Indian Army: News & Discussion

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.
RayC
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4333
Joined: 16 Jan 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby RayC » 08 Feb 2010 08:19

There are UBGL in the Army.

Production being what it is, it is in areas where it matters.

somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby somnath » 08 Feb 2010 11:21

ASPuar wrote:I strongly suspect that China has equally as much access to these technologies and money power. They also have the political will to make something of them.


Well not really...China cannot buy weapons from the EU, US, and now not even Israel..Its sole foreign supplier is Russia, and Russia will only ever give it significantly derated tech..We can access pretty much everything that is available..Used intelligently, this is a MASSIVE advantage to have..

I find the debate on the standard rifle symptomatic of the malaise in our MIC..How critical is an "indigeneous" rifle? About a dozen countries make great rifles, the tech is avialable cheap, and the trick is only in setting up a high quality manufacturing setup...Instead of wasting years first to get INSAS and then a decade later going through another wrenching acquisition process, we should simply buy the best rifle there is out there and get an Indian firm to mass produce it here..

We need to concentrate on things that are more critical to us - electronics, missiles etc etc...As for the rest, just buy the damn thing quickly and get over with it!

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby svinayak » 08 Feb 2010 11:26

somnath wrote:Well not really...China cannot buy weapons from the EU, US, and now not even Israel..

This can dramatically change in 5 years. They could get access to EU weapons.

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13099
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby negi » 08 Feb 2010 12:23

Somnath I don't know about the fine print but Chinese have been able to get access to EU (Ger/Fr) equipment as and when required for their weapons platforms their new line of MBTs/SPH and Diesel electric subs are powered by MTU powerpacks (and from what I know they have now started to reverse engineer some of the above stuff) , also their Type 039 submarine uses Thomson-CSF TSM-2233 sonar suite . Their new attack chopper Z-10 is powered by Pratt & Whitney engines .If you are alluding to a complete platform then I would say they don't need to because they have progressed enough to a level that they can build and produce a weapons platform on their own except for certain key components which again once procured are reverse engineered eventually.

On rifles didn't Styer AUG supply cold forging machines to India afaik for INSAS project ?

somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby somnath » 08 Feb 2010 12:40

Negi,

China might be using cmoponents and parts with less-than-ironclad-end-use-monitoring from EU in its weapon systems, but it cannot buy complete systems from EU - thanks to the ban after Tianenmen Square...

But yes, EU, especially France is very keen on finding new markets for its systems, but the embargo is unlikely to go anytime soon..We have a window of opportunity till then..

Of course it worls both ways - denial causes drastic scale-up in indigeneous effort (worked for us in the missile/space arena), and availability breeds de[endence on imports...So it has to be played intelligently..

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

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Singha » 08 Feb 2010 13:09

euros have sold lots of items (small lots) and their associated tools and designs to PRC without much finger pointing. its kind of how Russia supplies them gear like smerch and s300 and soon 'cloned' and 'genetic variations' appear in PRC inventory. this cannot happen for such complex systems without some unspoken 'consultancy' and wink-wink.

sumshyam
BRFite
Posts: 552
Joined: 23 Sep 2009 19:30
Location: Ganga ki dharti.
Contact:

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby sumshyam » 08 Feb 2010 13:56

Image

sumshyam
BRFite
Posts: 552
Joined: 23 Sep 2009 19:30
Location: Ganga ki dharti.
Contact:

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby sumshyam » 08 Feb 2010 13:57

Image

shravan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2201
Joined: 03 Apr 2009 00:08

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby shravan » 08 Feb 2010 14:38

6 soldiers dead, 60 trapped in Kashmir avalanche

Monday, February 8, 2010

SRINAGAR, India -- At least six soldiers are dead and 60 more are trapped following a massive avalanche that hit a training center of the Indian army at a famous ski resort town in Indian-controlled Kashmir.

Indian army spokesman Col. Vineet Sood in Srinagar says rescue operations are under way at Gulmarg, a ski resort about 30 miles (50 kilometers) northwest of Srinagar, the main city in Indian Kashmir.

Sood says the avalanche hit a training center of army's High Altitude Warfare School, or HAWS, early Monday and swept away soldiers during a training session.

He said, "We have activated all resources to rescue the buried soldiers."

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9989
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby sum » 08 Feb 2010 15:40

^^^

Goddamn it...so many of our elite troops caught up with Nature's fury!!! :x :cry:

hulaku
BRFite
Posts: 261
Joined: 14 Dec 2008 17:26
Location: Lepa Valley, Gurez

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby hulaku » 08 Feb 2010 17:23

Death toll is stated at 11 with 15 critical.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8504034.stm

RIP

RayC
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4333
Joined: 16 Jan 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby RayC » 08 Feb 2010 18:54

Image

I don't know where it was posted that INSAS cannot mount a Sight.

The above is an INSAS with a Sight.

Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Gaur » 08 Feb 2010 19:05

Of course INSAS can mount sights. I do not remember any post at BR stating to the contrary. :-? It would be absurd to say the least.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7805
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Gerard » 08 Feb 2010 20:22


Sriman
BRFite
Posts: 1858
Joined: 02 Mar 2009 11:38
Location: Committee for the Promotion of Vice and the Prevention of Virtue

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Sriman » 08 Feb 2010 20:26

J-K avalanche: Rescue operations in Khinmarg called off: 17 jawans, 1 officer die

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/jk-av ... ie/577123/

:cry:

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7310
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby nachiket » 08 Feb 2010 20:59

RayC wrote:Image

I don't know where it was posted that INSAS cannot mount a Sight.

The above is an INSAS with a Sight.


The post was about the lack of provision to fit a picatinny rail.


Craig Alpert
BRFite
Posts: 1440
Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
Location: Behind Enemy Lines

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Craig Alpert » 10 Feb 2010 00:52

Army looks for shoulder-fired air defense missiles
The Indian Army has issued a Request for Information (RFI) for Man Portable Air Defense (MANPAD) Very Short Range Air Defense (VSHORAD) missile systems. :?:

The RFI, issued last week, asks for detailed information about the systems available regarding their range, speed, reaction time, warhead capability and transportability.

The RFI also inquires about the whether the available systems have target seeking capabilities, multi-launcher capabilities and deployability from high mobility vehicles and naval vessels, including submarines as well as in all kinds of harsh terrain. The army is also keen that the system have the capability to be easily knocked down for ease of transport and para-dropped.

The army requires day and night sight capability, target detection and tracking and a Command, Control and Communication (C3) system for ‘detecting, processing and engaging aerial targets’.


Very intersting to say the least.. Just one question that I don't seem to understand WRT to the "VERY SHORT RANGE" why very short range and not the opposite??

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7310
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby nachiket » 10 Feb 2010 01:13

Craig Alpert wrote:Army looks for shoulder-fired air defense missiles
The Indian Army has issued a Request for Information (RFI) for Man Portable Air Defense (MANPAD) Very Short Range Air Defense (VSHORAD) missile systems. :?:

The RFI, issued last week, asks for detailed information about the systems available regarding their range, speed, reaction time, warhead capability and transportability.

The RFI also inquires about the whether the available systems have target seeking capabilities, multi-launcher capabilities and deployability from high mobility vehicles and naval vessels, including submarines as well as in all kinds of harsh terrain. The army is also keen that the system have the capability to be easily knocked down for ease of transport and para-dropped.

The army requires day and night sight capability, target detection and tracking and a Command, Control and Communication (C3) system for ‘detecting, processing and engaging aerial targets’.


Very intersting to say the least.. Just one question that I don't seem to understand WRT to the "VERY SHORT RANGE" why very short range and not the opposite??


Probably just a name given to differentiate from the Short Range QRSAM system procurement.

Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Gaur » 10 Feb 2010 01:22

Craig Alpert wrote:Army looks for shoulder-fired air defense missiles
The Indian Army has issued a Request for Information (RFI) for Man Portable Air Defense (MANPAD) Very Short Range Air Defense (VSHORAD) missile systems. :?:

The RFI, issued last week, asks for detailed information about the systems available regarding their range, speed, reaction time, warhead capability and transportability.

The RFI also inquires about the whether the available systems have target seeking capabilities, multi-launcher capabilities and deployability from high mobility vehicles and naval vessels, including submarines as well as in all kinds of harsh terrain. The army is also keen that the system have the capability to be easily knocked down for ease of transport and para-dropped.

The army requires day and night sight capability, target detection and tracking and a Command, Control and Communication (C3) system for ‘detecting, processing and engaging aerial targets’.


Very intersting to say the least.. Just one question that I don't seem to understand WRT to the "VERY SHORT RANGE" why very short range and not the opposite??

Is there any MANPAD system which is "not" of very short range? :wink:

Brando
BRFite
Posts: 675
Joined: 26 Feb 2008 06:18

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Brando » 10 Feb 2010 01:29

Craig Alpert wrote:Army looks for shoulder-fired air defense missiles
Very intersting to say the least.. Just one question that I don't seem to understand WRT to the "VERY SHORT RANGE" why very short range and not the opposite??


Maybe its time for the Indian Army to put down its Igla missile systems and go in for something like this:

[Future Weapons] Starstreak Short-range Surface to Air Missile and Thor

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7805
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Gerard » 10 Feb 2010 06:30


somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby somnath » 10 Feb 2010 09:57

Dont know which thread to post this in, but the Army thread seemed most apt..

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2010/02/in ... rfare.html

The Indian Armed Forces today promulgated three joint operational doctrines -- for Sub Conventional Operations, Electronic Warfare and Maritime Air Operations.


this is a good start, there is at least something on paper..The next step would be to change things on the ground, in terms of organisation...Sub conventional ops - that would involve everything starting from CI ops in KAshmir to covert ops across the border to operations in Afghanisatan...So who will be responsible for sub conventional ops? Army, given the predominance of personnel? IAF? Critical to MAldives type ops? Or IN? IS there a Sub conventional, or Special Ops command being set up? Will equipment procurement follow a joint ops doctrine?

If the exercise is limited to a set of mere guidelines, without firm action on the ground, its really of no use...

RayC
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4333
Joined: 16 Jan 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby RayC » 10 Feb 2010 11:02

It would be good if they implement it and not leave it as a doctrine!

I will be frank, I am totally at sea with the new nomenclatures that keep cropping up, thanks to the US style of reinventing the wheel with gobbledygooks.

What are the constituents of 'sub conventional' war/ operations? What then is Low Intensity warfare? What is LICO and what is COIN?

What is insurgency and what is guerilla warfare?

I understand what is a freedom fighter to some is a terrorist to others. Ideology and fanaticism!

I confess that I require some help!

RayC
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4333
Joined: 16 Jan 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby RayC » 10 Feb 2010 11:36

Brando wrote:
Craig Alpert wrote:Army looks for shoulder-fired air defense missiles
Very intersting to say the least.. Just one question that I don't seem to understand WRT to the "VERY SHORT RANGE" why very short range and not the opposite??


Maybe its time for the Indian Army to put down its Igla missile systems and go in for something like this:

[Future Weapons] Starstreak Short-range Surface to Air Missile and Thor


Good point, but without the accessories as mentioned in the clip, it will still be on the skills of the operator.

There is no doubt that with the vehicle mounted configuration, it is an interesting weapon that requires analysis by the Army.

Ideal for the Plains and where vehicles can go in the mountains!

RayC
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4333
Joined: 16 Jan 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby RayC » 10 Feb 2010 11:55

I am repeating this post lest it is lost with other issues:

It would be good if they implement it and not leave it as a doctrine!

I will be frank, I am totally at sea with the new nomenclatures that keep cropping up, thanks to the US style of reinventing the wheel with gobbledygooks.

What are the constituents of 'sub conventional' war/ operations? What then is Low Intensity warfare? What is LICO and what is COIN?

What is insurgency and what is guerilla warfare?

I understand what is a freedom fighter to some is a terrorist to others. Ideology and fanaticism!

I confess that I require some help!

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11560
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Aditya_V » 10 Feb 2010 12:20

Guys- One thing about the future weapons programmeon Discovery Channel, all the weapons are advertised with Best of Brochure claims, many of the technologies are not proven, only on paper, in fact a large number of weapons programmes in the series get cancelled since the developers are unable to develop technology as evisioned on the programme.

If all those weapons are used as shown in Future weapons, America and Britain should be winning all its wars in 6 hours with all insurgents dead(especially shooting all insurgents accurately in AFganistan from 2 miles off always, shooting aircraft with 3 small rockets 10k's away after detecting them with low frequency Lasers- a technology which does not exist today), All Hamas should have been Killed by Isreal by now, Hezbollah should be dead in thier camps

somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby somnath » 10 Feb 2010 12:41

RayC wrote:I will be frank, I am totally at sea with the new nomenclatures that keep cropping up, thanks to the US style of reinventing the wheel with gobbledygooks.

What are the constituents of 'sub conventional' war/ operations? What then is Low Intensity warfare? What is LICO and what is COIN?

What is insurgency and what is guerilla warfare?

I understand what is a freedom fighter to some is a terrorist to others. Ideology and fanaticism!

I confess that I require some help!


Call it what you will, nomenclature is irrelevant..Key is the structure and operationalisation...

A joint ops command, joint ops forces, integrated procurement...Today, the Army SF use Tavor, the MArcos use a mix of AK47/MP5/SIG, the GAruds use INSAS..And each of them would be working nona different procurement programme! we work on interoperability of Indian Army and US Army, but (last I read) the AD network of the Army does not "talk" to that of the AF!

Brando
BRFite
Posts: 675
Joined: 26 Feb 2008 06:18

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Brando » 10 Feb 2010 12:59

Aditya_V wrote: shooting aircraft with 3 small rockets 10k's away after detecting them with low frequency Lasers- a technology which does not exist today), All Hamas should have been Killed by Isreal by now, Hezbollah should be dead in thier camps


I can't speak for all the systems on Future weapons but with the Starstreak missile the British Army has nearly 300 of these systems mounted on wheeled and tracked platforms. They have even tested it on the AH-64 Apache helicopters by Lockheed Martin in 1998.
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/news/pres ... tAirD.html

This probably means that the technology does work. However, I found that the range of 10kms was an exaggeration because the latest Starstreak mark 2 version has a maximum range of only 7 kms @ Mach 3.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7716
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby rohitvats » 10 Feb 2010 13:20

Re. MANPADs: High time we induct a new MANPAD and proliferate the same at Infantry Bn./Mechanized Bn./Armored Regiment level.These can either be organic to the battalions/regiments or held as centralized asset at Brigade/Division level and seconded as per requirement.But with adequate numbers to cover all the battalions/regiments in strength.Most cost effective solution/deterrence against the CAS ops by PAF and gunships.Something the PA has done quite effectively with their Anza Mk-X MANPADS.They have proliferated the MANPADS and ATGM through out the army to counter Indian superiority in Aircrafts and Tanks.

Atleast start with MANPADs and then get a vehicle mounted system (which will take longer and will be more expensive proposition)

manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2212
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby manjgu » 10 Feb 2010 14:32

brando, i think 10 km was the detection range...

ParGha
BRFite
Posts: 881
Joined: 20 Jul 2006 06:01

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby ParGha » 10 Feb 2010 20:18

somnath wrote:Today, the Army SF use Tavor, the MArcos use a mix of AK47/MP5/SIG, the GAruds use INSAS..And each of them would be working nona different procurement programme!

Don't worry too much about this issue at least - when sent out into the field on sub-conventional ops they will all eventually revert to AKMoids (and a lucky few in Para SF and SG will get to hold on to the Vz58s). Didn't know that the MARCOS had SIGs, but I do know they have/had a bunch of rifles in 5.45mm WP in their inventory... yet in J&K they carry AKMs in 7.62mm WP just like the RR and CPMFs. As for Tavors, we will let time speak for it; personally I cannot make any sense of it.

Craig Alpert
BRFite
Posts: 1440
Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
Location: Behind Enemy Lines

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Craig Alpert » 10 Feb 2010 22:15

RayC wrote:Ideal for the Plains and where vehicles can go in the mountains!

Sir,
This won't help the IA. I'm sure you are aware of the motto they preach their cadets in CIJWS, Fight a guerilla like a guerilla. Keeping that in mind, I think MANPADs are used in an Urban Environment hence, the vehicle deployed system might not be advisable in places like Kashmir where a lot of buildings and "obstacles" (for a lack of better word) seem to be in the way, where a shoulder fired (maybe an improvement could be computer controlled withing 100-200 feet and not exposing of the soldier to fire) system is highly helpful. I'm sure in your years of experience (COIN?) this would have been an ideal tool for every CG to have for their GI.

On a side note, learning from the experiences of the US Army and combining with tactics developed by the IA Army (putting the best of both worlds) gained over their years of fighting the Mujaheddin don't you think that will help the IA battle better? the enemy they fight? Permission to speak freely sir, and please excuse me if I'm stepping out of line here but I've seen you tend to be a bit biased towards the US? or the US Army? way of doing things. While I refuse to get into who has better practices, I would like to highlight something to see if I can mellow your perception of the US. While you might disagree by the tactics used by US forces, they have some of the best Night fighting, Infrared, Thermal and Laser equipments which along with a lot of Technical (NOT PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE) seem to lay them an upper hand over the NON TECHNOLOGICALLY advanced Mujaheddin. Case in point, 26/11, Kashmir Hotel Gun battle could surely have used these night fighting equipments and the IA would have mopped this up with THEIR tactics and YEARS of experience within HOURS and not Days that it took BECAUSE OF LACK of these technological equipments! Now I'm NOT saying what my SF and Marines do is correct and should be replicated world over, BUT learning from our experiences and incorporating the best practices into the Indian Armed forces is in the benefit of the forces Not the Mujaheddin. The CQB Weapons have been EXTENSIVELY tested in Iraq, Afghanistan and while the latter has many mud houses, the former has plenty of heavy brick, cement, stone buildings which is similar to the conditions in India and hence the IA seem to closely watch what the SF does. It is not the US Forces Influencing as you term it, the IA but IA putting in place the best practice it can for their forces to defend their borders.
If in any way I have overstepped my boundaries, please accept my sincerest apologies as it wasn't my intention and I'm only pointing out the fact to support my end of the argument. Thank you for serving the country and god bless! Carpe Diem!

RayC
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4333
Joined: 16 Jan 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby RayC » 11 Feb 2010 08:09

Craig Alpert

Thank you for your frank comments. I appreciate it.

I am not biased toward the US or its tactics. They follow what is good for them and their psyche. I only comment that one should not superimpose the US way since the Indian psyche is different. Our training modes are different. Even in my time, I found it very odd that it was fashionable to superimpose US or Soviet tactics or doctrines to do an Indian operation and then bumble along to find a suitable answer to the issue. I have questioned some of the doctrines and I am yet to be given a satisfactory answer. One could say, what is sauce for the goose, need not be sauce for the gander.

For instance, I would indeed be grateful if I am educated as to what is sub conventional operations and what is the difference between sub convention, LICO, COIN etc. Each day, one finds a new term cropping up and since I am not current with the terms and its explanation, I find it difficult to follow the issue. And where I live it is barren from military influence or literature unlike say, Delhi where there are these think tanks etc.

The US equipment is first rate. I don't deny that. However, they are very sophisticated and delicate and thus maintenance heavy. Given the rugged terrain IA equipment has to be 'soldier poof' and robust.

I found this equipment under discussion very interesting. However, the rider that the video mentioned was that while it can be shoulder fired, the success depended on the firer. Hence, it was essential to have the vehicle with the guidance and lock on system and so in the mountains it was no go unless the vehicle could also go there. In the mountains, it can be deployed in the valleys and I think it has a long range.

Actually, I am was looking at it from the COIN/ subcoventional or whatever angle. I was commenting from the actual war scenario.

I sure would appreciate hearing from you one to one (and not one on one :) )
Last edited by RayC on 11 Feb 2010 12:00, edited 1 time in total.

Craig Alpert
BRFite
Posts: 1440
Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
Location: Behind Enemy Lines

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Craig Alpert » 11 Feb 2010 10:15

^^ Do check your mailbox. Thanks

manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2212
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby manjgu » 11 Feb 2010 11:29

RayC... " However, the rider that the video mentioned was that while it can be shoulder fired, the success depended on the firer."..

I did not quite get why do you use the word rider?

i think for for any weapon system , the success depended on the firer. and this will be more if a thing is shoulder fired, man portable? just in the context of the weapon system being discussed , it seems flexible.... being launched from a vehicle / shoulder fired as well / for targets in the air and ground as well !!

RayC
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4333
Joined: 16 Jan 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby RayC » 11 Feb 2010 12:05

manjgu wrote:RayC... " However, the rider that the video mentioned was that while it can be shoulder fired, the success depended on the firer."..

I did not quite get why do you use the word rider?

i think for for any weapon system , the success depended on the firer. and this will be more if a thing is shoulder fired, man portable? just in the context of the weapon system being discussed , it seems flexible.... being launched from a vehicle / shoulder fired as well / for targets in the air and ground as well !!


You should see the video. On the vehicle mounted configuration, it just locks on and follows the target and shoots three explosive and penetrative dart all in 10 secs. IIRC, it flies at Mach 3 speed.

Now, this hit is dependent on the skill of the firer in the ground role and not guaranteed since the locating and tracking is not automatic to lock and shoot.

Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Gaur » 11 Feb 2010 14:34

Craig Alpert wrote:Case in point, 26/11, Kashmir Hotel Gun battle could surely have used these night fighting equipments and the IA would have mopped this up with THEIR tactics and YEARS of experience within HOURS and not Days that it took BECAUSE OF LACK of these technological equipments!

I doubt that 26/11 operation could be mopped up in matter of hrs regardless of the tech used (Kashmir Hotel Gun battle was not handled by IA). But that is a different matter. I am curious regarding any particular tech you had in mind that would have helped the SP forces. I can think of only 2 major tech which come in handy during such operations, Night Vision and Comm Surveillance equipment. Both of which NSG possessed. Though NSG was hampered by the limitation of current NVGs which cause temp blindness when light intensity is suddenly increase due to any reason(blast, flare, rifle flash or even switching on the tube light). So single eye piece NVGs would have been of great help. But other than that, I cannot think of anything.
Eg: Shields and battering rams would have been ineffective. Laser pointers would have caused problems.
What are your thoughts on this matter?

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7310
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby nachiket » 11 Feb 2010 20:11

Gaur wrote:Eg: Shields and battering rams would have been ineffective. Laser pointers would have caused problems.
What are your thoughts on this matter?


Why do you say that Ballistic shields would have been ineffective?

Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: Indian Army: News & Discussion

Postby Gaur » 11 Feb 2010 21:32

^^
There were some factors in Taj which were not conductive to the employment of ballistic shields.
One was that the layout was not linear. There were many branching paths in all directions. So, the personnel carrying shields in the front would be very vulnerable if the attack was to come from the sides and rear. They would not have the reaction time to take cover.
One acquaintance of mine asked why carry shields only in the front? He suggested to create a ring of soldiers carrying shields while there would be mp5 armed soldiers inside the ring fully protected by the shields. There are two problems with this approach. One is that too many personnel would be required per team thus resulting in less no of total teams. So this approach would have further delayed the completion of the mission be a very large amount of time. Another more obvious problem with this idea is that the team would have extremely low mobility and would have been easily pinned downed making them extremely easy targets for grenades.
Another factor which was not conductive to the use of shields was that terrorists were armed with 7.62mm caliber AK-47 rifles. When one sees shield wielding American SWAT teams through discovery vids and movies, they are generally dealing with opposition armed with pistols. Shields which can withstand even 5.56mm fire are so heavy that they cannot be carried by soldiers as shown in movies. They are rolled on wheels. So in Taj, how would have NSG carried these shields from one level to another. Surely elevator is not an option. Not to mention even more serious effect on mobility.
So, while I do not know whether NSG even has Ballistic shields or not, it is of little matter as far as Taj Operation was concerned because they would have created more problems than solutions.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 30 guests