Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

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.
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3460
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Kartik » 14 Feb 2017 07:06

From AW&ST. Article by Alan Warnes, the Paki lover editor of AFM.

With the first export orders signed and new capabilities being introduced at a rapid pace, 2017 looks set to be an important year for the JF-17 Thunder developed by China and Pakistan.

The first flight of a two-seat version—JF-17B—is planned for the first quarter, Pakistan will stand up its fifth squadron flying the aircraft, and contracts are due to be signed for the most advanced variant, the Block 3, complete with active, electronically scanned array (AESA) radar.

The new fighter is critical to the Pakistani air force’s growth plan. Besides introducing new capabilities, it helps avoid Western sanctions that have previously blighted its operations. The development of a two-seat version is seen as key to adding capabilities and generating export orders. Assembly of the first twin-stick aircraft is underway at the Pakistan Aeronautical Complex (PAC) in Kamra. Three are being built, one for China’s Avic and two for Pakistan’s air force. Having a two-seater in the testing and development program will speed up the integration of weaponry, according to Chinese partner Catic. The first JF-17B is expected in Pakistan by mid-2017.

“Pakistan’s air force has never needed dual seaters to train its fighter pilots. We took delivery of the Shenyang F6, Chengdu F-7P/PG, Hongdu A-5C and the JF-17 without a trainer version,” says Air Marshal Arshad Malik, the chairman of PAC. “But we appreciate the Thunder’s technologies will be new to many of our markets [in Africa, the Middle East and Asia] so we opted to develop a dual-seater with our Chinese friends,” he adds.

With contracts for 50 Block 1 and 50 Block 2s signed and deliveries of all but the last 14 Block 2s, attention is now switching to a contract for 50 Block 3 models. However, it is looking increasingly as if production of these aircraft will not start until 2019, and as a result PAC will manufacture 12 additional Block 2s in 2018, to ensure production does not halt.

A decision on a new AESA radar for the Block 3s will be made this May. There are several contenders, including at least two Chinese options. One is the upgraded China Electronics Technology Group Corp. KLJ-7A, while Leonardo (formerly Selex ES) is also offering a system.

Another improvement is an aerial refueling capability. Trials and qualifications of a new production aircraft built with a Chinese inflight refueling probe are also reportedly underway.

Block 3 enhancements will also include new avionics, better electronic warfare systems, increased payload and more sophisticated weaponry. PAC officials describe it as the ultimate JF-17—and with an AESA radar, it will have the capability to employ longer-range weapons and track multiple aircraft. If the requirement is there, Block 1/2s will be upgraded to the Block 3 standard later.

The Russian-made Klimov RD-93 engine, which has flown over 30,000 hr. with Pakistani air force JF-17s, will likely to be replaced by a Chinese option. But this will take time and will come as an upgrade.

..

PAC is currently producing 16 aircraft a year for the air force; the 16th fighter aircraft for the service was handed over on Dec. 31. A similar number will be delivered this year to cover the last batch of Block 2 jets. “We can increase our output even further to cope with future exports,” Malik adds. Nigeria has already confirmed an order for three JF-17s, but no further details are known.

Pakistan’s air arm is operating the JF-17 with four squadrons at four bases, with a fifth due to form shortly. Its aircraft have been qualified for the anti-shipping role, equipped with the C-802AK missile and air defense duties with the SD-10A beyond-visual-range air-to-air missile (AAM) and the PL-5E short-range AAM.

Several air-to-surface weapons have also been integrated, including the CM-400 stand-off supersonic missile and the CM-102 lightweight anti-radiation missile. Work with the 500-lb. GB-1 laser guided bomb and the YINGS III targeting pod, on display at the Zhuhai Air Show last November, is underway. Pakistan’s air force is exploring further options as it looks to continuously boost its operational readiness.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3257
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Aditya G » 14 Feb 2017 14:26

JF-17 servers the mig-21 and f-7 replacement market very well. Western options such as F-50 don't cut it. bae HAL hawk can be a potential competitor.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2140
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby tsarkar » 14 Feb 2017 18:52

Kartik wrote:
“Pakistan’s air force has never needed dual seaters to train its fighter pilots. We took delivery of the Shenyang F6, Chengdu F-7P/PG, Hongdu A-5C and the JF-17 without a trainer version,” says Air Marshal Arshad Malik, the chairman of PAC.


Real men dont use trainers :rotfl: But what are these then?

Image
Image

Kartik wrote:
Nigeria has already confirmed an order for three JF-17s, but no further details are known.

And AW&ST see it fit to publish it :rotfl:

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9198
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby arun » 16 Feb 2017 20:57

X Posted from the STFUP thread.

Things seem to be hotting up in the Mohammadden Terrorist Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

In Punjabi Occupied Balochistan, a blow for freedom is struck. 3 Uniformed Jihadi’s of the Mohammadden Terrorist Fomenting Punjabi Dominated Military occupying Balochistan, are taken down in a demonstration of the IEDology of Pakistan:

Three personnel, including army captain killed in Balochistan IED blast

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9198
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby arun » 18 Feb 2017 21:21

X Posted from the STFUP thread.

Can someone please explain to me how the Uniformed Jihadis of the Punjabi dominated Military of the Mohammadden Terrorist Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan managed to locate 100 Ununiformed Jihadis a mere 24 hours after the demonstration of the IED Mubarak variant of the IEDology of Pakistan at Sehwan after all the chest thumping of wiping out Ununiformed Jihadis in Pakistan by Operation Zarb e Azb?

This looks to be more like cold blooded extra judicial murders of Non Punjabi Pakistani’s by the Uniformed Jihadis of the Punjabi dominated Military of the Mohammadden Terrorist Fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan:

Army kills '100 terrorists' after Sehwan shrine blast

Supratik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 09 Nov 2005 10:21
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Supratik » 18 Feb 2017 21:35

They probably rounded up a 100 Pashtuns and executed them and claimed they killed militants. I see a broadening Punjabi-Pashtun divide. Just what the doctor ordered.

Bheeshma
BRFite
Posts: 592
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 22:01

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Bheeshma » 18 Feb 2017 22:08

Good. I hope pushtuns will join sindhis and baluchis in wiping out the pakjabi army.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7571
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby rohitvats » 22 Feb 2017 11:20

Time for some self gloating - contents from my blog, which I've not updated in donkey years, gets mentioned in a research paper by some dude who is postdoctoral research associate at the National Security Education Center at Los Alamos National Laboratory. He's quoted content from a series of blog-posts I wrote about the canal based defenses in Pakistan.

Article: Pakistan’s Battlefield Nuclear Policy - Jaganath Sankaran

Link to article -https://www.ciaonet.org/attachments/27439/uploads

Please to be searching for mention of keyword 'Vats'.

Yey! I'm phamous.... :mrgreen:

Link to original posts:
http://vatsrohit.blogspot.in/2012/08/pakistan-defensive-canals-in-south.html
http://vatsrohit.blogspot.in/2012/08/canal-based-defenses-in-south-punjab-ii.html

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3460
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Kartik » 23 Feb 2017 01:19

I just thought of doing a simple analysis of the flight hours utilization of the JF-17s of the PAF with their RD-93 engines. The RD-93 is a variant of the RD-33 after all.

Alan Warnes had reported in that the 65 strong JF-17 fleet had logged 19,000 flight hours since its induction into the PAF

The JF-17 was inducted into service in February 2010..that's 6 years ago. In 6 years, the entire PAF fleet has flown about 19,000 hours.

If you consider the size of the fleet, it becomes clear that such a low number of flying hours indicates that the reliability and availability of the JF-17 fleet is pretty low.

I know that the fleet has been built up over the years, but still, they have 4 squadrons and a fifth recently re-equipped with the JF-17. But the statistics till December 2016 are ~70 strong fleet and ~20,000 flying hours in 6 years of service with 2 crashes. i.e. an attrition rate of 1 crash per 10,000 flying hours. Which compares poorly with the IAF's attrition rate of 0.83 per 10,000 flying hours for the period 1991-1998, when it was using MiG-23s, MiG-21s of various vintages and MiG-27s primarily. But the 1 crash per 10,000 hours is better than what PAF has historically managed. Basically, they crash a lot more than the IAF for the same amount of flying.

From Wikipedia
Final assembly of the JF-17 in Pakistan began on 30 June 2009; PAC expected to complete production of four to six aircraft that year. They planned to produce twelve aircraft in 2010 and fifteen to sixteen aircraft per year from 2011; this could increase to twenty-five aircraft per year.[59] On December 29, 2015, Pakistan Aeronautical Complex (PAC) announced the rollout of 16th JF-17 Thunder fighter manufactured in the calendar year 2015, taking total number of manufactured aircraft to more than 66.


So I basically did some simple maths, but had to re-do it since the advertised production per year clearly isn't true. Otherwise, by December 2016, the number of JF-17s in service @ 16 per year from 2011 would have been 106. But a PAF statement that as of December 2016, ~70 JF-17s were in service showed that they were inducting ~10 JF-17s per year, not 16.


Year EnteredService FleetTotal AverageYearlyHours CumulativeYearlyHours
2010 10 10 70 700
2011 10 20 70 2100
2012 10 30 70 4200
2013 10 40 70 7000
2014 10 50 70 10500
2015 10 60 70 14700
2016 10 70 70 19600


Clearly, availability of the JF-17 in PAF service has been ~70 hours per year per jet, or an average of 140 sorties per year assuming each sortie lasts 30 minutes.

I don't believe the rosy picture they paint, since it would hit export prospects, but it doesn't seem to be that either their production numbers are anywhere near the figures they claim nor is the jet's availability particularly good.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10672
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Gagan » 23 Feb 2017 01:49

^^^
+ 108

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3460
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Kartik » 23 Feb 2017 02:18

JF-17B at IDEX

Image

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3460
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Kartik » 23 Feb 2017 02:21

Brochure JF-17B

Image

Image

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3460
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Kartik » 23 Feb 2017 07:20

In continuation of my basic analysis regarding the JF-17's poor availability, just compare the number of flying hours for the Gripen in Hungary. The lease agreement signed recently increases the number of hours to 2000 flying hours per year, for a fleet of 14 Gripens.

Hungary extends Gripen lease

FMV today signed on behalf of the Swedish government an Additional Agreement to the lease agreement with Hungary for 14 Gripen C / D combat aircraft. It gives Hungary more flight time and updated aircraft.

The new agreement is a comprehensive solution that, among other things, gives Hungary 400 extra flight hours per year, increasing from 1600 to 2000 hours, with FMV contributing support to cope with the extended flight time. ...

Since the beginning in 2006, Hungary has flown over 14,000 flight hours on the Gripen


2000 flight hours for 14 Gripens, gives an average of 142 flight hours per Gripen per year. Compare that to the approximate average of 70 hours per JF-17 per year. the JF-17 has half the availability of the Gripen !!


14 Hungarian Gripens have flown 14,000 flight hours in 10 years..an average of 1400 flight hours per year for 14 Gripens, which gives 100 flight hours per year per Gripen..versus 70 JF-17s in service starting from 2011 having flown just 19,000 flight hours..something's really not right.

Cybaru
BRFite
Posts: 1920
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Cybaru » 23 Feb 2017 07:35

Somebody posted a link to a book about fake russian parts. Does anyone have that link?

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3257
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Aditya G » 23 Feb 2017 14:21

What is the difference between RD-93 and RD-33 with Indian Navy?

Indian Navy seems to have much stricter standards with respect to availability and reliability than PAF

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19751
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Austin » 23 Feb 2017 14:29

Kartik wrote:2000 flight hours for 14 Gripens, gives an average of 142 flight hours per Gripen per year. Compare that to the approximate average of 70 hours per JF-17 per year. the JF-17 has half the availability of the Gripen !![/b]

14 Hungarian Gripens have flown 14,000 flight hours in 10 years..an average of 1400 flight hours per year for 14 Gripens, which gives 100 flight hours per year per Gripen..versus 70 JF-17s in service starting from 2011 having flown just 19,000 flight hours..something's really not right.


I dont think we can come to this straight forward conclusion , In IAF MKI and Mig-21 is suppose to be the most flown types in terms of hours , I read quote some where where they mentioned MKI has been flown as high as 250-300 hours per year by some pilits that does not make MKI the most available type aircraft in the IAF.

With availability of full motion simulator pilot tend to fly less compared to what they did earlier and trying to preserve air frame life could be another reason , availability could be another factor but not the only one.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19751
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Austin » 23 Feb 2017 14:32

Aditya G wrote:What is the difference between RD-93 and RD-33 with Indian Navy?

Indian Navy seems to have much stricter standards with respect to availability and reliability than PAF


RD-93 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klimov_RD-33#cite_note-4

A variant used to power the JF-17 (FC-1). According to JF-17.com "The most significant difference being the repositioning of the gearbox along the bottom of the engine casing." The Klimov poster at Zhuhai 2010 airshow gave the thrust range of the engine to be 79 kN Dry to 98 kN Wet.[3] This was designed specifically for FC-1 with increased thrust and relocated gearbox compared to base RD-33's. Although the increase of thrust decreased the service life of RD-93 to 2200 hours from RD-33's 4000 hours. According to Air Commodore Mehmood engines are solid and reliable: “We’ve flown 7,000 hours with the engine and we haven’t had any problems”, he said [4]

Nick_S
BRFite
Posts: 518
Joined: 23 Jul 2011 16:05
Location: Abbatabad

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Nick_S » 23 Feb 2017 15:15

Pakistan Goes All Out to Sell JF-17 Fighter Jet to Sri Lanka
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... lanka.html

Efforts have been made by Islamabad for the past one year to convince the Sri Lankan government to purchase the aircraft that is jointly developed by Pakistan and China. Sri Lanka, aware of the technical shortcomings and design flaws in the aircraft, had earlier decided not to consider the deal as previously reported by the Sri Lankan news site ‘The Sunday Leader’.

Pakistan has maintained incessant pressure, both on the political leadership and the SLAF to confirm the deal. In this process, not only has Pakistan offered sops to the SLAF like ‘buy one JF-17 and get one F-7 free’ :rotfl: , gratis post-sale maintenance and training to SLAF pilots etc., but it is alleged to be also using the ‘kickbacks route’ and which has been reported by the Sri Lankan media.

Therefore, taking a leaf out of China’s modus operandi during the former President Mahinda Rajapakse’s regime where big ticket projects like the Colombo Port City Project were bagged by the Chinese by paying off huge bribes, Pakistan is alleged to have paid kickbacks to some senior bureaucrats in the Sri Lankan Defence Ministry and the SLAF, apart from targeting family members of top political leaders.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19751
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Austin » 23 Feb 2017 17:18

Pakistan and Ukraine discussed joint production of Main Battle Tanks at #IDEX2017 in UAE.

Image

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19751
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Austin » 23 Feb 2017 17:23

IDEX 2017: Pakistan and Ukraine sign agreement to co-produce engines for tanks

http://quwa.org/2017/02/21/idex-2017-pa ... nes-tanks/
Pakistan and Ukraine signed a memorandum-of-understanding (MoU) to co-produce diesel engine and engine components for Pakistan’s main battle tank (MBT) programs, Geo News reported from the 2017 International Defence Exhibition and Conference (IDEX) in Abu Dhabi.

The MoU was signed by Pakistan’s Minister of Defence Production (MoDP) Rana Tanveer Hussain and the General Director of the Ukrainian Defence Industry branch in Ukroboronprom.

Upon signing the MoU, Mr. Hussain reportedly stated that Pakistan “will import technology to produce [the al-Khalid tank’s] engine and parts … under the partnership.”

Pakistan’s state-owned news agency, the Associated Press of Pakistan (APP), reports that under the MoU, “Pakistan and Ukraine will cooperate in building, modifying, rebuilding and upgrading tanks in Pakistan.”

Notes & Comments:


This is the second armour-related MoU signed by Ukraine and Pakistan. In November 2016, Ukraine and Pakistan’s Heavy Industries Taxila (HIT) signed a $600 million agreement for 200 Kharkiv Morozov Machine Building (KMDB) 6TD-2 1,200 hp diesel engines for forthcoming al-Khalid 1 MBTs as well as overhaul and upgrade work for other Pakistan Army systems. Pakistan and Ukraine’s respective defence ministries also discussed the prospect of joint MBT and anti-tank guided missile (ATGM) production at IDEAS.


The engine collaboration/co-production MoU is significant. First, it expands Pakistan’s domestic ability for MBT production, building upon the armour manufacturing gains made through the 1990s and 2000s. It is not known to what extent Pakistan will manufacture KMDB’s diesel engines.

The agreement is likely focused on at least guaranteeing the supply (via domestic production) of essential spare parts and components for the Pakistan Army’s al-Khalid MBT force. Pakistan will be expanding its al-Khalid MBT force by 200 new tanks, and attention is also shifting to the al-Khalid 2, the platform’s first major upgrade. As per HIT, the al-Khalid 2 will be powered by a 1,500 hp diesel engine, and with Pakistan absorbing the platform technology, KMDB’s newly revealed 6TD-3 will certainly be an option.


Ukraine has an incentive to maintain work for domestic economic interests. Thus, it is unlikely that the Pakistani industry will maintain a complete 6TD manufacturing line in parallel. However, a Pakistani plant would still be beneficial to the Ukrainian industry in that it would guarantee the supply of 6TD components to all current and prospective 6TD users. Pakistan could also pay licensing premiums to KMDB.

In terms of MBT work, it is likely that Ukraine will take lead in upgrading the Pakistan Army’s T-80UDs. It is not known if Pakistan is interested in the Oplot-M. The status of the Haider MBT project is not known, but if still active, the infusion of the 6TD platform may shape the Pakistan Army’s selection. KMDB is tailoring the Oplot-M into a holistic platform that can (using its chassis) be repurposed as an infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) and self-propelled tracked howitzer. A single chassis would streamline the Pakistan Army’s logistics and maintenance channel.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19751
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Austin » 23 Feb 2017 17:26

Pakistan opts for Kelvin Hughes SharpEye radar for Agosta 90B

The Pakistan Navy selected Kelvin Hughes’ SharpEye I-band pulse-Doppler radar for use on the upgraded Khalid-class Agosta 90B submarine.

As per Kelvin Hughes’ press release, the SharpEye benefits from a low probability-of-intercept (LPI), which positions it as an effective radar for tracking targets, especially at long-range.

Carrying improvements in sub-clutter visibility (of 30 dB), the SharpEye can also track low radar cross-section (RCS) targets of up to 0.5m2.

Kelvin Hughes adds that the SharpEye, with its “high reliability, low maintenance, solid-state technology, the SharpEye transceiver can be located within the pressure hull, making use of the existing bulkhead infrastructure, antenna rotational drive and waveguide connections.”

Besides the Agosta 90B, Kelvin Hughes was also selected to supply the SharpEye I and E/F-band radar for the Pakistan Navy’s new 17,000-ton fleet tanker, which was launched from Karachi Shipyard & Engineering Works (KSEW) in August 2016.

Notes & Comments:

In June 2016, Pakistan awarded Savunma Teknolojileri Mühendislik A.Ş. (STM) a contract to upgrade its Khalid-class Agosta 90B submarines. The cumulative value of the deal (for all three submarines) is US $350 million and is to be implemented at KSEW. The first was scheduled for delivery within 45 months of the contract signing in June, with the remaining two to follow within 12 months of one another.

STM is the main contractor responsible for managing the program. In 2016, STM awarded contracts to Airbus Defence and Space, Aselsan and Havelsan for periscope and optronic masts, electronic support measures (ESM) systems, and command and control suites, respectively. The U.K-based Kelvin Hughes joins these subsystem vendors in supporting the Agosta 90B upgrade program.

The SharpEye will be replacing the Thales I-band navigation radar onboard the Agosta 90Bs. Kelvin Hughes states that the SharpEye can be used for more than just navigation, but with target tracking, it can provide the Agosta 90B with enhanced situational awareness.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10672
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Gagan » 24 Feb 2017 22:27

RAJ
‏@rajfortyseven

#Pakistan #Nuclear constructing what looks like Tritium extraction/purification plant at #Khushab.Used for compacting nukes.GE12/2&6/16TS8&9

Image

Image

Image

India needs to stop overconfidence and test IMHO


Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10672
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Gagan » 25 Feb 2017 05:38

The answer is yes.
Provided Russia gives it free, and includes 100 Su-35 fighters.
And in return Pakistan will allow Russia to be a part of CPEC


Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3961
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Rakesh » 27 Feb 2017 09:19

Pakistan Eyes J-20: Why India Needs to Accelerate the PAK-FA
http://www.indiandefencereview.com/spot ... he-pak-fa/

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19751
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Austin » 14 Mar 2017 12:57

Chinese LY-80 air defense missile system enters officially in service with Pakistan armed forces.

http://armyrecognition.com/march_2017_g ... 03172.html
In August 2016, it was announced that the Pakistan Ministry of Defense Production disclosed that the Pakistani armed forces had procured six LY-80 (HQ-16A) surface-to-air defense missile systems from China for $373 million U.S. in fiscal year 2014-2015. According the SIPRI (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute) Arms Transfers Database, China have sold LY-80 launch units to Pakistan.

Currently Pakistani armed forces also uses the Chinese-made FM-90 (HQ-7B export version) which was unveiled by Pakistan during national military parade in March 2015. The HQ-7B is a improved version of the HQ-7 (FM-80) that is a Chinese-made version of the French Crotale surface-to-air missile.

The HQ-16A or LY-80 is a Chinese-made ground-to-air defense missile system which was introduce in the Chinese armed forces in September 2011.

The HQ-16A (LY-80) launcher missile system is carried by an 8x8 truck that contains a command and control station behind the cab, and behind those are six firing missile containers in two rows of three.

The HQ-16A (LY-80) SAM components comprise a searching radar vehicle, command vehicle, radar tracking and guidance vehicle, launcher unit vehicle, and missiles canister. Technical support equipment includes missile transportation and loading vehicle, power supply vehicle, maintenance vehicle, and missile-test equipment. A single radar guidance vehicle controls two to four launcher units with six missiles ready to launch. The command vehicle is responsible to send target information and combat orders.

The HQ-16A (LY-80) missile can intercept an aerial flying target from an 15 m to 18 km of altitude, while its maximum interception range for combat aircraft is 40km, and between 3.5 km and 12 km for cruise missiles flying at an altitude of 50 meters at a speed of 300 meters/second.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19751
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Austin » 14 Mar 2017 12:58

AOA during launch :eek:


Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19751
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Austin » 14 Mar 2017 13:00

Pakistani Deadliest Missiles and Indian Air Defence Systems Dr Samar Mubarak


Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19751
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Austin » 14 Mar 2017 13:32

^^ from interview with Dr Samar

1 ) Shaheen 2 missile max range is 2,200 km ( tested to 1800 km ) to target South Indian Missile
2 ) Shaheen 3 missile range tested to 2700 km ( to target A&N )
3 ) Both missile have terminal guidance , do not follow fixed ballistic trajectory but maneuvers as it reaches the target as Anti-ABM system
4 ) RV Length is not more than 2-3 meters
5 ) Nasr Missile 60 km is short range but armed with small nuclear warhead for tactical employment against Cold Start doctrine , yeald is ~ 1 kt , weight of warhead 15-20 kg , to be used against thousand concentrated troops
6 ) Gauri missile has range of 1200 km and highly accurate will be superceed by Shaheen class
7 ) Raad missile is aircraft launch , Can be launched with 300-400 km deep inside enemy territory , Raad has camera as terminal guidance with 1-2 m CEP ( can fly at 50 , 100 , 150 m altitude ) its fully autonomous and no man in loop required. Trajectory can be shaped accordingly to avoid mountains , military facilities etc

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19751
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Austin » 14 Mar 2017 17:52

Pakistan military continues to play strong role in key affairs: US

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... xbTkN.html
Pakistan’s powerful military continues to play a strong role in the country’s national security and foreign affairs, the US State Department’s Office of Inspector General has said.

“The Pakistani military continues to play a strong role in national security and foreign affairs. The country faces external and internal challenges to its stability from crime and terrorism,” it said in a report on the inspection of US Embassy in Islamabad and its other consulates in Pakistan.


In the report running into more than 20 pages, the Inspector General said US-Pakistan relationship encompasses issues of critical importance to American national security. These include counter-terrorism, nuclear non-proliferation, peace in Afghanistan, and domestic and South Asian regional economic growth and development.

“Mission Pakistan’s highest policy priorities are to promote regional stability, combat terrorism, and support a secure, economically vibrant, and stable Pakistani democracy,” it said. :rotfl:

Three unrelated events in 2011, an incident in Lahore involving an American citizen, the killing of Osama bin Laden in a raid in Abbottabad, and the Salala border clash, were perceived as challenges to Pakistani sovereignty and a set back for US-Pakistan cooperation, it said.
:roll:

Since then, the two governments have taken steps to improve relations, culminating in Secretary John Kerry’s 2015 visit to Islamabad to co-chair the Strategic Dialogue and the Pakistani Prime Minister’s visit to the US the same year.

“Nevertheless, bilateral challenges remain, including advancing the Afghanistan reconciliation process, combating terrorism, and promoting civil society, the empowerment of women, and the rule of law,” the report said.


Observing that Pakistan is one of the largest recipients of US foreign assistance, the report said that in fiscal 2015, Pakistan received USD 803 million, including USD 538 million in civilian and USD 265 million in security assistance.


Civilian assistance is centered on five sectors: energy, economic growth, stabilisation, education and health. Security assistance focuses on counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency.

However, the Office of the Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan reported a 61% decrease in foreign assistance funds to Pakistan from its peak in 2010 to the 2017 request, due to changing regional priorities.

In its report, the Inspector General said that the cashier advance at Consulate General Karachi is excessive.

“The Class B cashier advance of USD 110,000 for Consulate General Karachi exceeds the standard level, defined as the amount the cashier requires for one week’s activity plus an amount sufficient to cover replenishment turn-around time,” it said.


Although Consulate General Karachi required this amount at one point, its cash requirements diminished in 2015.

The Inspector General said embassy in Islamabad did not use the Department’s automated Fleet Management Integrated System to manage its USD 14 million vehicle fleet.

Bheeshma
BRFite
Posts: 592
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 22:01

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Bheeshma » 14 Mar 2017 20:14

Austin wrote:^^ from interview with Dr Samar

1 ) Shaheen 2 missile max range is 2,200 km ( tested to 1800 km ) to target South Indian Missile
2 ) Shaheen 3 missile range tested to 2700 km ( to target A&N )
3 ) Both missile have terminal guidance , do not follow fixed ballistic trajectory but maneuvers as it reaches the target as Anti-ABM system
4 ) RV Length is not more than 2-3 meters
5 ) Nasr Missile 60 km is short range but armed with small nuclear warhead for tactical employment against Cold Start doctrine , yeald is ~ 1 kt , weight of warhead 15-20 kg , to be used against thousand concentrated troops
6 ) Gauri missile has range of 1200 km and highly accurate will be superceed by Shaheen class
7 ) Raad missile is aircraft launch , Can be launched with 300-400 km deep inside enemy territory , Raad has camera as terminal guidance with 1-2 m CEP ( can fly at 50 , 100 , 150 m altitude ) its fully autonomous and no man in loop required. Trajectory can be shaped accordingly to avoid mountains , military facilities etc


None of the claims can be substantiated. I doubt the claims about nasr and CEP of any of their missiles. :rotfl: . They must have been getting paranoid seeing DRDO's CEP for Brahmos and Agni series and pulled the numbers out of their ass.

Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1492
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Sid » 15 Mar 2017 03:16

http://www.indrastra.com/2017/03/NEWS-Pakistan-Army-Officially-Inducts-LY-80-003-03-2017-0042.html

Pakistan Army Officially Inducts Chinese-made LY-80 LOMADS


Not sure about cost, but 200 million is awfully cheap for a system derived from BUK class SAM.
Image
Image

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby sum » 15 Mar 2017 05:50

^^ I wish we will someday get a true picture of the servicibility rates of all these Chinese gizmos in TSP service

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5901
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby brar_w » 15 Mar 2017 06:01

I think we can all agree atleast on the missile being canisterized ;)

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3257
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Aditya G » 16 Mar 2017 02:35

Why will PA operate this system instead of PAF? Is it to be embedded with army manned nuke missile systems

Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1492
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Sid » 16 Mar 2017 04:13

It's their MRSAM equivalent, which in our case IA will be operating.

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3961
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Rakesh » 17 Mar 2017 03:54

Pakistan could easily become a nuclear hazard. Here’s what needs to be done
http://dailysignal.com/2017/03/14/pakis ... o-be-done/

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19751
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Austin » 18 Mar 2017 21:21

I doubt but for the record

After a Pakistani TNW strike, India can go for Pakistan's nuclear arsenal: Former NSA Shivshankar Menon
Former national security advisor (NSA) Shivshankar Menon has shed new light on an especially worrying aspect of India’s nuclear doctrine --- New Delhi’s barely credible promise of automatic, “massive” nuclear retaliation against any adversary that targets India, or Indian forces anywhere, with weapons of mass destruction (WMDs).

The credibility gap in this strategy of “massive retaliation”, as pointed out by critics worldwide, is that it would cause carnage in the adversary’s towns and cities but leave intact much of his nuclear arsenal. With those surviving nukes (second-strike capability), the adversary would then wreak havoc on Indian towns and cities.

It is hard for New Delhi, globally regarded as a restrained power, to convince analysts and adversaries that it would knowingly trigger the catastrophic deaths of millions of civilians on both sides by responding “massively” to a far smaller attack --- even, a single Pakistani Tactical Nuclear Weapon (TNW) that killed perhaps a hundred Indian soldiers deep inside Pakistani territory.

Yet, India’s nuclear doctrine, promulgated on January 4, 2003, undertakes that “Nuclear retaliation to a first strike [by an adversary] will be massive and designed to inflict unacceptable damage.”

Now Menon, in his recent book entitled “Choices: Inside the making of Indian foreign policy”, indicates that India’s threat of “massive retaliation” need not involve nuclear strikes against Pakistani urban centres (“counter-value”, or CV strikes). Instead, India’s “massive response” could take the form of targeting Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal (“counter-force”, or CF strikes), leaving that adversary with a greatly diminished capability of striking back at India.

In a key paragraph in his book, Menon --- who, as NSA, oversaw nuclear targeting policy --- analyses the meaning of a “massive” strike. He says: “There would be little incentive, once Pakistan had taken hostilities to the nuclear level, for India to limit its response, since that would only invite further escalation by Pakistan. India would hardly risk giving Pakistan the chance to carry out a massive nuclear strike after the Indian response to Pakistan using tactical nuclear weapons. In other worlds, Pakistani tactical nuclear weapon use would effectively free India to undertake a comprehensive first strike against Pakistan.”

Menon carefully differentiates between “first use” (which Indian nuclear doctrine forbids) and “first strike”, which --- in widely-accepted nuclear vocabulary --- refers to a disarming CF strike aimed at leaving an adversary without nuclear recourse.

Menon clearly enunciates the logic of a disarming CF strike: “India would hardly risk giving Pakistan the chance to carry out a massive nuclear strike after the Indian response…” In other words, India’s “second strike” (in response to a TNW against its forces) must leave Pakistan with little or no “third strike” capability.

But does a disarming counter-force strike (which Menon terms a “comprehensive first strike”) amount to a “massive” response, which Indian doctrine mandates? A senior Indian official asks: “Who says a “massive” response must necessarily be directed at CV targets?

Menon’s insights extend the focus of India’s second-strike well beyond counter-value targets to counter-force targets.

Contacted by Business Standard, Menon declined to elaborate, stating only: “India’s nuclear doctrine has far greater flexibility than it gets credit for.”

Menon’s book has been in print since November, but only now has this nuance been noted by Vipin Narang, a highly regarded nuclear strategist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. This week, Narang tweeted: “Indian strategy following Pak tacnuke (tactical nuclear) use is neither proportional response nor massive retaliation. But [rather, it is a] disarming counterforce strike.”

Even so, serious question marks remain over how effectively, or whether at all, India can actually execute a disarming CF strike that takes out most of Pakistan’s nukes. Partly because of the possibility of Indian attack, Pakistan is building up its nuclear arsenal faster than any other country, running its Khushab nuclear reactor at full tilt to produce plutonium. It is currently estimated to have 120-130 nuclear warheads.

Especially difficult for India to target are Pakistan’s small, highly mobile TNWs that are basically truck-mounted, tube-launched artillery.

Furthermore, any impression in Pakistan of Indian counterforce strikes, or the fear that the nukes might soon be lost, would incentivize their early use --- the “use them or lose them” dilemma.

Indian public debate has traditionally focused on another aspect of our doctrine --- the commitment of “No First Use” (NFU) of nuclear weapons. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) questioned NFU in its pre-2014 election manifesto, before backing off quickly. Then, last year, former defence minister Manohar Parrikar raised questions over the need for NFU, before the BJP dismissed that as his “personal view”.

However, given Pakistan’s conventional military weakness in the face of a sudden Indian offensive under the “Cold Start” doctrine, Rawalpindi’s operationalization of TNWs, and its declared plan to use them early in a conflict, make India’s response a matter of life and death for millions.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19751
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Postby Austin » 18 Mar 2017 22:06

In a key paragraph in his book, Menon --- who, as NSA, oversaw nuclear targeting policy --- analyses the meaning of a “massive” strike. He says: “There would be little incentive, once Pakistan had taken hostilities to the nuclear level, for India to limit its response, since that would only invite further escalation by Pakistan. India would hardly risk giving Pakistan the chance to carry out a massive nuclear strike after the Indian response to Pakistan using tactical nuclear weapons. In other worlds, Pakistani tactical nuclear weapon use would effectively free India to undertake a comprehensive first strike against Pakistan.


To comprehensively take out Pakistan Nuclear Weapons in first stike , We would need intelligence in real time to target these weapons be it BM , CM or Aircraft or other types and past wars have shown that would be complex

From Dr Samar interview and in past they have mentioned that TNW would be used against military formation of IA crosses deep into Pakistan and pakistan conventional forces cannot stop them , they would use TNW against our troops.

IF Pakistan knows it will use TNW against IA , it will start moving its Nuclear forces making any Indian first strike more difficult and if that happens then Pakistan would retaliate with full force of its nuclear wepons beyond conventional ones , known Indian Second or Third Strike might leave it with little or none to respond


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Austin, g.chaks, Yagnasri and 46 guests