakis at this juncture,
1. US version of war on terrorism ended with osama atleast in this part of the world
2. Pakis can not buy anything from them other than begging, no economic benefit here.
3. With licence building of chini military hardwares, paki military generals who are the custodian of nuclear stuffs and who actually run the country, are in my more sync with their chini counterparts.
4. Religious fanaticism is at its high and religious freedom is a mockery in puki land.
5. Exporting terrorism to a country which Us call her natural partner.

The list can go on but what add salt to the injury is statement that by giving money to porkies will made them improve ties with India!!

I always wonder how we consider Us as natural partner?

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 07 Feb 2015 13:29

Nothing to do with Pak. Everything with domestic manufacturers. Whether you dump it in ukraine, syria, pakistan, iraq, yemen, or the middle of the ocean nobody cares. The order books must remain overflowing while tax income is improving due to the current economy + low oil. Pakistan is not alone in reaping the benefits.

shaun · Post by **shaun** » 07 Feb 2015 14:00

1 Dumping in ukraine for countering Russians
2.Dumping in syria , iraq and yemen to counter IS and for Oil
3. Dumping in middle of ocean , nothing such happened.

If the reason is to keep the order books overflowing then they could give the hardwares to friendly countries with friendly prices.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Feb 2015 16:45

given the friendship prices for TSP, this means a lot more mavericks, jdams and GBU-xx weapons.

shaun · Post by **shaun** » 07 Feb 2015 18:24

Well, TSP is not buying, US giving money to porkies to buy their weapons just to cover up before their general public, that because of economic incentives they give to porkies, they are promoting democracy in pukiland and thatporkies buy weapons from them and thus a win win situation for both. Even it helps to improve their image before porki abduls.

During cold war days when us had genuine intentions to counter soviets, they improved relationship with chinis substantially form military technology to large scale industrialization ,which became a strong foundation for PRC. Compare to that, Indo-US ties is more in the economic front and unlike in China where it helped them setup manufacturing hub, here in India, they are actually tapping our market. Whatever strategic thing there is in the relationship are in papers only and some for keeping India engaged with them for the coming future.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 17 Feb 2015 18:56

Russia-Pakistan Deal May Lead to More Sales

ISLAMABAD — A deal for Pakistan to directly import Russian engines for the JF-17 Thunder multi-role fighter will improve the program and may lead to more Russian-made parts for the aircraft, analysts say.

News broke over the weekend that Pakistan would directly import the Klimov RD-93 engines from Russia rather than via China, which reportedly also supports the deal.

Kaiser Tufail, an analyst and former air commodore, said he believes the deal is significant on cost and political grounds.

"I think a direct deal with Russia for supply of the engines basically removes the Chinese middleman, resulting in cheaper procurement cost. It is also reflective of a thaw in what has been a frosty relationship with Russia over the past several decades," he said.

Considering the JF-17 is a Sino-Pakistani project, Tufail said: "China's approval of direct procurement from Russia is also significant, and can be seen as trilateral cooperation between the three countries, in which Pakistan enjoys a pivotal position."

Engine availability has always been a source of speculation for the JF-17 program — initially the lack of a Western-made powerplant — and whether Moscow would continue to supply the RD-93, leading Pakistan to look for an alternative.

An alternative does exist in the Chinese Guizhou WS-13, but analysts do not consider it yet to have matured. With the guaranteed availability of the RD-93, the only issue is whether a more powerful, and perhaps thrust-vectoring, variant may be adopted at a future date.

The European EJ200 is also being offered, but for potential customers such as Saudi Arabia.

Brian Cloughley, analyst and former Australia defense attache to Islamabad, said, "I think there is already examination of the means of upgrading the JF-17 in many ways, and it would be surprising if this did not include more powerful engines, and certainly an improved version of the RD-93 would be a sensible choice."

Cloughley said financing may be an issue, but it's something he said he believed politics will overcome. "As usual, it all comes down to cost — but Russia is cutting the price of its exported defense material in order to acquire and lock-in markets."

Cloughley also highlighted a perennial fear of sanctions for Pakistan that still shapes its policies. "This is yet another blowback effect of sanctions, and it may cost the west considerably in the long term."

However, Tufail questioned the need for the JF-17 needing a replacement engine.

"I believe it is a premature idea, as the current RD-93 is powerful enough, providing a thrust-to-weight ratio of almost 1:1," said Tufail.

"So far the engine has performed flawlessly, both from an operational and maintenance point of view, its relatively low [time between overhaul] notwithstanding. When the PAF eventually decides to replace the current engine, it would likely be on the TBO factor," he added.

Tufail explained that under present circumstances, the JF-17 may not be suited to a more powerful engine.

"It also needs to be understood that any thrust increase in an aircraft that is not amply endowed with a large internal fuel quantity is not a feasible option. The RD-93 is, therefore, likely to continue on the current version of the JF-17 for the foreseeable future," Tufail said.

Cloughley said the engine deal could lead to further Russian involvement in the JF-17. "I have no doubt that Moscow and Islamabad are looking at all sorts of equipment, and it would make sense for Pakistan to make deals — providing they are acceptable to China."

The engine deal could eventually lead to weapons deals, Tufail said.

"Over a long term, Russian weapons would surely come under consideration, but I believe for the time being, we won't get into retrofits," he said.

Tufail added: "These are effort intensive for they need time to iron out the interface glitches. For the next 5-7 years, the PAF would like the weapon system to mature, though I am sure studies of Russian weapons integration would surely get underway during this period."

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 17 Feb 2015 19:07

Its the third time Porkies have been taken on ride on the promise of establishing a local production line to cater for global needs.

1> Agosta Subs, Malaysia bought it directly from French.

2> MBT 2000, again Peru bought tanks directly from Chinese.

3> JF-17, Argentina opting to buy Chinese built JF-17s.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 18 Feb 2015 14:59

Argentina hasn't opted for any FC-1s as yet..the Chinese are attempting to get them interested in the J-10B instead.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 18 Feb 2015 19:55

Sid wrote:Its the third time Porkies have been taken on ride on the promise of establishing a local production line to cater for global needs.

1> Agosta Subs, Malaysia bought it directly from French.

2> MBT 2000, again Peru bought tanks directly from Chinese.

3> JF-17, Argentina opting to buy Chinese built JF-17s.

Something like Russian selling Yakhont to Vietnam?

Whats of concern here is that Pakis will have a OEM supplier of engines for their principal fighter program - and it is indigenous/CKD program to boot. Pakistan can then go on to manufacture many given the relatively cheap price.

Russia must be hooked on to FC-1's export potential. All countries operating old MiGs, Mirages and F-7s are potential customers. Albeit lack of a trainer variant is holding it back (IMHO).

kancha · Post by **kancha** » 20 Feb 2015 22:36

TSPA lost an officer, Major Zahid Iqbal, to sniper fire in NWA today

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 21 Feb 2015 06:19

Good but whats the source?

kancha · Post by **kancha** » 21 Feb 2015 06:38

Twitter

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 21 Feb 2015 08:38

Yeah sure..right after you tell me how Lt Saurabh Kalia was treated. I have no sympathy for pakis. A dead one is a good one. No matter what.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 21 Feb 2015 09:03

kancha wrote:TSPA lost an officer, Major Zahid Iqbal, to sniper fire in NWA today

What is NWA? North Waziristan?

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 21 Feb 2015 09:50

Bheeshma wrote:Yeah sure..right after you tell me how Lt Saurabh Kalia was treated. I have no sympathy for pakis. A dead one is a good one. No matter what.

Your being all emotional does not mean that you feel any more strongly about it than someone else. There is a saying about clouds that thunder ...

Anyways, this forum discusses the Indian armed forces, a thoroughly professional unit trained and equipped to fight and kill, but never mock the dead. We try to uphold that etiquette in this forum. As a poster on this forum, I hope you follow the same.

Jay · Post by **Jay** » 21 Feb 2015 09:59

Etiquette be damned. A dead Paki, that too in uniform, does not and will not get an ounce of respect from me. They all can go to hell for all I care...

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 21 Feb 2015 10:40

This is not a moral science class. Nobody wishes them well. But, there is a big fat margin between respect and disrespect. Our army does not show disrespect to any fallen soilder and rightly so. And we should live up to those ethics.

If you find that difficult to do, it is fine. Just don't express it here.

Akshay Kapoor · Post by **Akshay Kapoor** » 21 Feb 2015 12:27

Indranil,

They are no longer 'soldiers' and haven't been for a long time. The Paki army is a Jihadi outfit which has only one creed - jihad in the name of Islam. It is a cold hard fact. We can't wish it away. I have seen it first hand when I served. Yes we (army) do not act like them and are highly disciplined but our patience is at breaking point. I don't want to go into details but there are a lot of examples of their bestiality that are not in the public domain. There is no question of respect...living or dead. Only thing is we don't waste our energy on the dead and we go through the motions to keep discipline up and follow orders.

Lets look at this clinically...the more officer casualties Pakis have in their operations against the Taliban, the better for us as this increases the friction between the two. For a professional, a reduction in the threat is good news.

I understand that as a moderator you need to protect the forum/site. But in this case I wonder if it was necessary. Bheeshma said nothing that we haven't said several times in units/HQs.

As always I fully respect the mod decisions and hope you don't mind me posting this.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 21 Feb 2015 13:16

I am not oblivious.

If you read my last posts again, you will realize that I am towing the same line that Army asked you to follow, knowing fully well what the Pakistani Army has become. That is the right value to follow as a human.

Let's move on.

Akshay Kapoor · Post by **Akshay Kapoor** » 21 Feb 2015 13:23

Indranil,

We were never chastised for a casual 'good' to news of enemy casualties. The line was and is not to mutilate bodies, bury dead bodies in accordance with rites , hand them over when possible etc. I really think you are missing the point here unless the poster said something more than that and I missed it.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 21 Feb 2015 13:25

Point taken. Thank you.

kancha · Post by **kancha** » 21 Feb 2015 22:25

shiv wrote:
kancha wrote:TSPA lost an officer, Major Zahid Iqbal, to sniper fire in NWA today
What is NWA? North Waziristan?

Yes

shaun · Post by **shaun** » 21 Feb 2015 22:51

Sniper Fire, thats dangerous ... we should take note of it. Some time back , The Hindu reported a sniper fire direction finder was in testing phase , what happened to it ?? cause we might see such snipers proliferating in the valley.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 27 Feb 2015 17:14

Pakistan acquires Karakoram Eagle AWACS - DT

Chief of the Air Staff Air Chief Marshal Tahir Rafique Butt said the event was not only a significant moment for the Squadron and the PAF, but also a moment of pride for all Pakistanis. He reassured that PAF in line with the Quaid’s vision of being “Second to None”, was equipped with technologically advanced weapon system. He said re-equipping the No 4 Squadron with this state-of-the-art aircraft would enable PAF to effectively counter all threats against Pakistan’s aerial frontiers and add a new dimension to the national security.

The chief of the air staff said that induction of Karakoram Eagle AWACS would revolutionise PAF’s operational concepts. With its induction, the PAF was transforming into a modern versatile and capability-based force.

Earlier, the prime minister reviewed Chinese-built Karakoram Eagle AWACS Aircraft and congratulated the PAF and the nation.

Those present at the ceremony included Minister for Defence Khawaja Muhammad Asif, Federal Finance Minister Muhammad Ishaq Dar, Federal Minister for Commerce Khurram Dastagir, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee General Rashad Mahmood, Sindh Chief Minister Syed Qaim Ali Shah, Ambassador of Peoples Republic of China Sun Wey Weidong and Sindh Chief Secretary Sajjad Saleem Hotiana.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 04 Mar 2015 03:22

Pakistan and China develop two-seat Xiaolong fighter

To introduce the FC-1 Xiaolong multirole fighter, also known as the JF-17 Thunder, to the overseas market, China and Pakistan are going to display a two-seater version of the aircraft during the Paris Air Show held from June 15-21 this year, reports the Moscow-based Military Parade.

Known as the FC-1B or JF-17B, this two-seater fighter is likely to be equipped with the French-built M88-2 engine. It is currently equipped with the Rafale twin-engine fighter designed by Dassault for the French Air Force.

With this new engine, the range of the Xiaolong can be extended from 800 kilometers to 1,000 kilometers, according to the report. A refueling probe will be installed on the FC-1B or JF-17B as well for aerial refueling according to an unofficial source.

Other defense analysts have queried whether the M88-2 can be fitted to a two-seater Xiaolong.

Shalav · Post by **Shalav** » 04 Mar 2015 05:18

^^ Odd choice that!

The M88-2 has lower thrust (dry/AB) ~50/75 kN v/s ~79/98 , has a narrower dia ~650mm v/s 1,000mm, and shorter length ~3,600mm v/s ~4,200mm versus the RD-93. It also has a lower weight ~900kg v/s ~1,000kg. The fuel consumption is about equal (dry & AB) 80kg/(kN.h) & 170kg/(kN.h) v/s 75kg/(kN.h) & 188kg/(kN.h)

I wonder why? Is there a shortage of the RD-93 supplies? Certainly it seems the Chinese WS13 project does not seem to be going anywhere, else why would they not put this on the FC-1B?

Mainly I am wondering why the change to the M88-2? It has lower specs than the RD-93 on paper and only has a 100 kg weight advantage. They would have to completely redesign the aft end with a heavier two-seater airframe and lower spec'd engine!

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 04 Mar 2015 08:11

1) french influence over Porkies.
2) More reliable with less MTBO.
3) since they are pitching it for trainer/conversion role, thrust should not be an issue.

Even we went with the french engine for IJT for above reasons first. But then....

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 04 Mar 2015 10:24

Not to forget better KB to the generals. I am all for it , the JF-17 will probably have AOA of 15 degrees with this.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 04 Mar 2015 15:30

Shalav wrote:^^ Odd choice that!
Mainly I am wondering why the change to the M88-2? It has lower specs than the RD-93 on paper and only has a 100 kg weight advantage. They would have to completely redesign the aft end with a heavier two-seater airframe and lower spec'd engine!

Cheena biladhel wants to xerox some technology from the M-88.
The question is weather the Pakistanis can afford the M-88?
The answer is NO !
And the french have refused sales to the beggers in the past because they were not able to come up with the cash

adityadange · Post by **adityadange** » 04 Mar 2015 16:12

^^ or just some muscle flexing by french. buy rafale or we go to your enemies.

kancha · Post by **kancha** » 04 Mar 2015 20:02

@Karachi_Post 5m5 minutes ago
Two dead as PAF Mirage aircraft crashes in DI Khan

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 08 Mar 2015 07:32

I thought all Pakee Miraj III/V are all single seeters, may be two of them went down!?!? Is it part of the Jumma celebration or an accident..

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 08 Mar 2015 10:44

Shrinivasan wrote:I thought all Pakee Miraj III/V are all single seeters..