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.
member_23370
BRFite
Posts: 1103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby member_23370 » 11 Sep 2012 23:21

It was commissioned in 1979. It is already nearly 33 years old. I am not sure why the pakis even wanted a ship 1 year newer than the last Type-21 rust bucket they are using. It is basically a patrol ship for coastal waters. I guess like iran they plan to keep the ship till it turns 50 or sinks which ever comes first.

K Mehta
BRFite
Posts: 959
Joined: 13 Aug 2005 02:41
Location: Bangalore

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby K Mehta » 12 Sep 2012 15:56

Is it just me or is the gun on the PNS Alm-give pointing right at the stack/chimney of the ship?
Not the best placement of the gun I think.

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 » 12 Sep 2012 21:10

the harpoons would presumably be in 2 bundles of 4 each fwd of the superstructure behind the gun , pointing up at steep angle or somewhere in back. its a very typical arrangement used in many ships incl of royal navy.

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

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby arun » 30 Sep 2012 08:03

X Posted from the “Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP) : 24 July 2012” thread.

Aakar Patel writing in the Express Tribune thoroughly demolishes the martial pretensions of the Pakistani Punjabi Mohammaddens who form the majority of the Army of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan :lol: :

A_Rai wrote:Is the Pakistan army martial?

Are Punjabi Muslims martial? Do they have a history of war and conquest or at least of resistance to conquest? I ask because there’s no evidence of their martial character in our history. No general, no subedar, no thanedar, no wazir, no bakhshi of the Mughal empire was a Punjabi Muslim so far as I know.

I might be wrong about this but there are only two Punjabi Muslims named in Mughal texts. The first is Kamaal Khan Gakkhar, who submitted (without fighting) to Akbar in 1576, according to Akbarnama. The second is Jalal Khan Gakkhar, an old man named among the victims by Jahangir in a skirmish with Afghans in 1620. A third reference is indirect, the name of the author of Shah Jahan’s Padishahnama is Shaikh Abdul Hamid “Lahori”. The Ain-e-Akbari has one joint reference to Janjuas and Awans, calling them tribes conquered by Afghans. There are of course Punjabi Hindus (mainly Khatris) who fought for the Mughals with distinction. Like Todar Mal, who led the sapping at the siege of Chittorgarh against the Sisodiya Rajputs, and also settled the revenue system for Akbar. Maathir ul Umara says Todar Mal was born in Lahore, though British scholars thought this was Laharpur in Awadh.

Where are the Punjabi Muslims? The fact is that the Punjabi Muslim is a convert mainly from the peasantry (Jat) which is not martial. General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani is Gakkhar, a caste that claims Rajput ancestry. The second Rohtas fort was built by Sher Khan Suri to pacify the Gakkhars. In his Tuzuk, Jahangir makes the remark in passing that the Gakkhars are warlike, but adds that they only fight among themselves. Meanwhile Rajput, Afghan, Maratha, Sikh, Jat (Hindu) and tribal Hindu generals all fought for and against Mughal armies. Rajputs had to be continually submitted by force, except for the loyal Kachwahas of Ambar (Jaipur). Right down to Aurangzeb, according to Maasir-e-Alamgiri, Mewar’s Sisodiyas and Marwar’s Rathors resisted the emperor. I clarify here that Muslims other than Punjabis fought the Mughals, and some very well.

Uttar Pradesh’s Rohilla Afghans were enemies of the Mughals and one of them (Najibud Daulah) ruled from Mughal Delhi for 10 years. Turkish-speaking Turani Sunnis and Farsi-speaking Irani Shias were the most important parties in the Mughal court. The former ranked as better fighters than the latter, who were better administrators. The fiercest Indian-origin Muslims were Shias, the Syeds of Barha (in Uttar Pradesh). The Maratha light cavalry was devastating and ended Muslim rule over India. The Sikhs captured Punjab and raided west up to Kabul and east up to the Doab. The Jats south of Delhi made life miserable for the later Mughals. Even the Baniya general Hemu showed martial character, almost ending Mughal rule before falling at the second battle of Panipat.
What exactly did the Punjabi Muslim do? Invaders who got past Peshawar could then only be stopped at Karnal or Panipat because they went through Punjab undisturbed. It is true that the armies of both Nadir Shah and Ahmed Shah Abdali were harassed in Punjab on their return with Mughal booty, but their attackers were Sikhs, not Muslims. Punjab was a quiet state. Punjabi Muslims neither rebelled against Mughal Delhi nor fought any invader whether Afghan or Persian. Was this because the Punjabi did not want to fight other Muslims? Not really, because he did not even resist being conquered easily by Sikhs.

It is the Englishman who 150 years ago gave the Punjabi Muslim a rifle and taught him how to use it. But this did not require any martial background. The British Bengal army was full of UP Brahmins (like Mangal Pandey). It is only after this formation of the modern regiments, that Punjabi Muslims are called martial by writers like GF MacMunn. After the English left, the record of Punjabi Muslims at war under their own generals is not sterling. I count one draw and one loss and I’m being charitable. Against the Pashtun Talib the record is not encouraging, despite the thousands of martyrs. Nadir Shah said of Indian Muslims after the battle of Karnal that they “know how to die, but not how to fight”.

This is fine and many states of India are not martial. Few soldiers were produced by Bengal’s Hindus for instance, and not many by Gujarat even today. But they don’t have the militant bombast of the Punjabi Muslim (who apparently equals 10 Hindus). I’m just wondering what this bombast is based on because I cannot figure it out.

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

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby arun » 30 Sep 2012 08:16

X Posted.

The UK’s Telegraph reports that senior figures of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) suspect the hand of the Army of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and its notorious intelligence agency the Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate (aka ISI aka ISID) in floating allegations of an affair between Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar and leader in waiting Bilawal Bhutto Zardari:

pgbhat wrote:Pakistan foreign minsiter denies Bilawal Bhutto affair rumours

Senior PPP figures on Thursday said they believed the claims were part of a plot by the country’s feared Inter-Service Intelligence [ISI] agency to damage Ms Rabbani Khar’s reputation because it blames her for her part in facilitating a UN investigation into thousands of missing people detained by the security forces.

One PPP official told The Daily Telegraph that the ISI expects the United Nations’ Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances to recommend senior army and intelligence officials be charged for their role and blame Ms Rabbani Khar for allowing the delegation into the country.
“They are not happy with her,” the official said. “The UN mission received a cold reception but Hina was called in by the president to meet him and the army chief. She crossed some red line.”


I have kept the typo in the headline intact.

member_23858
BRFite
Posts: 137
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby member_23858 » 30 Sep 2012 17:30

^^^This keeps up the Paki tradition of always playing the victim... :evil: :evil: :evil:
Am not complaining though.. just hope all the Hoo-Haa doesn't fizzle down before i finish my popcorn :D :D :D


VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2393
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby VinodTK » 07 Oct 2012 23:59

In truce violation Pakistan targets Indian posts, no casualties
JAMMU: In yet another truce violation, Pakistani troops fired at Indian forward posts in Jammu and Kashmir's Sambha sector prompting BSF jawans to retaliate effectively.

There was no loss of life or injury to anyone on the Indian side in the brief exchange of fire between the two sides yesterday, a senior BSF officer said here today.

Pakistani Rangers violated the ceasefire targeting Indian forward posts with small arms firing in Samba sector, he said.

"There was a brief small arms firing on Kharwa forward posts by the Pak Rangers along the International Border in Samba sector yesterday," the BSF officer said.

BSF troops guarding the border fired back effectively, he said adding there was no loss of life or injury to anyone.

This is the third incident of firing and ceasefire violation by Pakistan in Samba sector in less than a week.

Pakistan border guards fired on Chachwal forward belt in Samba sector on October one and four in which a civilian couple were injured.

Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Shrinivasan » 08 Oct 2012 02:17

All these incidents would give Aman ki Tamasha a quite burial! Or atleast make it politically difficult to kove forward... But then CongI spinmeisters would use this to make case for exactly that.

member_22906
BRFite
Posts: 305
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby member_22906 » 14 Oct 2012 13:55

Didn't know where to post this... thought this would be fine here.

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2012/10/lahore-nama.html

Non-military topic

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

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby arun » 15 Oct 2012 22:33

X Posted from the Oppression of Minorities in Pakistan thread.

The uniformed Jihadi’s of the Army of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan drives the followers of Christism out of their homes.:

Forced Migration: Christians allegedly forced out of Landi Kotal

member_22906
BRFite
Posts: 305
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby member_22906 » 27 Oct 2012 00:25

X-posted from Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum (Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan - Oct 4 2012)

http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/pak-afghanistan-clash-over-durand-line/article4031545.ece

Afghanistan’s contention is that the Durand Line Agreement – signed by the erstwhile governments of Afghanistan and India (under the British) to demarcate their respective territories – was valid only for 100 years and the land that had been made part of the British holdings should return to the Afghans.

Among the Pashtoons in Pakistan also, there is a section which advocates this position; primarily because of ethnic loyalties and the general demand for a Pashtoonistan. Pakistan rejects the 100-year time-frame of the agreement and maintains that binding bilateral agreements are passed on to successor states; making the Durand Line the official Pakistan-Afghanistan border. In fact, Pakistan is prickly about the border with Afghanistan being called the Durand Line.


:rotfl: :rotfl:

arijitkm
BRFite
Posts: 137
Joined: 12 Oct 2009 23:23

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby arijitkm » 29 Oct 2012 23:19

Is Pakistan's Paranoia Pushing it Into a Nuclear War with India?

The possibility of a nuclear war between Pakistan and India grows every day. If the Pakistanis do not bring under control the terrorist groups in the country and resolve the conflicts with India, it is not a matter of if it will happen, but when.
.....
At the time that Pakistan acquired nuclear weapons, military strategists rejected tactical nuclear weapons because they would provoke the Indians to escalate to strategic weapons in response. That opinion has changed. The addition of a fourth nuclear reactor at Khushab that produces plutonium to be used in tactical weapons says that the inventory will be expanded.
.....

Boreas
BRFite
Posts: 315
Joined: 23 Jan 2011 11:24

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Boreas » 30 Oct 2012 01:16

^^ paid media reports to elevate arms sale.

Has anything new happened inside pakistan or between India-Pakistan that was not already being happening since last 10 years?

Chandragupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3469
Joined: 07 Dec 2008 15:26
Location: Kingdom of My Fair Lady

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Chandragupta » 01 Nov 2012 14:31

Aditya_V wrote:SHiv- one thing for certain strong convential force by us but no very limited/ Nukes by Pakis will go for Hiroshima Nagasaki solution which they tried in 1989, when they were ready with F-16's in Chaklala to Nuke us thinking we were Nuke nood.


X posting from the Deterrence thread.

Can any mullah give me more details around this incident?

Boreas
BRFite
Posts: 315
Joined: 23 Jan 2011 11:24

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Boreas » 02 Nov 2012 01:21

As far as I know in 1989 PAF F-16 were not nuclear capable.

There was one incident in 1990 when PA/PAF loaded a nuclear bomb (imported readymade from china) in one of its C-130, this was under Benajir Bhutto. Another was under zia-ul-haq in 1986 or 87, but that was i guess just words without any real movement.

I think NSA Menon made a reference to some of these incidents in a lecture sometime back!

member_20067
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby member_20067 » 02 Nov 2012 02:30

Chandragupta wrote:
Aditya_V wrote:SHiv- one thing for certain strong convential force by us but no very limited/ Nukes by Pakis will go for Hiroshima Nagasaki solution which they tried in 1989, when they were ready with F-16's in Chaklala to Nuke us thinking we were Nuke nood.


X posting from the Deterrence thread.

Can any mullah give me more details around this incident?


http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 387267.cms?

krishna_krishna
BRFite
Posts: 873
Joined: 23 Oct 2006 04:14

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby krishna_krishna » 02 Nov 2012 06:08

This oldie baba recalls an incident when sarhad ke par ek eye es ey sarbarha during excercises in 89 had a firangi visiting them from unkil desh showed them something hanging below solah's after seeing that he expalined with chest thumping that they have everything, they send two signal as a response to kasrat near the sarhad one through this and other through diplomatic channels when some guy repeated that idhar khoon ki nadiyan behengi and he repeated same infront of that time videsh pradhan who later become PM the same thing and he was then taken to visit papa G. And there is claim when he heard this lunch fork dropped from his hands (I dont know till what extent that is true)

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12405
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Aditya_V » 04 Nov 2012 21:25

Can anyone confirm whether standard Paki service rifle is the H&K G3A4, and G3A3 or is it dervatives of the Chinese Type *4.

If it is still the H&K G3A4, looks like they want the capability of battle field rifle compared to us using mostly assault rifles.

Wonder how the insas performed vs the G3 at Kargil and other skirmishes.

Or are the Pakis want the heavier and longer ranged rifle for H&D reasons while in the real world scenario in most cases lighter but shorter range assault rifles are more useful.
The Chinese service rifle seems to the QBZ 95 with a 5.8 *42 mm unique ammunition
Last edited by Aditya_V on 04 Nov 2012 21:34, edited 1 time in total.

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 » 04 Nov 2012 21:34

In kargil for plausible deniability they likely issued ak56 and not g3 to the nli.
They license make the g3 and mp series for decades now.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12405
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Aditya_V » 04 Nov 2012 21:40

But when all major miltaries have mostly moved to smaller calibere assault rifles as the standard service rifle, wonder why the Pakis are sticking to the G3.

member_23370
BRFite
Posts: 1103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby member_23370 » 04 Nov 2012 22:46

Money!! No one is ready to donate newer ones to the beggars

member_23252
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 76
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby member_23252 » 05 Nov 2012 00:58

The Untold Story : Pakistan's Nuclear Progarm
Quite a lengthy article on Porki Nuke Program, Indian WKK on Paki forum are going gaga over this article. Is this Dr. Munir Ahmed Khan guy any good ?

member_23252
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 76
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby member_23252 » 12 Nov 2012 23:48


Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19836
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Karan M » 13 Nov 2012 00:55

A_Rai wrote:The Untold Story : Pakistan's Nuclear Progarm
Quite a lengthy article on Porki Nuke Program, Indian WKK on Paki forum are going gaga over this article. Is this Dr. Munir Ahmed Khan guy any good ?


He ordered Chinese.

rsharma
BRFite
Posts: 271
Joined: 02 Aug 2006 22:14
Location: Hidden Markov Model

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby rsharma » 16 Nov 2012 00:18

Found this on google-maps at Masroor AFB
Is it the cheeni ZDK-03 or the P3B AEW&C version

Image

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8095
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby nachiket » 16 Nov 2012 00:26

The wings don't look like those of a P-3. Must be a Y-8. But the nose doesn't look quite right for an An-12. Maybe it's a modified version.

vivek_ahuja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2330
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby vivek_ahuja » 16 Nov 2012 02:22

Its the Karakoram Eagle AEW platform. Look it up.

Image

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby shiv » 16 Nov 2012 06:11


:shock: That is some seriously bad camera work For a news channel it is worse than shameful.

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2393
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby VinodTK » 16 Nov 2012 07:13

Pak race for tactical nukes adds new poison to the mix
Washington: Pakistan is reportedly racing to acquire a threatening arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons – smaller and more readily usable nukes – which creates instability of another dimension altogether in South Asia. If deployed, these battlefield weapons will raise the stakes for India, while giving Pakistan’s ISI-linked jihadis a nearly impenetrable cover for terrorist attacks.

US experts are deeply concerned about the development because when pushed to its logical conclusion, such weapons make sense only when distributed near the borders for quick and early use. That, by definition, is destabilising because the decision to use them would theoretically rest with officers lower down the hierarchy. Political inputs – such as they are in Pakistan – could be lost or ignored by a local commander in the confusion of war.

The fear of theft might also increase as small nuclear weapons are distributed around the battlefield and so would the possibility of loss of command and control. No surprise that US officials are worried – their once most favored nation-state has added a new poison into the mix.

The risk of nuclear weapons falling into Pakistani jihadi is now higher. Reuters

Given that Pakistan army’s main obsession remains India and memories of defeat in past wars are constantly alive, New Delhi will have to ponder the meaning of this new proliferation. An arsenal of readily available tactical weapons lowers the threshold for a nuclear exchange and possibly limits India’s options.

India’s policy is “no-first use” of nuclear weapons but of retaliation in case of a nuclear attack. Pakistan has no such mitigating thoughts and has an explicit “nuclear first use” policy. It bluntly refused India’s offer of a joint no-first-use pledge in May 1998 after both countries conducted nuclear tests. When President Asif Ali Zardari tried to walk back and suggested to an Indian audience that he was ready to accept a no-first-use policy, he was quickly dismissed as “uninformed” and as speaking “off the cuff” by the military establishment.

Many argue that the nuclear shield allowed Pakistan to launch the Kargil incursion in 1999, and to send ISI-trained terrorists to attack the Indian parliament in December 2001 and landmarks in Mumbai in 2008. India amassed troops on the border in 2001, but didn’t proceed any further mainly because of fear of crossing the nuclear threshold.

The development of tactical nukes complicates this picture even further. And it is not as if Pakistan is doing this secretly. Pakistan is running down the dangerous road openly, wilfully and announcing it in press releases. Its stockpile of plutonium has grown with Chinese help. The generals in Rawalpindi have been boastfully telling visitors about their new capability. This more dangerous and destabilising scenario is an indirect message to India that if you do “Cold Start,” you will meet a “hot end.”

Cold Start is a doctrine talked about in Indian defence circles; it envisages quick but limited retaliation with rapid mobilisation without crossing the nuclear threshold in case of a Pakistani provocation. Interestingly, the Indian political leadership has never embraced Cold Start – and in India these delicacies matter greatly. But that hasn’t stopped Pakistan’s military from assuming the worst. Dangling the threat of using tactical nuclear weapons, it wants to deny India the space for conventional military retaliation in case of a terrorist attack traced back to ISI-trained extremists.

The testing of Nasr (Hatf IX), a short-range missile with a range of 60 km, in April 2011 is Pakistan’s loud answer. It was officially announced as being capable of carrying nuclear warheads of “high accuracy” and having the ability to “shoot and scoot.” In plain English: Pakistan may have developed miniaturised nuclear warheads that can be mounted on Nasr.

Pakistan is also said to be “jumping generations, developing force structures and command and control” and doing everything else required to fight a nuclear war. It is already known from a 2008 WikiLeaks cable that US intelligence officials believe “Pakistan is producing nuclear weapons at a faster rate than any other country in the world.” It may soon surpass Britain and France. But how it plans to deploy tactical nuclear weapons is still unclear.

The reality is that even if India didn’t ever develop Cold Start – and there is no indication it is an accepted doctrine – Pakistan would still be going down this path. When the Generals, who unfortunately continue to decide Pakistan’s destiny, see a conventional military disadvantage with India, they want to regain parity. But this time the answer they have found is highly destabilising, especially in light of the turbulent domestic situation in Pakistan.

In addition, those who control Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal have not publicly defined the red lines for their possible use and it would be safer for India to assume the Generals are not bluffing. While restraint is India’s fall-back position and civilian control over the military undisputed, in Pakistan nuclear weapons are under direct military command. As the military’s arsenal grows, so might its confidence for adventurism.

Nuclear weapons, while never desirable and always precarious, have traditionally been used for deterrence. But Pakistan is a different kettle of fish. It was born in insecurity and Pakistan’s military establishment hasn’t closed the book on Partition of the subcontinent in 1947 because it didn’t get Kashmir. The Generals have been talking of waging a “people’s war” in India since the 1950s to wrest Kashmir, according to academics who have studied the Pakistan army documents. Despite losing wars, they haven’t “felt” defeated. Instead, accepting the status quo is considered defeat.

The new fixation of Pakistan’s military for tactical nuclear weapons can open a Pandora’s box of moves and counter-moves. But none of the above would be required if the one factor that endangers stability in South Asia is isolated and removed – and that is Pakistan-supported terrorism. And you don’t need nuclear weapons for that.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby shiv » 16 Nov 2012 07:48

VinodTK wrote:Pak race for tactical nukes adds new poison to the mix

US experts are deeply concerned about the development because when pushed to its logical conclusion, such weapons make sense only when distributed near the borders for quick and early use. That, by definition, is destabilising because the decision to use them would theoretically rest with officers lower down the hierarchy. Political inputs – such as they are in Pakistan – could be lost or ignored by a local commander in the confusion of war.

The fear of theft might also increase as small nuclear weapons are distributed around the battlefield and so would the possibility of loss of command and control. No surprise that US officials are worried – their once most favored nation-state has added a new poison into the mix.

The risk of nuclear weapons falling into Pakistani jihadi is now higher. Reuters



Why are US officials concerned? Pakistan is a Most Favored non NATO ally. Why does the US feel threatened? India is not bothered. Why is the US bothered?

Pakistan probably calculates that launching a small nuke to decimate an Indian attack will make the Indian politicians chicken out from retaliation because their own asses have not been harmed and only some Indian soldiers killed. This may be a very good assessment of the Pakistani army about how Indian politicians might behave in war, but the US need not be worried. It is only the Indian armed forces who need to worry, which is exactly what the Pakistanis want, and what the ally wants the US must support no?

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

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby arun » 16 Nov 2012 08:21

Retired Colonel turned Lawyer, Inam Ur Raheem, who filed a case challenging the validity of a three-year extension of service for Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani appears to have been beaten up by his former colleagues namely the uniformed jihadis of the Army of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, just some 200 yards away from GHQ.

Meanwhile the picture of the retired Colonel in the NYT article certainly depicts him having a cultivated aura of proper Mohammadden piety complete with bushy beard and other accoutrements of Mohammadden chic like a skull cap.

Would this constitute a case of Blue-Green on Blue-Green violence as Uniformed Jihadi beats up formerly Uniformed Jihadi?:

A Pakistani Lawyer Takes on the Army and Pays in Bruises

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24179
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby SSridhar » 18 Nov 2012 17:00

http://newindianexpress.com/cities/chen ... 343978.ece
Earlier in the day, delivering a talk on ‘Navies and Nations’, Chopra {Vice-Admiral Anil Chopra, flag officer commander-in-chief, Eastern Naval Command} said the presence of Pakistani Navy in the Persian Gulf might increase with the Chinese developing the Gwadar deep water port in Balochistan.

“With the development of Gwadar port, Pakistan will have more access to the Persian Gulf. And to that extent, you could say that the footprint of the Pakistani Navy could increase in the Persian Gulf,” he said. Chopra also said that the Pakistani Navy had maintained very sustained force levels for the last 20-30 years and modernised its technology.

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

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Brando » 18 Nov 2012 18:59

^^ We've been hearing about this "Gadwar" bogeyman for the past 10 years yet there haven't been any developments remotely like what was predicted.

So far the Chinese only seem to be using it (quite reluctantly) as convenient logistics hubs for transporting raw material. No matter how keen the Pakistani's are to have the Chinese set up shop there, is Gadwar really a bigger threat to the Indian Navy than if the Chinese Navy were to set up shop in Karachi instead of Gadwar ?? I think to the Indian Navy, it would afford the Chinese the same advantage. So "Gadwarr" itself isn't the issue but having the Chinese navy in the Arabian sea is doesn't matter if it is Gadwar or Karachi or Iran or Oman or Yemen.

member_23370
BRFite
Posts: 1103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby member_23370 » 18 Nov 2012 21:11

No Gwadar has no impact for IN but if they can get increased funding for ships and use it to set up a few ships in Oman to keep eye on the persian gulf it would be useful. The bit about sustained force level; and technology is horse shit. Pakis have sustained numbers because the 40 year old Type-21's are still rusting with PN instead of being scrapped and F-22p have very little capability.


Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Sagar G » 19 Nov 2012 01:20

While Hellfire missiles are said to have pinpoint accuracy, the rockets used by Pakistan have a margin of error of about 30 meters (100 feet) at best, and an unexpected gust of wind could take them 300 meters (1,000 feet) from their intended target, said the civilian.


:rotfl:

neeraj
BRFite
Posts: 321
Joined: 12 Jun 2001 11:31
Location: UK

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby neeraj » 19 Nov 2012 01:24



One of Islamabad’s closest allies, China, has offered to help by selling Pakistan armed drones it developed. But industry experts say there is still uncertainty about the capabilities of the Chinese aircraft. :rotfl:

Pakistan has demanded the US provide it with armed drones, claiming it could more effectively carry out attacks against militants. Washington has refused because of the sensitive nature of the technology and doubts that Pakistan would reliably target US enemies. :rotfl:

“China is a bit of a tough nut to crack as you’d expect,” said Huw Williams, a drone expert at Jane’s International Defence Review. “They frequently wheel out exciting looking aircraft but are yet to really demonstrate anything earth shattering.” :rotfl:


Don
BRFite
Posts: 412
Joined: 09 Dec 2002 12:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Don » 23 Nov 2012 14:55

http://www.indiandefence.com/forums/pak ... iller.html

Airshow China 2012: CM-400AKG Becomes Pakistan's 'carrier killer'

Airshow China 2012:
Robert Hewson, Zhuhai Section:

2012-Nov-16


Image


Key Points, A Chinese-developed new very-high-speed missile has been fielded by the PAF.

The weapon has been Described as the PAF's 'carrier killer'

Pakistan has fielded a new very-high-speed long-range air-launched missile That senior officers in the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) Have Described as "an aircraft carrier killer".

The CM-400AKG Mach 4 is a plus-capable air-to-surface weapon Developed in China and now in service with JF-17 aircraft of the Pakistan Air Force. (Robert Hewson) The weapon, Designated CM-400AKG, was designed and Developed in China by the China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation (CASIC) and was Revealed at Airshow China 2012, held in Zhuhai from November 13 to 19.

The CM-400AKG is now part of the operational weapon set of the PAF's JF-17 Thunder multirole fighter. "This is a mature weapon has been fully tested That. It is not conceptual. It is in service," Air Commodore Khalid Mahmood, PAF JF-17 Deputy Project Director stated. "The CM-400AKG is a very high-speed missile that is very Difficult to intercept. It hits the target at Mach 4 or above and its kinetic impact alone is enough to destroy any high-value target, like an aircraft carrier."

The CM-400AKG Appeared first, briefly, in public at last year's Dubai Airshow, When a placard for the weapon was Placed alongside to PAF JF-17 - and then removed. The weapon itself was not shown. At the time it was Acknowledged PAF personnel to new Chinese-built air-to-surface stand-off missile. However, the initial assumption That It was a derivative of the C-802 anti-ship missile has PROVED to be very wide of the mark.



The CM-400 is 400AKG kg solid-rocket-powered weapon That Can be Fitted with Either a penetrator or blast / fragmentation warhead. It is a fire-and-forget precision-guided weapon That Can be Fitted with several options seeker, Which are Understood to include an active radar seeker and an imaging infrared seeker with target-recognition (TR) capabilities. PAF sources say the missile can be pre-programmed with digital imagery highly needed for attacks against fixed sites in TR mode, but it can be retargeted in flight Also by using the radar seeker option.

The range of the CM-400AKG is Understood to be in the 180-250 km class. It is designed for use against fixed or what Were Described as "slow moving" targets. Data Indicates That CASIC launch after the CM-400AKG climbs to high altitude and Terminates with a high-speed dive on the target. The PAF describe the missile's impact velocity as "hypersonic".

Both CASIC and the PAF note the CM-400AKG That Has Been Developed As A JF-17 weapon. The PAF currently has two squadrons of approximately 36 JF-17s operational. A ten or eleven aircraft Further Have Been Delivered and a third squadron will be Established early next year.

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

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby adityadange » 23 Nov 2012 16:31

as per wiki the KLJ-7 radar that is fitted on pakistani jf17 has range of 105km. how will it help to gain maximum advantage of 250km range of paf's new carrier killer?


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests