Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Singha » 26 Apr 2012 11:33

BEL is setting up a coastal radar network all over, which might supplement any IN/CG assets already present in that region.

adityadange
BRFite
Posts: 274
Joined: 04 Aug 2011 11:34

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby adityadange » 26 Apr 2012 12:01

Retired General Talat Masood, a defence analyst, told media it would be able to hit targets up to 2,500 to 3,000 kilometres (1,550 to 1,850 miles).


well... the range makes sense. let me explain to you all.
range of the missile: 1000km
range of the truck carrying the missile: 1500km
range of bullock carts pulling the trucks: 250 km
total: 2750
cep: +/-250km

So the figure: 2500- 3000km :rotfl: :rotfl:

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10774
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Aditya_V » 26 Apr 2012 19:42

Looking at the pics on the web the Shaheen 1A looks more similair to DF-11 than Df-15.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby arun » 26 Apr 2012 20:13

Singha wrote:their 2nd stage seems to be the conical stage below the red warhead section.


I am sceptical.

Sceptical as there seems to be only a single unbroken vertical seam running from top to bottom, which presumable is a cable duct for motor control.

Multi stage solid fuelled missiles have more than one such unbroken seam for use as cable ducts. Indeed the Agni V has three such vertical seams for use as cable ducts, one for each stage. (See Here). Stage 1 cable duct ending just below the words A5-01. Stage 2 cable duct from above the DRDO insignia to just below our Flag. And Stage 3 cable duct from above our Flag to just below the black painted nose cone.)

So my take is that the conical portion below the red warhead section is an avionics bay and not a second stage.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35017
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby shiv » 26 Apr 2012 22:01

Why is it that the Shaheen whatever that was tested is quoted a being able to carry a 200-300 kg muclear warhead but a 200-600 kg conventional warhead?

Is this djinn science? Because "uranium" is "heavier" than conventional explosive, 200 kg of Uranium warhead weighs the same as 500 kg of conventional explosive because conventional is "lighter"? :D

Despite the smiley, this am a serious question.

Gurneesh
BRFite
Posts: 470
Joined: 14 Feb 2010 21:21
Location: Troposphere

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Gurneesh » 26 Apr 2012 22:07

^^^ I dunno but 200kg of Uranium should weigh exactly the same as 200 kg of any thing (air, water, rdx, tnt, etc).... It is the volume that will change with density. So 200 kg of uranium will have lesser volume that say 200 kg of aluminum.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35017
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby shiv » 26 Apr 2012 22:12

Gurneesh wrote:^^^ I dunno but 200kg of Uranium should weigh exactly the same as 200 kg of any thing (air, water, rdx, tnt, etc).... It is the volume that will change with density. So 200 kg of uranium will have lesser volume that say 200 kg of aluminum.


Not in djinn science. In djinn science 200 kg of Uranium will weigh more than 200 kg conventional explosive. That is my question. Why does pakmijjile carry 200 kg nuke but 500 kg conventional?

The other explanation, leaving out djinn science is that some one is trying to say "Hey, we got 200 kg warheads"

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3391
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Aditya G » 26 Apr 2012 22:49

tsarkar wrote:
Aditya G wrote:PNS Azmat...Equivalent to Veer class (450 tons)...tsarkar and other gurus, what is the mission for this ship?
As you correctly mentioned, cheap equivalent to Veer class.

After the Karachi raid, Pakistanis purchased Chinese Osa missile boat copies with 2 missiles instead of 4. That class too was named Azmat and these boats are replacements.

No one should be fooled by the sloping sides, we dont know how much studies have been done behind those sloping sides.

1. Check the only sensor. Radar is a old one, while our newest boats carry Positiv PAR. It can designate but not guide.
2. Check the only gun. It is a ZSU-23-2 23 mm guns in a fancy housing. And unguided. Our boats have 76 mm main gun and two AK-630, in the latter boats guided by BEL Oerlikon TMX. Even our Patrol Boats have 30 mm guns guided by EO sights.
3. Missiles are Chinese Exocet copies with Harpoon components, both gifted by the Pakis.


tsarkar, I extend my question -what is the PN's mission? How will they deploy their fleet in case of full fledged war with India?

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7345
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby krishnan » 26 Apr 2012 23:11

will they have anything left to deploy ????

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23315
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Austin » 26 Apr 2012 23:22

shiv wrote:Why is it that the Shaheen whatever that was tested is quoted a being able to carry a 200-300 kg muclear warhead but a 200-600 kg conventional warhead?


Me think 200-300 kg would be the N weapons warhead design for a given yeald , since they use U235 as fissile material its less compact that PU.

The standard explosive that that most Cruise missile or Conventional BM carries ( 400-500 kg ) , So shaheen would be dual purpose conventional/nuclear role with some trade off in range achieved for a given throw up weight.

The other thing i can think of is volume available , for a given volume available they might be able to pack in 400-500 kg of conventional explosive , while the Nuclear warhead design with all its electronic components/fuze/fail safe device etc might need bigger volume but end up with over all lower weight.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3391
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Aditya G » 27 Apr 2012 00:19

krishnan wrote:will they have anything left to deploy ????


Before the shots are fired, the enemy force will naturally array itself in a position it deems most suitable to it. My thoughts are towards understanding what role PN sees itself perform against IN, which is far bigger and advanced foe.

Looking at history:

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/Hist ... tives.html

One of the most significant events during 2001-2002 was the enhanced deployment of the Indian Navy against Pakistan. The Indian Navy had deployed more than a dozen warships including the aircraft carrier INS Viraat in an offensive posture. The ships were on a high alert, fully armed and carrying out regular patrolling in the Arabian Sea. Five warships from the Eastern Fleet were also rushed to the Arabian Sea to contribute to the naval build up. The Navy was in a high state of alert in the shortest ever time frame. The high operational availability of its material assets i.e. ships, submarines, aircraft, naval support infrastructure was amply demonstrated.

Earlier, a similar deployment had forced the Pakistan Navy to stay close to its harbours and hastened the end of the eleven-week Kargil intrusion in 1999. The Indian Navy had forward deployed frigates, destroyers and submarines within striking range of Karachi harbour, through which more than 90% of Pakistan's trade, including oil supplies, are received. This display of force was aimed at challenging Pakistan to vacate the Indian territory in the Kargil sector in North India. The build up was also aimed at imposing a naval blockade of Karachi port.

The Indian fleet conducted offensive manoeuvres in the Arabian Sea resulting in the Pakistan naval fleet sticking very close to its coast. Pakistan had interpreted the initiatives to mean that the Indian Navy was preparing to enforce a quarantine or blockade of Karachi and prevent the supply of oil from the Persian Gulf. Naval planners in Islamabad have remained preoccupied with the Indian threat of a naval blockade of Pakistan's seaports. As a matter of fact, the threat of a naval blockade finds a prominent place in the Pakistan Navy's strategic thinking and tactical plans. This is primarily due to past experiences during the 1965 and 1971 India-Pakistan wars. Islamabad was not keen to open another front for itself against the Indian military and chose to withdraw from Kargil.


http://www.indianexpress.com/Storyold/112574/

Just when people were getting curious about the Navy's successes, a senior officer said, "People know about the role that the Army and the Air Force played during the Kargil war. But little do they know about Navy." He added with pride, "Thirty Indian Naval ships parked themselves outside Karachi. Just 13 nautical miles from the harbour, in the contiguous waters. It did the trick. It conveyed to Pakistan what the warfare in Himalayas and diplomatic channels could not spell out. They started pulling out of Kargil.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35017
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby shiv » 27 Apr 2012 06:17

Austin wrote:
shiv wrote:Why is it that the Shaheen whatever that was tested is quoted a being able to carry a 200-300 kg muclear warhead but a 200-600 kg conventional warhead?


Me think 200-300 kg would be the N weapons warhead design for a given yeald , since they use U235 as fissile material its less compact that PU.

The standard explosive that that most Cruise missile or Conventional BM carries ( 400-500 kg ) , So shaheen would be dual purpose conventional/nuclear role with some trade off in range achieved for a given throw up weight.

The other thing i can think of is volume available , for a given volume available they might be able to pack in 400-500 kg of conventional explosive , while the Nuclear warhead design with all its electronic components/fuze/fail safe device etc might need bigger volume but end up with over all lower weight.



Nuclear bombs will at best have less than 25 kg Uranium/Pu. And the volume occupied by that will not be more than a volley ball size. That leaves behind plenty of extra weight to be made up by other components. OK there may be some cladding, conventional explosive and electronics and a casing. With the specific gravity of conventional explosive being low compared with say lead or Uranium/Pu the volume of 500 kg will be relatively high.

I wonder if it is the physical shape of the bomb itself that is a constraint? Unless they are bluffing as usual.

Arav
BRFite
Posts: 141
Joined: 03 Aug 2011 15:38

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Arav » 27 Apr 2012 06:30

We need a MRBM with MIRVed capability for Pakistan

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby arun » 27 Apr 2012 08:24

X Posted from the TSP thread.

arun wrote:Aman Ki Asha Newspaper The News reports that Dr. Shireen Mazari, spokesperson for foreign policy of Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) political party, is rather upset that the US State Department lauded India for having “a solid nonproliferation record”.

Setting aside the veracity of the claim, it certainly does not seem “brotherly” of a political party of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to begrudge the alleged help given by India to fellow members of “Ummah” namely Iran and Iraq.

Appears that there is a sectarian angle to this action by Imran Khan’s PTI as both Iran and Iraq have Shia Mohammadden majorities while Pakistan is a majority Sunni Mohammadden country:

Contrary to US claim India’s ‘nonproliferation record’ is highly suspect


Aman Ki Asha Newspaper The News reports that Dr. Shireen Mazari, spokesperson for foreign policy of Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) political party, is now rather upset with India for “leaking” news of the launch of the Shaheen 1A:

India leaked news of Pak test launch

Sohum
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 63
Joined: 02 Jul 2003 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Sohum » 27 Apr 2012 18:56

Don't know if this has already been posted or discussed. Some interesting gems from cablegate leak. This was written by the us embassy islamabad and marked as a secret cable.

The Pakistani F-16 program, however, will be
no match for India's proposed purchase of F-18 or equivalent
aircraft.


The Pakistanis also will have to
pay $80 million to install the upgrade kits in Turkey and
approximately $25 million to build and defend a separate F-16
base because of USG concerns about potential technology
transfer to China.


However, the Pakistani military now faces a growing
extremist militancy on its western border with Afghanistan,
and it is using F-16s in that fight. F-16s are not the ideal
tool for counter-insurgency operations, but they are all the
Pakistanis have or are likely to acquire near term to conduct
air operations.
Their current F-16 capability is limited,
however, and does not allow for night combat, precision
bombing, or coordinated Close Air Support.


When Pressler Amendment sanctions were imposed in
1990 after Pakistan's nuclear tests, the U.S. could not
legally deliver 28 F-16 aircraft that Pakistan had purchased
with national money. However, Pakistan was required to pay
for storage of the purchased F-16s in Arizona.
Even though
the U.S. resolved this issue in 1998, it left a legacy of
distrust that continues even today.


New Aircraft. In 2006, the GOP signed a five year contract
to purchase 18 new Block 52 aircraft. The first delivery is
scheduled for 2010. As of September 2008, Pakistan had paid
$388 million in national funds, leaving a balance due of
$1.04 billion. The GOP is over 30 days behind schedule on
its December 2008 payment; its September payment was made
almost three months late and only after Pakistan received the
first tranche of its IMF Standby Agreement payment.
The next
payments due are: $113M in December 2008 (now overdue),
$99.5M in March 2009, and $301M in June 2009. .. Post firmly believes that
the GOP cannot afford to continue to make these payments, and
we do not expect this situation to change. The GOP is also
reportedly behind in payments to China, Sweden and other
countries for JF-17s, Erieye Airborne Early Warning And
Control(AEW&C) radar and other aircraft/programs.


This is a $641 million FMS case which
includes purchases of 500 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air
Missiles (AMRAAMS),
750 Mark 84 bombs and 500 bomb tail kits,
among other items. The AMRAAMS are not counter-insurgency
related but the GOP insists on acquiring the beyond visual
range capacity this technology allows.
The balance of
payment on the weapons/munitions package is $360 million to
be paid for entirely by Pakistan.


Both the new and MLU F-16s are subject
to Pakistan's compliance with security restrictions that
demand a separate base and 24/7 U.S. security coverage at a
cost of more than $25 million.
A National Defense Policy
Committee (NDPC) site survey, conducted in 2006, rejected
Mushaf Air base, where Pakistan's F-16s, French Mirages,
Russian MIG 21s and French Alouette Search and Rescue
helicopters are currently housed, as unacceptable because of
the prohibition co-mingling F-16 operations with other
aircraft. There have been other USG concerns about illegal
technology transfer relating to Pakistan's co-production
program with the JF-17 Chinese fighter aircraft.
While
finding the Shahbaz Air Base a suitable location, the NDPC
noted that none of the physical security requirements were in
place at the time of the inspection. Despite PAF promises
that security upgrades will be in place by 2009, Post does
not believe that Shahbaz will be ready in time for the
proposed 2010 delivery of new F-16s.



Source: http://www.cablegatesearch.net/cable.ph ... LAMABAD177

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13271
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Lalmohan » 27 Apr 2012 19:20

the orions were on a base shared with the chinese... makes you wonder...

Luxtor
BRFite
Posts: 185
Joined: 28 Sep 2003 11:31
Location: Earth ... but in a parallel universe

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Luxtor » 27 Apr 2012 19:49

Don't wonder, all weapons/techs provided to the pukis by uncle, French and other western countries were freely but of course secretely shared with the Chinese. This is a tacit understanding the puks have with the Chinese in exchange for nukes, missiles, and other assortment of Chinese weapons, plus geo-political cover from the Chinese.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13271
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Lalmohan » 27 Apr 2012 20:35

no, i dont wonder about the sharing, i am wondering about who fried the onions?

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6834
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby nachiket » 28 Apr 2012 02:42

Lalmohan wrote:no, i dont wonder about the sharing, i am wondering about who fried the onions?

The americans were quick to offer replacement onions which will no doubt end up in cheeni hands as well.

Sohum
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 63
Joined: 02 Jul 2003 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Sohum » 28 Apr 2012 05:46

F-16s are not the ideal tool for counter-insurgency operations, but they are all the Pakistanis have or are likely to acquire near term to conduct air operations. Their current F-16 capability is limited, however, and does not allow for night combat, precision
bombing, or coordinated Close Air Support.


More interestingly to me, this cable tacitly implies that whatever PAF fields in terms of close air support is ineffective be it Mirage III ROSE upgrades, Q-5, and F-7 etc.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3391
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Aditya G » 28 Apr 2012 10:12

http://post.jagran.com/pakistan-marines ... 1335545337

Jamnagar(Guj): Pakistan Marine personnel allegedly opened fire on Indian fishermen, injuring one of them, near the international maritime border off Jakhau in Gujarat on Thursday night, and apprehended 10 Indian fishing boats this morning in another incident.

Four boats were set free later but it was not clear how many fishermen were in captivity.

"Daya Bhai, one of the six fishermen on board the vessel `Sagar Bhuja' sustained bullet injuries when Pakistan Marine Security Agency personnel opened indiscriminate fire on them late Thursday night while they were fishing in international sea," a Marine Police official said here.

The vessel is from Porbandar. The injured fisherman has been admitted to a hospital in Okha.

In another incident, "the Pakistan Maritime Security Agency personnel this morning apprehended 14 fishing boats from near the international maritime border in Arabian sea off Jakhau coast...four boats were set free by them (later) with a few fishermen on board," said Manish Lodhari, Secretary, National Fish Worker Forum (NFWF). The boats were from Okha, Porbandar and Mangrol.

"I am not aware how many fishermen were on board these fishing boats," he said.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23315
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Austin » 28 Apr 2012 11:22

Pakistani security official discusses the Shaheen-1A test

LAHORE: Earlier on April 26, 2012 when news broke of Pakistan testing its new Intermediate Ballistic Missile Hatf-IV (Shaheen-1A), Terminal X contacted Brigadier Ateeq ur Rehman, Director PR for the Pakistani military's Inter-Services Public Relations regarding the range of the latest variant. This scribe was informed that the range has not been disclosed for various reasons.

Later today, a Pakistani military source for TX made an important disclosure: the mysterious range everyone was guessing for the Shaheen-1A is not 2500 kilometers or 5000 kilometers as some exaggerated, it has a maximum range of just 1500 kilometers. According to the official, there were two main objectives of this short test:

* Enhance accuracy for pinpoint attacks
* Inclusion into the league of nations which have developed intermediate ballistic missiles.

The official stated that Pakistan's deterrence is foremostly against any aggressive Indian adventurism that can turn the region into an inferno. In the official's opinion, India carried out the recent Agni-V ICBM test to send an indirect signal to its rival China, whom it has strong reservations against for various reasons.

It was also revealed by the official that India's military establishment has not shared the actual range of the Agni-V ICBM which happens to be 8000 kilometers, not 5000 kilometers as falsely broadcast in the mainstream media.

"Pakistan possesses various ICBMs which have a range of 9000+ kilometres", said the official, "But they will be revealed and tested when there is a need for it. At the moment, Pakistan is silently observing the Eastern Theatre of Operations spearheaded by the US and its increasing presence in Europe, the Pacific Ocean and South Asia. Add to that Indian frolicking and the coming US-Israel drills in the Middle East... and when the time comes, those who should know, will know, Pakistan also has targets beyond India... way beyond India".

He added, "A wise group does not consider the Agni-V test as a threat for Pakistan but rather for China, and China is smart enough to deal with it. The military establishment is not really considering ICBM tests soon since we consider silence as the ultimate weapon. It might be that Israel signaled India to provoke Pakistan into doing an ICBM test and exposing their exact range so that an international conspiracy against the country's nukes could be initiated as is being currently done against North Korea. Far from being slapped with sanctions, India instead received appreciation from the US, NATO and Israel for its recent test".

And, as this scribe repeated the million dollar question, 'Any ICBM tests in the pipeline?'

"Well, yes.. My vote is not for it though".

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9917
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby sum » 28 Apr 2012 12:25

"Pakistan possesses various ICBMs which have a range of 9000+ kilometres", said the official, "But they will be revealed and tested when there is a need for it.

Riiiiight.... :roll: :roll:

Add to that Indian frolicking and the coming US-Israel drills in the Middle East... and when the time comes, those who should know, will know, Pakistan also has targets beyond India... way beyond India".

What does that mean? Israel?

pralay
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 514
Joined: 24 May 2009 23:07
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby pralay » 28 Apr 2012 12:38

Austin wrote:Pakistani security official discusses the Shaheen-1A test
"Pakistan possesses various ICBMs which have a range of 9000+ kilometres", said the official, "But they will be revealed and tested when there is a need for it.

He is born paki and infected with "My mijjile is Longer and Bigger" syndrome.
What else can we expect from them:rotfl: :rotfl:
sum wrote:
Pakistan also has targets beyond India... way beyond India".

What does that mean? Israel?

It means China or US (because Paki always bite a feeding hand) :rotfl:

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7345
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby krishnan » 28 Apr 2012 12:42

Heaven/hell

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10774
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Aditya_V » 28 Apr 2012 12:51

Only in Paki, the test was a 300KM M-11 variant, even flights on the Mumbai gulf sector were not affected, and they claiming 1500KM, it was more in the range of 300km.

Craig Alpert
BRFite
Posts: 1442
Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
Location: Behind Enemy Lines

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Craig Alpert » 03 May 2012 05:15

Pakistan builds over 100 bunkers in 4 months adjoining Rajasthan

JAISALMER: In the past few months, Pakistan has constructed a large number of bunkers in their area adjoining Rajasthan's Jasialmer and Barmer districts and considerably improved their communication system in these places, defence and intelligence sources said.

Pakistan built over 60 new bunkers opposite Jaisalmer and over 48 opposite Barmer in the past 3 to 4 months, they said.

Those built opposite Jaisalmer include a large number of bunkers adjoining Longewala and Tanot in Islamgarh area in Pakistan. New bunkers also came up at Sakhirewala, Mirzawala, Toba and Kandera in Pakistan, opposite Kishangarh area in Jaisalmer. They also constructed 3 to 4 bunkers more on its every border out-post.

Sources said that similarly, in the past one year, Pakistan's 55 infantry brigade constructed over 45 new bunkers in Mitharia Charan, Charnot, Keetari Bedani, Jetaran, Chapas Shakrio etc in their area opposite Barmer. They also built kuccha and pucca morchas (fronts) and also constructed 3 new bunkers each at many check-posts.

They also laid new communication lines in many important border areas like Sangad. Apart from this, a huge army cantonment is being constructed at Suryaan area in Rahimiyar Khan district in Pakistan.


Defence spokesperson Col SD Goswami said that on March 14, defence minister AK Antony informed the Parliament that Pakistan had constructed 886 bunkers, 261 fronts, 398 towers and 143 border out-posts between 2004 and 2011.

Antony also informed that the government was aware through various inputs as to how Pakistan was continuing with the construction of bunkers, fronts and towers.

The BSF, during a flag meeting with Pakistani rangers, had raised the issue of these constructions before the field commander :?: .

Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1634
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Sid » 03 May 2012 09:09

Austin wrote:Pakistani security official discusses the Shaheen-1A test

"Pakistan possesses various ICBMs which have a range of 9000+ kilometres", said the official, "But they will be revealed and tested when there is a need for it.


If we remove all glitter and chest beating from above statement, I do think they posses such system. And these ready to use system, supplied by we know who, do not need any testing.

If N Korea can have ICBM, so can pakies. Whats the big deal here.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36297
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby SaiK » 05 May 2012 09:33

so, do we know what did the pakis [chips] do with the broken stealth skirosky's tail section after geronimo?

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23315
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Austin » 05 May 2012 11:17

JF-17 seen with Chinese Weapons ( via mp )

http://i.imgur.com/IUPA6.jpg

aniket
BRFite
Posts: 293
Joined: 14 Dec 2010 17:34
Location: On the top of the world

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby aniket » 05 May 2012 14:23

I think it was returned to uncle Sam but in pieces.

abhischekcc
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4278
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby abhischekcc » 06 May 2012 00:22

Craig Alpert wrote:Pakistan builds over 100 bunkers in 4 months adjoining Rajasthan

JAISALMER: In the past few months, Pakistan has constructed a large number of bunkers in their area adjoining Rajasthan's Jasialmer and Barmer districts and considerably improved their communication system in these places, defence and intelligence sources said.

Pakistan built over 60 new bunkers opposite Jaisalmer and over 48 opposite Barmer in the past 3 to 4 months, they said.

Those built opposite Jaisalmer include a large number of bunkers adjoining Longewala and Tanot in Islamgarh area in Pakistan. New bunkers also came up at Sakhirewala, Mirzawala, Toba and Kandera in Pakistan, opposite Kishangarh area in Jaisalmer. They also constructed 3 to 4 bunkers more on its every border out-post.

Sources said that similarly, in the past one year, Pakistan's 55 infantry brigade constructed over 45 new bunkers in Mitharia Charan, Charnot, Keetari Bedani, Jetaran, Chapas Shakrio etc in their area opposite Barmer. They also built kuccha and pucca morchas (fronts) and also constructed 3 new bunkers each at many check-posts.

They also laid new communication lines in many important border areas like Sangad. Apart from this, a huge army cantonment is being constructed at Suryaan area in Rahimiyar Khan district in Pakistan.


Defence spokesperson Col SD Goswami said that on March 14, defence minister AK Antony informed the Parliament that Pakistan had constructed 886 bunkers, 261 fronts, 398 towers and 143 border out-posts between 2004 and 2011.

Antony also informed that the government was aware through various inputs as to how Pakistan was continuing with the construction of bunkers, fronts and towers.

The BSF, during a flag meeting with Pakistani rangers, had raised the issue of these constructions before the field commander :?: .


Are the jokers preparing for another war?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52534
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby ramana » 06 May 2012 04:59

They expect Rajasthan sector to be an axis of Indian retaliation for their terrorist attacks.

paramu
BRFite
Posts: 669
Joined: 20 May 2008 11:38

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby paramu » 06 May 2012 10:08

They see RYK as the pivot of the target. But Pakistan does not have depth in geo graphy

They are trying to provoke and then trying to defend. It is a poor strategy.
They are being adviced by some outside powers

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36297
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby SaiK » 06 May 2012 10:18

A well known behavior is much better to handle. Let them do, what they want to for our observation pleasure.. and as long as there is no new kargil type of adventure being planned, again aided by emboldened chippanda club advanced services.

we should target all the shipments to pakistan.. and choking the port is easier... they have no other option than the dessert route. bunker busters enhanced pinaka batteries can be a nice additions to just let them know, we are acknowledging their antics to make any misadventure.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Singha » 06 May 2012 10:29

with US preparing to leave afghanistan, they are preparing for the day when US might not immediately save them from a indian attack....and china as yet is focussed on securing POK not taking over the sindh-punjab front unlike US in south korean DMZ.
so they have a need to hold firm for atleast a week of heavy indian pressure without losing much territory until US-China combine leans on India to let the munna walk away.

this means they have to plug all gaps. deploy in strength all over the place. invest in lines of comms, POL, ammo and redundant c3I & recon assets to match any indian buildup and movement - our buildup and move times are being brought down year after year in a planned manner.

Gurneesh
BRFite
Posts: 470
Joined: 14 Feb 2010 21:21
Location: Troposphere

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Gurneesh » 06 May 2012 11:19

noob pooch: When we know where the bunkers are, then wouldn't the first step of offensive be to deposit some guided shells into those bunkers (before the main offensive occurs) ?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Singha » 06 May 2012 11:46

well indo-pak bunker chain is claimed to be very strong, enough to be immune to plunging fire from 155mm shells. probably concrete covered with a layer of rock and earth. even the less well constructed stone sangars, with concrete and steel rod covers ported up by mules from pakistan side in kargil took quite a hammering from our shells and still held up. the ones built solidly in peacetime will be even harder nuts to crack.

either it needs some FAE type shell, or GBU or my favourite soln - resurrected units of the famous Krupp 8" cannons with reload module from the Prinz Eugen design...even the US army used to have 8" howitzers for a longish time.

member_22906
BRFite
Posts: 306
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby member_22906 » 06 May 2012 12:02

^^
Flamethrowers were fairly effective in 1971 war. That was something that really soiled many salwars. Psyched out the pakis since they wouldn't be in pristine condition when they met their 72 :lol:

ashish raval
BRFite
Posts: 1390
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 00:49
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby ashish raval » 06 May 2012 12:38

abhischekcc wrote:Are the jokers preparing for another war?


Seems like they want to feel what it is like to come under supersonic cruise missile fire, pinaka, bofors artillery fire, bhishma and Arjun tank attack and see if they can escape and reach Delhi for dinne

Guess every 15/20 year the student needs a zhapad to let him remember what it takes to be disciplined. I think this time around we would see them for midnight supper in peshawar and next day IA will be standing outside tunnels of torabora and FATA ready to bury them in mountains forever. :twisted: want my Indus land back....

Guess what it is time that IA starts training Afghan Army officers at different levels to that they will be ready to kill porkies and eat them for lunch too. Seriously India, Afghanistan and Russia should have a strategy in place for puke breakup. Russians could be allowed access to Indian ocean as part of deal. :evil:


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests