Discussion on Indian Special Forces

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3826
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby hnair » 25 Feb 2015 14:41

Seem like they started life as "phyjjiks package" protection types, plus a certain amount of SAR/FAC type roles. A very visible way for IAF to nix Army's "but are they tough enough to protect those mijjiles during peace time, unlike us?", that was plaguing the divvying of roles during initial days. Since they are new to the game, with no hoary history of .303-toting awesomeness and has less numbers for procurement, they seem to get the latest shiny weapons with minimal fanfare.

well, someone has to deal with the biggest peace-time threat to Indian military, " :(( Studd helmet inspectors of internet". The Garuds and the spiffy boys of SPG's counter-assault are the vanguard to deal with the Helmet-Orcs, while the dusty-old SOGies drag their weary asses back to the sack.... 8)

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

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby Singha » 25 Feb 2015 15:58

^ :rotfl: kind of like customer facing marketing and back end engg team. the SPG is going a fine job there being highly visible on formal occasions.

I did mean the garuds would go in with parachute batallions for specific roles like taking out the strongpoints/ammo storage on a airbase or tackling any known SF units in the base (to guard missiles and HVTs) since they are not as large as the rangers. the could also escort civilian scientists strapped tandem to parachutes and flung out of planes to defuse some n-device or missile and secure the captured arsenal :|

KiranM
BRFite
Posts: 575
Joined: 17 Dec 2006 16:48
Location: Bangalore

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby KiranM » 25 Feb 2015 16:20

For those interested, concept of operations to seize an airfield by MEU(SOC). In the middle of the write up is an estimate for the size and ToE for the initial assault force to capture an airfield (and not a whole Air Base).

Given the spat between Paras and SF, splitting into separate regiments is a must. But we do not have the numbers or the budget to have a dedicated Rangers type force. We will need Paras to support SF similar to UK SFSG.

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

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby Singha » 25 Feb 2015 17:33

the concept of seizing an airbase ahead of advancing mech columns would only make sense in a deep battle scenario?
in our context, pretty much all the TSP and Cheen airbases are located well away from the border, to the extent we do not envisage such deep campaigns on land to need airfield seizures in MEU style...

Male airport is a potential place , islamists are really acting up there. I see Indian intervention there as inevitable in next 2-3 yrs to crack some skulls and throw the islamists into the seas.

seizing and destroying the helicopter FARP and base areas is a distinct use case though , on all fronts. these will be much shallower say within 50-100km of the border.

vipins
BRFite
Posts: 447
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 17:46

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby vipins » 25 Feb 2015 21:47

Garuds from AI
Click

KiranM
BRFite
Posts: 575
Joined: 17 Dec 2006 16:48
Location: Bangalore

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby KiranM » 26 Feb 2015 11:41

Singha wrote:the concept of seizing an airbase ahead of advancing mech columns would only make sense in a deep battle scenario?
in our context, pretty much all the TSP and Cheen airbases are located well away from the border, to the extent we do not envisage such deep campaigns on land to need airfield seizures in MEU style...

Singha sir agree in case of Pak where the terrain is mostly flat enabling counter attack by mech forces. But in case of PRC we need to keep our offensive options open. Like capturing an airfield in Tibet to air land elements of MSC. The terrain there will not enable PLA to move assets to counter that easily. Of course this is with the rider that IAF needs to degrade IADS and keep skies open from PLAAF fighters.

vivek_ahuja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2223
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby vivek_ahuja » 26 Feb 2015 16:06

KiranM wrote:Singha sir agree in case of Pak where the terrain is mostly flat enabling counter attack by mech forces. But in case of PRC we need to keep our offensive options open. Like capturing an airfield in Tibet to air land elements of MSC. The terrain there will not enable PLA to move assets to counter that easily. :shock: Of course this is with the rider that IAF needs to degrade IADS and keep skies open from PLAAF fighters.


Um, I would respectfully disagree on that bolded part. The terrain on the PLA's side of Tibet is immensely suited for manuever by large mobile forces. Helicopters (Mi-17s) from both sides can do short hop-skip-and-jump style flights. Except for the fact that our helicopters won't be anywhere around, given the distance from our border and the mountains in between.

Getting troops from our side "over the hump" would require fixed-wing aircraft (no helicopters can fly that far inside Tibet by themselves at those altitude conditions). Any Indian troops on the ground that deep inside Tibet would be outnumbered quickly and effectively by the PLA troops. You could argue that the Indian air force would provide cover, but that remains to be seen that many days into the war (attrition etc.).

Point is that the only way these operations work from our side is for Garuds to be inserted via fixed-wing aircraft near the airfield. They attack the airbase under air cover and wreck it. And then we get them out post-haste by fixed-wing aircraft again.

There is no concept of "airbase capture" that would be applicable inside Tibet from our side without regular army troops reaching up to the airbase soon afterwards.

-Vivek

vivek_ahuja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2223
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby vivek_ahuja » 26 Feb 2015 16:13

Since we are on the topic, I would add that I have always thought of the Garuds primarily for the following roles:

1. Raiding forces against fixed targets (radar sites, SAM batteries, even airfield under certain conditions). Quick and dirty: get in, blow shit up, get out. No "holding" concepts here.
2. Combat Search and Rescue for downed IAF pilots. This goes without saying.
3. Counter-SF security for our own bases and sites to prevent the enemy from doing the same to us.
4. Combat air controllers. Fair enough. But are we going with the U.S. model here of incorporating air-force controllers amongst army units? Why can't the air-force and army coordinate and have the army itself deploy controllers into its frontline units?

I honestly don't know where this idea of "seize-and-hold" is coming from. Isn't that exactly the kind of roles the Army Paras are for? Even there, the Paras would deploy in force and have massive army support behind them for any such operation. Garuds would help if asked by the army, of course. But certainly we aren't deploying small teams of Garuds to over whole airbases?

Isn't the Garud concept for small teams only? Leave the large-scale airborne invasions for the Army Paras? Or is the air-force trying to create its own airborne forces to spite the army? If so: what for?

Geez. Considering the lack of money for equipment upgrades etc., this idea of overlapping responsibilities between two services is just so frustrating. But I guess manpower comes cheap in India as opposed to equipment...

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1160
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby rkhanna » 26 Feb 2015 16:33

1. Raiding forces against fixed targets (radar sites, SAM batteries, even airfield under certain conditions). Quick and dirty: get in, blow shit up, get out. No "holding" concepts here.
2.

Garud at RedFlag very successful ran such operations. SEAD/DEAD and Assaults on Munitions/Missle Sites is part of their Op Profile

4. Combat air controllers. Fair enough. But are we going with the U.S. model here of incorporating air-force controllers amongst army units? Why can't the air-force and army coordinate and have the army itself deploy controllers into its frontline units


Has such a thing been recently practised in our large scale exercises (Army/AF)? Also contrary to what I have been told (and posted above) according to Wiki Garud Flights do spend time with Army SF to get Op Experience in J&K. Dont know credibility of source.

I honestly don't know where this idea of "seize-and-hold" is coming from. Isn't that exactly the kind of roles the Army Paras are for? Even there, the Paras would deploy in force and have massive army support behind them for any such operation. Garuds would help if asked by the army, of course. But certainly we aren't deploying small teams of Garuds to over whole airbases for sure?


Definition of Seize and Hold can vary. But no they would not deploy in such a mission in Isolation. But they would definitely play point in such a mission (specially to act as ATC post seizure).

However, Assaulting and Capturing (for limited time) Airfields is part of their mission profile. It was part of their Mission Profile at RedFlag (08) as well.

BTW -There is this Video on Youtube dubbed 'Assault Landing' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08FvBXYIkR4
I Understand it is a demonstration for some VIPs - but could any guru's provide further insight into such an operation?

vivek_ahuja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2223
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby vivek_ahuja » 26 Feb 2015 16:56

rkhanna wrote:However, Assaulting and Capturing (for limited time) Airfields is part of their mission profile. It was part of their Mission Profile at RedFlag (08) as well.


So that's still my question: why does it have be in their mission profile? If they need extensive army support etc for such an operation anyway, why can't the Paras do it?

My biggest pet peeve is the duplication of roles and organizations when even getting the right infantry equipment is slow as a snail. What might make an airbase capture something so specialized that the Army Paras cannot do it?

Sigh. Maybe its just me and my desire for simplicity in life. But as that saying goes "we ought to have a good army rather than a large one". So many units, organizations and vertical command structures and no SOCOM style organization or corral all these units into a fist.

Anyway, end of rant, I guess.

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

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby adityadange » 26 Feb 2015 18:08

this maybe a silly point but what if garuds capture railway stations/lines to cripple chinese advance in tibet?

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1160
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby rkhanna » 26 Feb 2015 18:09

So that's still my question: why does it have be in their mission profile? If they need extensive army support etc for such an operation anyway, why can't the Paras do it?


Vivek.. I feel you on the lack of SOCOM..and CDS for the Rest of the Military as well. On your above Point - My assumption is that They will Play Point/PathFinders to the Overall Para Mission. The Para's will do all the heavy Lifting. I assume since its an 'Airfield/Airport' The Garud would have better special knowledge/skills to take down/take over (and then run?) critical infrastructure than your Regular Para Chappie.

this maybe a silly point but what if garuds capture railway stations/lines to cripple chinese advance in tibet?


Garud operates in an Aviation Based Envoirment. Dont see why they would be tasked to do that unless there is no other suitable unit available.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7726
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby rohitvats » 27 Feb 2015 09:12

Lot of fantasy stuff being discussed here!

Do people actually realize the enormity of a mission like capturing an air-base? Neither Garud have the numbers to accomplish this task nor does India have the airlift capability to even attempt such an operation. Someone spoke about Garud working in conjunction with Paratroopers from IA on this aspect. Question is: What is the holding capacity of the Paratroopers in the first place? Who will back these paratroopers? There is a simple rule in airborne operations – the paratroopers need to be linked up with ground troops on the double. When this does not happen, paratroopers get slaughtered. There are enough examples of this in the history of modern warfare.

Not to forget that any such operation would require absolute air-superiority by IAF to allow the mission to succeed.

Rather than try and do everything under the Sun, if Garud can fulfill the mandate of CSAR, they would’ve served the purpose. Rest everything seems scope creep which derives primarily from their IAF antecedents and as one SF guy told me, ‘ their luxury to get more practice with assets like C-130 and others’.

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3972
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby deejay » 27 Feb 2015 10:06

^^^ RV, agree with your initial assessment but the observation of the SF guys is just a 'perception'. The Garud do their practices with air assets in the same places as the SF. These places have organised courses and schedules pre-published. Any additional training would also mean additional costs.

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1160
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby rkhanna » 27 Feb 2015 12:06

*New Discussion: Small Arms Training

1\ Anybody here have any Idea how many rounds a Year do our SF/MARCOS/ETC shoot a year? From all the Non Fiction Bio type books of Western SF I have read a bout 250-300 Rounds a week seems to be the norm.

(From what I gather a regular IA grunt shoots about 1000 Rounds a year normal and this can double for a 'special situation'. IMO this is pretty good because in one of the US Congressional Hearings it seemed that the US Army only budgeted 350-400 odd rounds per Soldier - Though High Tempo Units like 10 Mountain / 82nd get more Trigger time.)

2\ I have been told that while there are about 52 Marksmen Training Centers in India (Usually associated with the Regiment) there is no formal sniper/scout school in India. SF/Marcos sniper teams usually go outside India for sniper training.

Can somebody confirm or deny?

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7726
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby rohitvats » 27 Feb 2015 12:32

deejay wrote:^^^ RV, agree with your initial assessment but the observation of the SF guys is just a 'perception'. The Garud do their practices with air assets in the same places as the SF. These places have organised courses and schedules pre-published. Any additional training would also mean additional costs.


deejay - Any guesses why C-130 were based in Hindon? Hint: that is where Garud Commando Regimental Center is located! Coincidence, isn't it? I mean, apart from NSG in Manesar which will rely on IL-76/C-17 placed in IGI, C-130 will perforce have to fly to some base to pick-up Army SF contingent or they will travel to Hindon. Unless, we've reached a maturity level where C-130 were located in Hindon to cater to boys from Sarsawa. :P

Compared to Army SF guys and paratroopers, Garud have far better access to these assets (fixed wing or rotor). From what I understand, IA was not consulted when it came to C-130 and C-17 placement and was quite livid.

There is some operational synergy by placing IL-76/An-32 in Agra and Chandigarh but pray do tell me, what synergy is served by placing C-17 in Hindon? I'm willing to be corrected here.

There is a reason next set of C-17 and C-130 are going to be based in Panagarh alongside the new MSC HQ and troops.

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3972
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby deejay » 27 Feb 2015 13:31

^^^ RV C130 is just one of the platforms. We did this before C130s with AN 32s and if you check on Agra, that is where the Para Jumping School, SF guys and adequate AN 32's are based. Also, my views are restricted to training advantages and I am not sure on deployment advantages. I insist, the training costs will be the determining factor on how much air time these folks get.

The Garud are based in Hindon and they were there before the C 130s arrived. That co-location is an advantage in 'actual deployment' is true. I was contesting the point in training advantages to Garud because of it being an IAF formation.

The Agra co-location with AN 32s has always been there and for the Army, while the Hindon co-location for the IAF appears more convenient but that is more a result of when these formations took birth. The IAF did position the 'newer' and in my view better resource of C130 with the Garud.

As for IA vs. the IAF - I wish our 'brass' and 'thick stripes' showed the maturity of leaders which is truly required. And of course the IAF never told IA where they would deploy the new 130's and C17's. :-?

KiranM
BRFite
Posts: 575
Joined: 17 Dec 2006 16:48
Location: Bangalore

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby KiranM » 27 Feb 2015 13:38

rohitvats wrote:Lot of fantasy stuff being discussed here!
Do people actually realize the enormity of a mission like capturing an air-base? Neither Garud have the numbers to accomplish this task nor does India have the airlift capability to even attempt such an operation. Someone spoke about Garud working in conjunction with Paratroopers from IA on this aspect. Question is: What is the holding capacity of the Paratroopers in the first place? Who will back these paratroopers? There is a simple rule in airborne operations – the paratroopers need to be linked up with ground troops on the double. When this does not happen, paratroopers get slaughtered. There are enough examples of this in the history of modern warfare.

Not to forget that any such operation would require absolute air-superiority by IAF to allow the mission to succeed.

rohitvats sir, 99% of what we discuss on BR regarding what forces 'need' or 'should do' falls in the realm of fantasy. The 'expected time frame' of the 'need' being in few years to few decades. For example, MMRCA in IAF colours by 'next year' has been discussed galore over the last 5 years. What we are discussing here is a 'fantasy' which we jingoes believe is needed by the forces and obtain without duplication.

Now coming to airlift requirements and fighter support, some of us are aware of the current capabilities of IAF as you state. Yours truly gave a link to an article by Lt. Gen Katoch on the airlift scenario before acquiring C-130Js (which anyways are earmarked only for SF) and C-17 (which are for strategic airlift only). So we are aware unless there are more transports like MTA/ vanilla C-130s and fighters in numbers our 'wish' will remain as you say a 'fantasy'. But that does not mean we (Indian forces) do not aspire and set the ball rolling for building such a capability. Defining and refining the concept of operations and tactics for objectives like airfield seizure takes years and several iterations of joint exercises. And on BR we armchair jingoes can only talk of concepts. If platforms (transport and/ or fighters) are a prerequisite for even thinking of concepts then we might as well disband the 50 Ind Para Bgde and fulfill the wishes of Para generals to elevate all Para Bns to 'special forces' (airborne or foot borne); since anyways we can airlift only a Battalion group as of now.

Yes, agree that airborne needs to be linked up with conventional forces ASAP. That is why I am also talking about air landing conventional units like MSC post airfield seizure.

vivek_ahuja wrote:Um, I would respectfully disagree on that bolded part. The terrain on the PLA's side of Tibet is immensely suited for manuever by large mobile forces. Helicopters (Mi-17s) from both sides can do short hop-skip-and-jump style flights. Except for the fact that our helicopters won't be anywhere around, given the distance from our border and the mountains in between.

vivek ahuja sir, I am not saying tibet terrain prevents free mobility for PLA. I was comparing the lack of ease of movement as compared to interior Pak (exception being Northern Areas). By terrain I meant the difficulties due to 'The terrain of the plateau tilts from northwest to southeast. There are steep winding mountains, deep ditches and glaciers, Gobi and other landforms.'.
Also unlike Pak the axes of movement in Tibet are limited. There are no parallel highways and criss-crossing networks of roads like in Pak. Rail network is limited again compared to Pak. So I was talking of comparative ease of capturing airfield and landing a blocking force in the rear areas. The key word being comparative. I am not downplaying the complexity or risk of it in anyway.

A use case that comes to mind is what you wrote in Chimera of para deployment in Chumbi valley to cut off the MSR. But a more substantial force being air landed like MSC units with APCs/ IFVs and light/ mobile artillery. Of course these fantasies are with a caveat of having the required number of transports to airlift and fighters for maintaining localized air superiority to prevent airborne or heliborne counter moves like you mentioned.

All I am saying is we need to have options open which will also enable us for contingencies like Male scenario Singha sir talked about.

vaibhav.n
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 575
Joined: 23 Mar 2010 21:47

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby vaibhav.n » 27 Feb 2015 17:09

rkhanna wrote:*New Discussion: Small Arms Training

1\ Anybody here have any Idea how many rounds a Year do our SF/MARCOS/ETC shoot a year? From all the Non Fiction Bio type books of Western SF I have read a bout 250-300 Rounds a week seems to be the norm.

(From what I gather a regular IA grunt shoots about 1000 Rounds a year normal and this can double for a 'special situation'. IMO this is pretty good because in one of the US Congressional Hearings it seemed that the US Army only budgeted 350-400 odd rounds per Soldier - Though High Tempo Units like 10 Mountain / 82nd get more Trigger time.)

2\ I have been told that while there are about 52 Marksmen Training Centers in India (Usually associated with the Regiment) there is no formal sniper/scout school in India. SF/Marcos sniper teams usually go outside India for sniper training.

Can somebody confirm or deny?


1. These will be very difficult, officially and independently. Besides, different units will obviously have differing requirements with pure CT units (NSG) undoubtedly spending most time on range. Another thing, Army SF Assault Teams on Op-Alert will be obviously firing more during its duration than its peers deployed in COIN Ops. 300-400 rounds does sound about right otherwise.......

2. Infantry School, Mhow runs courses on the same for select Offr/OR's who are expected to gain Instructor level grading over time and conduct training in their respective Battalions for NCO's, the best among whom would again go to Mhow to continue the cycle. Regimental Centres roll-out basic adept Riflemen, the individual Battalion decides who is to be sent where and will conduct in-house Cadres/Courses accordingly.

This is different in the SF where they select among probables. Incidentally, Army SF Sniper Course is the longest among all the TCS's.

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1160
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby rkhanna » 02 Mar 2015 22:31

'Supposedly' MARCOS in an encounter in J&K

Image

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2958
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby tsarkar » 04 Mar 2015 20:17

Garud Roles -
Asset Protection
Quick Reaction to any attack
Securing Forward Bases for helicopters resupply missions. Extensively done in naxalite areas
SAR for downed pilots
FAC is also coming to Garuds rather than dedicated pilots on rotation. There is a reason why FACs are pilots. They know exactly what another pilot in the air can or cannot do. This is now shifting to Garuds.

Taking full fledged airbases or radars or missile batteries is too long ranged to be logistically supported and Garuds are too few in number, nor do they train in company or battalion strength. Most likely media mistakes securing Forward Bases with taking heavily defended airbases.

For example, during Male landing, the Il-76 pilots didn't know whether the airport was secure. The job of Garuds is to secure such landing sites.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3421
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby Aditya G » 04 Mar 2015 21:16

Czech Vz58 at the back? With a laser sight as well. May be Para SF?

rkhanna wrote:'Supposedly' MARCOS in an encounter in J&K

Image

member_28840
BRFite
Posts: 109
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby member_28840 » 04 Mar 2015 22:50

Aditya G wrote:Czech Vz58 at the back? With a laser sight as well. May be Para SF?
rkhanna wrote:'Supposedly' MARCOS in an encounter in J&K


Well spotted, does look like a Vz58 with Eotech holographic sights. What is the LMG / MMG on the ground, behind them, with the tripod deployed? looks like a PK machine gun to me.

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1160
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby rkhanna » 05 Mar 2015 09:13

Well spotted, does look like a Vz58 with Eotech holographic sights. What is the LMG / MMG on the ground, behind them, with the tripod deployed? looks like a PK machine gun to me.


Supposedly the Gun is an AK103? Eitherway MARCOS is the only one what has shown AK series of Weapons with Optics. and the LMG on the Road is a Negev - Helmet / Camo also point towards MARCOS.

jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5095
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby jamwal » 05 Mar 2015 10:28

What is the logic of having so many different variety of guns ?
Sniper, machine gun, assault rifle etc are OK, but even for these categories, there are so many different makes !

ArmenT
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 4239
Joined: 10 Sep 2007 05:57
Location: Loud, Proud, Ugly American

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby ArmenT » 05 Mar 2015 11:01

xave wrote:
Aditya G wrote:Czech Vz58 at the back? With a laser sight as well. May be Para SF?


Well spotted, does look like a Vz58 with Eotech holographic sights.

Don't think that is a Vz58. Enlarging the image a bit, you can clearly see an AK style fire selector lever.

By the way, the pic links to a .pk site.

Raja Bose
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19478
Joined: 18 Oct 2005 01:38

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby Raja Bose » 05 Mar 2015 11:05

jamwal wrote:What is the logic of having so many different variety of guns ?
Sniper, machine gun, assault rifle etc are OK, but even for these categories, there are so many different makes !


I guess each operator uses what they feel appropriate.

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

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby member_20067 » 05 Mar 2015 11:12

Raja Bose wrote:
jamwal wrote:What is the logic of having so many different variety of guns ?
Sniper, machine gun, assault rifle etc are OK, but even for these categories, there are so many different makes !


I guess each operator uses what they feel appropriate.


At times I think they also use the confiscated weapons... or else how can one off or two off rare pieces suddenly show up..? will they not be mass procured through tendering..?

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1160
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby rkhanna » 05 Mar 2015 12:49

Don't think that is a Vz58


AK 103 most likley. Part of MARCOS armoury

member_28840
BRFite
Posts: 109
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby member_28840 » 05 Mar 2015 17:00

rkhanna wrote:
Well spotted, does look like a Vz58 with Eotech holographic sights. What is the LMG / MMG on the ground, behind them, with the tripod deployed? looks like a PK machine gun to me.


Supposedly the Gun is an AK103? Eitherway MARCOS is the only one what has shown AK series of Weapons with Optics. and the LMG on the Road is a Negev - Helmet / Camo also point towards MARCOS.


Thanks. Now that you mention it, it does seem more likely its an AK103, the stock does look different from a Vz58. And good job identifying the Negev LMG as well.

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1160
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby rkhanna » 10 Mar 2015 10:30

Para Jump over AeroIndia 2015 - 2 Para SF, 1Bn 1SFG and NSG

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2342
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby VinodTK » 27 Mar 2015 03:27

India Carries Out First Military Exercises In Kyrgyzstan
Special operations forces from India and Kyrgyzstan have wrapped up joint military exercises near Bishkek, the first time Indian soldiers have carried out such drills in the country.

The exercises, Kanzhar 2015, involved about 100 soldiers overall, including Kyrgyzstan's "Scorpions" special operations forces and 30 of their Indian colleagues. They covered "joint special operations to destroy illegal armed formations in mountainous terrain," according to a Kyrgyzstan military spokesman. "There were also practical exercises and training including at night, and also exchanges of experience in military medicine, mountain, tactical and firearms training."

As is de rigeur, Kyrgyzstan framed the event as an anti-terrorism exercise: "The provocative, insidious activities of international terrorist organizations, pursuing the goal of seizing government power, have recently become stronger," said Kyrgyzstan's deputy chief of the general staff, Zhanybek Kaparov, at a ceremony opening the exercise. "So for us, it's very important to cooperate with the armed forces of India to fight together against extremism and terrorism."

The Indian soldiers were reportedly specialists in high-altitude warfare, but nevertheless said they hoped to learn how Kyrgyzstan did things: "We know that Kyrgyzstani soldiers have great experience in conducting military activities in mountains and we hope to adopt that," one Indian captain said. "In addition, we will study how to survive in the mountains, since that's the fundamental difficulty in these conditions. We also would like to see what kind of equipment and weapons your soldiers use."

According to one Kyrgyz participant, it sounded like it was the Indian soldiers who were doing most of the training, at least in the medical phase of the exercise: "First aid was needed for soldiers receiving gunshot wounds or burns. In addition, our soldiers imitated broken limbs or contusions. The Indians study how to provide the necessary first aid for these injuries, but in parallel our soldiers, learn, too. The foreign guests share their experience and practices, and say how things are done there."

In 2011 the two countries announced a plan to boost military cooperation, including joint training and establishment of a high-altitude military research center. That same year India and Kyrgyzstan conducted joint exercises in India. Kanzhar 2015 took place March 10-25 in the Shamsi gorge just outside Bishkek. While the exercises were going on, a delegation of Indian diplomats also visited Bishkek and discussed expanding military cooperation.


ravip
BRFite
Posts: 270
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby ravip » 02 Apr 2015 12:25

deleted. it doesn't suit here.
Last edited by ravip on 02 Apr 2015 16:52, edited 1 time in total.

vaibhav.n
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 575
Joined: 23 Mar 2010 21:47

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby vaibhav.n » 02 Apr 2015 15:33

No offence but...

Dunno...Are we supposed to lust after a couple of topless Marcos trying to look raunchy for the Kashmiri ladies??

member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby member_22539 » 02 Apr 2015 17:20

^Are their well-toned bodies making you uncomfortable? :D

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10031
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby sum » 27 Apr 2015 09:36

MARCOS ( picked from comments section of another site) :

Pic1

Pic2

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3421
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby Aditya G » 18 May 2015 21:51

I dont think we have seen such a pic before. The pic itself is not great but it is good to know that MARCOS and IAF have good coordination and the former can actually parachute into the sea.

Marine Commandos of Indian Navy demonstrate a water para jump from AN -32 aircraft during Milan 2010. – Photo courtesy Indian Navy

https://marginalmatters.files.wordpress ... photo1.jpg

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3421
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby Aditya G » 21 May 2015 18:27

ID the paratrooper unit:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-wfUbQPWbQ9U/V ... 465379.jpg

(Op Maitri, Nepal)

Raja Bose
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19478
Joined: 18 Oct 2005 01:38

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby Raja Bose » 21 May 2015 19:22

Aditya G wrote:I dont think we have seen such a pic before. The pic itself is not great but it is good to know that MARCOS and IAF have good coordination and the former can actually parachute into the sea.

Marine Commandos of Indian Navy demonstrate a water para jump from AN -32 aircraft during Milan 2010. – Photo courtesy Indian Navy

https://marginalmatters.files.wordpress ... photo1.jpg


Actually MARCOS and USN SEALs are or at least used to be the only 2 units in the world who can parachute into the ocean with a full combat load.

vaibhav.n
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 575
Joined: 23 Mar 2010 21:47

Re: Discussion on Indian Special Forces

Postby vaibhav.n » 21 May 2015 21:28

Aditya G wrote:ID the paratrooper unit:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-wfUbQPWbQ9U/V ... 465379.jpg

(Op Maitri, Nepal)



252 Parachute AD Battery


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: amar_p, ryogi, Sagrawal, Shakthi and 49 guests