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.
Locked
Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3486
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by Aditya G »

True, but there is also no need to censure military leaders like Gen Paddy when they do make a statement.

My point from the start has been - adequate signalling is required

https://shashankjoshi.wordpress.com/201 ... -doctrine/
India’s Lt Gen. B.S. Nagal (retd) served as India’s Strategic Forces Commander (2008-2010) and, after his retirement, as head of a nuclear cell within the Indian Prime Minister’s Office that reportedly sought to mimic Pakistan’s nuclear secretariat, the SPD.

In the June edition of India’s Force magazine, he has written a fascinating and somewhat critical essay on India’s nuclear weapons titled ‘Checks and Balances’. His comments are noteworthy both because of the positions he has held – he’s sat at the pinnacle of the civilian and military institutions than deal with Indian nuclear weapons

....

At times doubts are raised over the strategy of MR. Reasons to doubt its applicability are:

1 Gradual escalation/ quid pro quo will prevent large scale nuclear damage and is a pragmatic option;

2 Response to a few or one tactical nuclear weapon (TNW) should not be disproportionate which could result in an all-out nuclear war;

3; Escalation control should be practiced in conventional and nuclear war on moral and humanitarian considerations …

4. The strategy is not rational, our political leadership may not show resolve during crisis or at the time of decision.

[But] MR is the declared policy, and must be implemented. The nation has placed faith in political leadership and the leadership is expected to fulfil their responsibility. In case we vacillate on the issue or raise doubts about our commitment to the policy, we will send wrong signals to our adversary(s).


...

A more proactive public communication will help reassure the public, and it should be practiced in the future, especially when we are committed to NFU. A unique feature of nuclear deterrent signalling has been the role of Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) scientists in speaking on strategy, development and employment philosophy. The statements by the scientists also prematurely release information on delivery systems, which later become embarrassing when time lines are overshot/ delayed. A deliberate and well-thought out nuclear signalling policy should be put in place to communicate with the nation and send the desired message to the adversary(s). The political leadership must speak on select occasions on India’s nuclear policy to display the resolve and credibility without conveying an aggressive posture. An open paper on national security including nuclear policy should be issued periodically. This will invite debate and suggestions and enrich the policy.
The points in bold have been articulated by members on this thread as well.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20844
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by Karan M »

Compare and contrast to UPA.

http://www.deccanchronicle.com/151026/n ... end-firing
Pakistan Rangers DG calls BSF chief, urges end to firing
PTI | October 26, 2015, 21.36 pm IST

New Delhi: The top commander of Pakistan's border guarding force on Monday called up the BSF chief to urge Indian troops to stop their retaliatory firing over escalated ceasefire violations by the neighbouring country following which both sides agreed to halt the exchanges.

Amidst a spurt in ceasefire violations along the Indo- Pakistan International Border (IB) in Jammu and Kashmir, the chief of Pakistan Rangers called up BSF DG DK Pathak urging the Indian side to stop its retaliatory firing.

Sources said that Rangers Director General Maj. Gen. Umar Farooq Burki told the BSF chief that they have suffered "very heavy" damage because of the BSF response and urged the border guarding force to stop its firing.


The Border Security Force (BSF) DG told his counterpart that there would be no retaliation if Pakistan does not initiate the firing, they added.

The Rangers DG, sources said, rang his BSF counterpart Monday afternoon on the newly-operationalised hotline between the two sides and urged Pathak to ensure tranquillity and stop firing on the border.

There have been repeated ceasefire violations by Pakistani troops since October 23.

"Both sides agreed to stop the firing, but BSF made it clear that they will retaliate if provoked," they said.

The Indo-Pakistan IB in Jammu and Kashmir was peaceful since the Rangers and BSF held a DG-level conference last month in the national capital recently in September, but fresh violations by the other side began last week.

The two sides had decided to create a new mechanism and the two Directors General (DsG) had agreed to activate a hotline to get in direct touch in case of any problems on the border they guard.

Pakistan today targeted 30 border outposts and several hamlets with mortar bombs and heavy machine gun firing in the Samba and Kathua districts of J-K, leaving a civilian injured as ceasefire violations by the neighbouring country it continued for the fourth day.

The recent instances of ceasefire violations have left a civilian dead and seven others injured till now on the Indian side.
Meanwhile bluster and bluff co.

http://arynews.tv/en/indian-firing-alon ... akistanis/
RAWALPINDI: Four Pakistani civilians were injured when Indian forces opened indiscriminate fire at the Working Boundary on Sunday, ARY News reports.

At least seven people have been injured by Indian fire at the border area in the past three days.


According to details, Indian Border Security Forces opened heavy fire and shelling at Narowal, Zafarwal and Shakargarh sectors due to which four people were wounded.

Punjab Rangers gave a befitting response to the Indian fire, silencing their guns. :mrgreen: (and said, sirjee, please please stop)

A sense of terror has been taking hold of masses due to continuing fire in the vicinity.

The violation of ceasefire along the Working Boundary and the Line of Control (LoC) has resulted in the martyrdom of a number of Pakistani troops and citizens, wounded and damages apart.
In short, Pakistan is busy trying to put a lid on its casualties but the news is trickling out.
http://www.shanghaidaily.com/article/ar ... ?id=306644
Indian firing kills two Pakistani nationals: official
Oct 26,2015

ISLAMABAD, Oct. 26 (Xinhua) -- Pakistani officials said early Monday that Indian firing had killed at least two Pakistani people and wounded nearly a dozen others.
BSF!

Image
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20844
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by Karan M »

Aditya G wrote:True, but there is also no need to censure military leaders like Gen Paddy when they do make a statement.

My point from the start has been - adequate signalling is required

The points in bold have been articulated by members on this thread as well.
The point about politicians/national will/signalling is this - either you believe in GOI having process based deterrence or you dont.

If you think weak leaders detract from it, then elect strong ones. That's it. That's all we can do.

MMS etc making strong statements and turning other cheek on border firing, on being pro-Pak, as versus Modi speaking little but giving Pakistan a proper slap as required.

I'd say the "signalling" is then fairly obvious.
nirav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2020
Joined: 31 Aug 2004 00:22
Location: Mumbai

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by nirav »

Aditya G wrote:True, but there is also no need to censure military leaders like Gen Paddy when they do make a statement.

My point from the start has been - adequate signalling is required

...


The points in bold have been articulated by members on this thread as well.


IMHO we are spending way too much time in discussing our doctrine or like some members suggested , lack of testimonials to nuke the pakis.

Instead we should be focusing on turning the tables on Pak fauj who stated that they will nuke pakiland to stop evil yindoos.

Their nukes were touted as ultimate protectors of pakistaniyat and in reality their "doctrine" has developed weapons to bomb their own napak land.

Must engage in reverse propagandu and keep dhoti free flowing ;)
nirav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2020
Joined: 31 Aug 2004 00:22
Location: Mumbai

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by nirav »

Double post due to gernail error
Last edited by nirav on 27 Oct 2015 02:22, edited 1 time in total.
vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1657
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by vasu raya »

US to Nawaz Sharif: GPS ties Gurdaspur strike to Pakistan
The United States’ intelligence community is worried that Indian strikes could escalate into a war, leading Pakistan to use its tactical nuclear weapons against advancing Indian armoured formations, and to counter-strikes. It’s a prospect that the United States has become increasingly concerned with amidst a diplomatic deadlock between New Delhi and Islamabad.
Armageddon as part of Indian retribution is causing these people to break the 'kill chain', effectively breaking down Indian deterrence on terrorist activities
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20844
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by Karan M »

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3486
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by Aditya G »

Karan M wrote:...If you think weak leaders detract from it, then elect strong ones. That's it. That's all we can do.

MMS etc making strong statements and turning other cheek on border firing, on being pro-Pak, as versus Modi speaking little but giving Pakistan a proper slap as required.

I'd say the "signalling" is then fairly obvious.
This is not about Modi or MMS per se. There could be a UPA or Mahaghatbandhan sarkar after 4 years. We all know that there are varying sorts of opinions in the GoI establishment, and given the committee type decision making system there is a chance that the Prime Minister may be advised against Massive Retaliation (MR), and hence may not press ahead with it.

Secondly, aggressive border response may not be adequate indicator of the leadership's position on nuclear matters, for simply the scale and responsibility attached to nuclear bombing are vastly different. I am sure Modi has a view, but on this matter he will need to collate it with technical and professional views of all stakeholders in the government.

Lastly, given the nature of the subject, even written doctrines may be found as open to interpretation. Take this gent's opinion for example... there may be others in the establishment with the same opinion:

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp ... 168042.ece
...

One clause currently in the Doctrine merits some revision. It states that “ ....[our] nuclear weapons will only be used in retaliation against a nuclear attack on Indian territory or on Indian forces anywhere...retaliation to a first strike will be massive.” Now, threatening retaliation “against a nuclear attack on Indian territory” is one matter. It is the basic component of nuclear deterrence and should apply whether the attack on our territory is small or big, as long as it is nuclear.

But adding on the phrase “or on Indian forces anywhere” is a different matter. The rationale behind it was presumably to deter a nuclear attack on our forces should they enter alien territory or the high seas in combat. Such an eventuality is not implausible after Pakistan developed the Nasr — a nuclear capable battlefield missile which could be used on Indian forces if they march deep into Pakistani territory. However, threatening retaliation against that with a massive nuclear attack from our side can boomerang on our credibility. Pakistan’s battlefield nuclear attack is likely to be small (by nuclear standards). They would not want to spread much radioactivity on their own soil. It is also unclear whether they can develop a sufficiently miniaturised warhead to fit the Nasr, and how much damage such a warhead could do. It may achieve at most a few hundred fatalities. This is still a terrible loss of Indian soldiers and armoury. But it would be far from being “mass destruction.”

However, such a battlefield nuclear attack will place India in a dilemma. Having threatened in our Doctrine to inflict a “massive” nuclear retaliation, can we really go ahead and kill lakhs of their civilians in response to a much smaller attack, that too on their own soil? It would be a disproportionate response, which would go against our national sensibilities and attract widespread criticism from around the world. Surely, there are more proportionate non-nuclear ways of inflicting punitive retaliation.

Yet, if we do not counter attack after having threatened to do so, that would invite derision that we are “a soft state” incapable of hard nuclear decisions and would erode the credibility of our future deterrence, not only against Pakistan, but also against China.

It may therefore be better to limit massive nuclear retaliation only against nuclear attacks on our country and say nothing in the Doctrine, one way or the other, about attacks “on Indian forces anywhere.” Should the latter take place, we always have the option of some appropriate, measured retaliation.

...

(R. Rajaraman is professor emeritus, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.)
Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1655
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by Sid »

Karan M wrote: The point about politicians/national will/signalling is this - either you believe in GOI having process based deterrence or you don't.

If you think weak leaders detract from it, then elect strong ones. That's it. That's all we can do.

MMS etc making strong statements and turning other cheek on border firing, on being pro-Pak, as versus Modi speaking little but giving Pakistan a proper slap as required.

I'd say the "signalling" is then fairly obvious.
Alas, if it was that easy in this yindoo nation.

What I believe is that there is "statement", a policy paper, which may or may not be enforced at this point of time. And its use might be subjective under certain circumstances. For example, even though Israel never exercised or published its policy/stance on nuke use, everyone already know what they will do.

It is this ambiguity which lets our friendly neighbor miscalculate and make mistakes again and again. And god forbid, they will do it again as we are not able to deter them.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by Austin »

Karan M wrote: The point about politicians/national will/signalling is this - either you believe in GOI having process based deterrence or you don't.

If you think weak leaders detract from it, then elect strong ones. That's it. That's all we can do.
These policies are not set by weak leaders or strong one but by Deep State Actors who guard our nation irrespective of who comes to power.

When we had Kargil and Parliament Attack we had the so called Strong Leader in ABV/Advani , Advani even mentioned in his memoir that when he tried to get D back there was some one in PMO who did not want this and it went no where , that inspite of who Advani was in the establishment.

When it comes to pakistan the ruling establishment in India has to take care it with bluff and rhetoric and action where ever possible without commiting to war thats the best and most we can do , just trying to control the temper of the dog and not killing it via international players

We can just hope Pakistan will eventually implode due to its own inherent contradiction and thats the only way to get rid of that threat for good.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34981
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by shiv »

I believe that it is not easy to elect "strong leaders" when our own mental view of strong and weak are skewed by a guilt trip that tells us that we are Hindus who are automatically cruel to Muslims and that Pakistan was formed because Muslims went off in a huff and that we need to treat Muslims even better so that Pakistan feels happy with our behaviour and then we can live in peace.

Every incident where Muslim sentiment is hurt in India is played up both by Pakistan and by secular Indians as proof that this entire business of partition and the Kashmir imbroglio is deeply linked to Hindu inability to treat Muslims right. Of course an Indian Muslim viewpoint - even when it denies such a viewpoint is simply ignored.

The fact is that the Pakistani army thrives on the idea of protecting Islam of the Indian subcontinent against the Hindus. The more Indians are made to feel guilty about their alleged horrific treatment of Muslims the better it is and the more the proof that Pakistan, protected by the Pakistani army is necessary.

The problem is the Pakistani army and it is clever enough to survive by doing mercenary work for the US, for China and for the Gulf states. In every case the Pakistan army positions itself as opposing something that India supports or represents - like Hindu India supports communist USSR or Hindu India supports US against China or Hindu forces support TTP against Pakistan
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by Austin »

Eddi from Turkey

Pakistan to get 37 trainer-cum-fighter jets from Turkey for free
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan will get 34 trainer-cum- fighter aircraft from Turkey free of cost under a major defence deal inked between the two countries, the Defence Ministry announced today.

On Pakistan's desire of acquiring the aircraft, Turkey decided to provide 34 T-37, a jet trainer and light attack aircraft and its spare parts, without charging a single penny, the ministry said in a statement.

The agreement was reached during the meeting of Pakistan- Turkey High Level Military Dialogue Group which concluded in Ankara, The Express Tribune reported

Highlighting the exemplary brotherly relations between the countries, the secretary said, "Pakistan desires to further translate these relations into strategic cooperation, signifying strategic importance of our relations."

The agreement is reached at a time when Turkey is believed to be seeking Pakistan's increased security and defence cooperation to deal with the emerging threat posed by Islamic State terrorist group as well as Kurdish rebels, the paper reported.
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21234
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by Prem »

Paki Joining Turkey ( actually linking with ISIS) will be against the interests of Persia,PRC and Russia. Let's hope Paki Jihadis go their gung ho and join the war and find Sakinah of Jannat under the shadow of Sukhoi.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19332
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by NRao »

I thought Pakistan had a pact with Iran not to get involved for strategic depth. No?

Pakistan is willing to break that pact for trainers?
nirav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2020
Joined: 31 Aug 2004 00:22
Location: Mumbai

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by nirav »

G parthasarthy and commodore Bhaskar on latitude with mahroof raza on times now right now.

Both reiterated India's official stance of a massive response.
Threat of tac nukes doesn't hold.

Will operate and use options available to India in the strategic space w.r.t Paki thresholds

Parthasarthiji also said Paki gernails are *very* interested in cantonment land. Hence uniformed jihadis not *suicidal* :mrgreen:
Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3486
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by Aditya G »

German Luna UAV - 3rd july 2015 crash in Shakargarh (close to IB)

Image
Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3486
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by Aditya G »

I was reviewing recent acquisitions by PN Air Arm.

Check out these two - C/Ns 2060 & 2266, built early 1970s. Inducted in August 2014:

Image

3 ATR-72 aircraft acquired are also second hand, and are in Civilian configuration. No MAD, radar, torpedos, hardpoints ... not even a large cargo door.

Atlantics were officially retired in 2012, and Fokker F-27s should be on the way out as well. Sea Kings are 1970s as well. The only silver lining are new Z-9s and some P-3s. Otherwise the service is in total decline compared to their hey days in the late 80s and 90s when their air launched cruise missile capability was something.

They should look at buying second hand Sikorsky UH-3 Sea Kings and may be more Z-9s.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34981
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by shiv »

Aditya G wrote: They should look at buying second hand Sikorsky UH-3 Sea Kings and may be more Z-9s.
No. They should look at importing paper and printing presses to print more Qurans and build more madarsas. Allah cleated Pakistan. Allah will save them.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20844
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by Karan M »

Austin wrote:
Karan M wrote: The point about politicians/national will/signalling is this - either you believe in GOI having process based deterrence or you don't.

If you think weak leaders detract from it, then elect strong ones. That's it. That's all we can do.
These policies are not set by weak leaders or strong one but by Deep State Actors who guard our nation irrespective of who comes to power.
.
So now you believe in deep state actors, in which case then they are incompetent (26/11, or exodus of Pandits from J&K). Previously you claimed processes don't matter because politicians do or that India is weak since it won't do anything. So clearly the deep state was weak.
Basically you are in a circular argument here. Then you go around stating that strong leaders don't matter.

Fact is either India has processes which ensure actions are taken, come what may. Or it has people who make it act. So elect the right people as versus cowardly milquetoasts who claim friendship, brotherhood, people like us even when your neighbour keeps murdering your citizens. There is no secret group of deep state actors out there. At best there are multiple power groups which occasionally protect us from the likes of MMS, but also prove woefully incompetent when things like 26/11 happen.
When it comes to pakistan the ruling establishment in India has to take care it with bluff and rhetoric and action where ever possible without commiting to war thats the best and most we can do , just trying to control the temper of the dog and not killing it via international players
Basically this is your personal belief which you are projecting onto the state which has far more options than you think they have or should have. Whether you admit it or not, they can go to war, they can engage in many dissuasive acts (covert ops, Balochistan & NWFP support and so forth). If it comes to war, irrespective of how devastating it will be, the services are being prepared to win that conflict, which is what all the documentation clearly states and which even the Pakistanis admit.

Which then boils down to the fact what kind of leadership India has & whether that person has the gumption to employ those choices or sit and fiddle like Nero as MMS did. The right kind of leadership which understands military power then goes and addresses basics (like Parrikar is doing with Su-30 serviceability or the DAC asking the Regiment of Artillery what it needs as happened recently). The wrong kind sits on files, makes sure even batteries for submarines are not available and uses a Navy Chief as a bakra when things become evident (and to protect himself all the man can do is come on TV and make a few remarks). The right kind listens to R&AW and elects an aggressive NSA focused on the tasks at hand. The wrong kind looks at his own chair and has a clan loyalist as his NSA who is also bound by the unseen center of power. In short strong leaders matter, since the GOI is nothing but a bureaucratic mess which needs a lot of forceful direction to steer it. This is the reality.

Every nation gets the leadership it deserves. Elect strong, capable leaders and hold them accountable and you will be relatively safe. Elect fools & be taken for one. Depending on some imaginary deep state or the like applying western concepts of their MIC-bureaucractic nexus to a developing country like India, would be the heights of folly.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by Austin »

Karan you must watch this

7 years after 26/11: Are We Safe? Live Q&A with Sandeep Unnithan

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElT2ucvz2Nw
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by Austin »

Karan M wrote:So now you believe in deep state actors, in which case then they are incompetent (26/11, or exodus of Pandits from J&K). Previously you claimed processes don't matter because politicians do or that India is weak since it won't do anything. So clearly the deep state was weak.
Basically you are in a circular argument here. Then you go around stating that strong leaders don't matter.
Deep State always exists in every country , To me it seems the perinnial fear of Ind Estb is any action against Pakistan will lead to full scale war and once that happens the Nuclear Dimension comes into picture and then it is how do we stop this when the dice gets rolled.

if Indian army moves in there would be pressure from Intl Community to come to pre-war level boundary so even if we occupy land we would be under pressure from Intl community.

Not to mention Economic Sanction would cripple us , in worst case the US/Europe might just freeze our assets abroad and even that of Pvt Companies something done to iran , recently Russia on lesser scale so its the sum of Military consequences and Economic Consequences and no clear thought what to do even if there is a war is what paralysis Indian Estb every time.

Else why would there be no consequences to Pakistan when their act of terror is not responded in any offensive way but purely defensive manner where we tend to take the losses
Basically this is your personal belief which you are projecting onto the state which has far more options than you think they have or should have.
My Personal Belief is based on my years of experience of watching such horrific terror attacks and then going unpunished , I have watched it since 93 Mumbai blast , Multiple Blasts , Kargil , 26/11 , Parliament attack , since most of these attacks have taken place in my own city Mumbai I know it too well.

We still have Dawood/Tiger Menon Family In Pakistan Check , Hafeez Sayeed/Lakhwi in Pakistan Check , POK Training Camps not targetted since 1989 Kashmir Terrorism and still exisit Check , No one I know off from Pakistan who is of any significant value ( high value target ) has either been punished or brought to justice.

All I see year after year are tall claims and when the time comes a very paralysing effect of Indian Estb on how to respond
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34981
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by shiv »

Any sort of ABM cover on the Paki side is going to make it inconvenient for them to hold out their threat of nuking India if India reponds to a terrorist attack from Pakistan.

If you look at the progression from 1998 ->
1. Over Paki nuclearization 1998
2. Kargil war expecting that India cannot expand the conflict as it did in 1965
3. 2002 parliament attack and mobilization that did not lead to conflict leading to the conclusion that mobilization was too slow to respond
4. 2002-2008 : repeated terrorist attacks from Pakistan knowing full well that India will not be able to mobilize fast enough and will hesitate to attack because of nukes
5. Post 2008 - "Cold Start" ideas brought up
6. Post 2010 - Tactical nuclear weapons/Nasr claim from Pakistan as a response to Cold Start
7. Post 2015 ->ABM cover to neutralize any Paki response to Indian punitive action
8: The near future: Back to infiltration and trying to support insurgencies in India using expatriates outside India?
Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1655
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by Sid »

^^ABM cover will only give them an excuse to expand their stockpiles. Maybe MIRV? Thats the only conclusive step they can take.

I say let them go on spending spree and dryout their stash.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34981
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by shiv »

Sid wrote:^^ABM cover will only give them an excuse to expand their stockpiles. Maybe MIRV? Thats the only conclusive step they can take.

I say let them go on spending spree and dryout their stash.
They will not take this step. China will do it for them and we need to see what we can do about China.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14778
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by Aditya_V »

My opinion, is Neither China nor USA will like either us or Pakis having too many Nukes. Each NUke in Paki Hands is one which CHina and US will have to watch out. If Pakis have 15 Nukes, they will gaurd it like Hell. If they 100, a general might be tempted to trade one secretly with aanther nation. 100 or 99 Nukes against India make little difference. The only way out is, we arm ourselves enough that China feels it has to negotiate with us. Right now they think they can contain us with the Pakis.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34981
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by shiv »

Aditya_V wrote:My opinion, is Neither China nor USA will like either us or Pakis having too many Nukes. Each NUke in Paki Hands is one which CHina and US will have to watch out. If Pakis have 15 Nukes, they will gaurd it like Hell. If they 100, a general might be tempted to trade one secretly with aanther nation. 100 or 99 Nukes against India make little difference. The only way out is, we arm ourselves enough that China feels it has to negotiate with us. Right now they think they can contain us with the Pakis.
I think the entire world of CTBT/FMCT pasand countries have lost the plot. They can "dislike" anyone having nukes but there is nothing they can do. Zilch.

Both China and the US are beginning to find that arming Pakistan does not stabilize the country. It only makes Pakistan more boldly anti-India. India was initially expected to fail, but now India's stability is taken for granted and an Indian love for peace with Pakistan and lack of desire for war is taken as a given. This needs to go. India needs to promote instability in the relationship. This is instantly met with threats from Moody's etc saying economy will falter. But it is a game that must be played where we say our security is paramount and Pakistan needs to be sorted out. But we need to put a gun to Pakistan's head even as we arm ourselves to thwart China
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14778
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by Aditya_V »

Exactly my view, I have my doubts on what capacity reduction has hap penned between 2004-14. We need to keep quiet, build our capacities and capabilities and provided there is no further sabotage in 2019. We can continue along this path. Wonder how much damage was done by the Murder of 13 scientists from 2009-13 for which no one has been found responsible?
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by Austin »

shiv wrote:Any sort of ABM cover on the Paki side is going to make it inconvenient for them to hold out their threat of nuking India if India reponds to a terrorist attack from Pakistan.
In case of ABM system wrt to Pakistan we need to make sure that their IRBM gets intercepted at boost phase , where the missile cannot manouver and it is easier to intercept and best part is it fall on their land mass.

In India-Pak context the short flight time to cover Pakistan land mass and enter into Indian means there is barely more than 3-4 minutes post launch where the IRBM would be Indian land mass and travelling towards its target.

The sensor shooter time for BM detection and launch/Intercept of ABM before the boost phase gets over should be under 3-4 minutes ( i am being generous here could be well under 2 mins ).

Beyond that phase an IRBM might just travel at 300-400 km Altitude and intercepting them would be impossible even though we might just track it well as it will be over our land mass and then opt for High Altitude Terminal Defence via PDV/S-400/AAD , A 3 intercepter attempt at 160+ , 100+ and 25+ Km altitude would ensure high probability of intercept.

From Pakistan pov they might develop a MaRV warhead like Iranian/Agni-2 types , MIRVng would be one option that is probably much easier than developing a MaRV
Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1655
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by Sid »

Austin wrote: In case of ABM system wrt to Pakistan we need to make sure that their IRBM gets intercepted at boost phase , where the missile cannot manouver and it is easier to intercept and best part is it fall on their land mass.
But how it will be done? Boost phase interception represents a very very very small time window. Deploy such interceptors too close to border and they will be open to SEAD.

Next option will be to preempt their launch. That will require high investment in monitoring/surveillance equipment (satellite/planes/HUMINT) to continuously have an eye on them. If they look up, you go for a kill. As these are solid fueled, we will never get ready warning.
Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3486
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by Aditya G »

Continuing on Pak Navy's development in recent years.

The biggest win for PN has been to disperse its assets on a larger number of bases. Ironically that's thanks jehadi strikes on Mehran airbase.

Obviously, it makes targetting more complex for us, as previously all eggs could be found in Karachi.

PN has also increased the strength of Pak Marines, who protect these installations. They have been equipped with Chinese gun based air defence systems.

http://usiofindia.org/Article/?pub=Stra ... 1&ano=2704
On 03 September 2014, Pakistan’s naval chief Admiral Mohammad Asif Sandila commissioned a new air base PNS Siddique in Turbat, southern Balochistan. This marks another step by Pakistan Navy (PN) toward moving its assets away from the congested city of Karachi, a process which began after the Indian Navy’s attack and bottling up of PN units at Karachi in 1971.

Following the loss of Chittagong, Karachi was Pakistan’s only port. Strategic necessity dictated the creation of small ports with berthing facilities for PN ships at Jiwani, Gwadar, Pasni and Ormara, with reports of a new base at Khor Kalmat, between Pasni and Ormara, in the offing. Ormara eventually became the site for the PN’s second largest naval base (Jinnah Naval Base), commissioned in 2000. It was again in the news when the PN announced in April 2014 that it will shift its entire fleet of diesel-electric submarines there.

Till end August 2014, the PN had only two active Naval Air Stations, PNS Mehran (at Karachi, commissioned in 1975) and PNS Makran (at Pasni, commissioned in 1988). PNS Siddique, the newly commissioned third naval air station, is named after Vice Admiral Haji Mohammad Siddique Choudri, who took over from Rear Admiral Jefford in 1953 as the first Pakistani Naval Officer to become Commander-in-Chief of the PN and led the service for six years.

Located at Turbat, a relatively small town with a population of below 200,000, it is about 90 kms NNW of Pasni and about 117kms NE of Gwadar. The International Airport at Turbat (IATA Code TUK) is connected by air to Muscat, Sharjah, Karachi, Gwadar and Dalbandian. The town is connected by road to Panjgur and Kalat to NW, Pasni to SE and Karachi to the East. There is no rail connectivity.

Turbat has a runway length of 6000ft (1829m), more than sufficient for P-3C Orion (which requires a runway length of about 4250ft at Max Take Off Weight and below 3000ft at Max Landing Weight), Fokker F-27, Hawker 850 and ATR 72-212A fixed wing aircraft flown by the PN as well as its various helicopters. Not much is known yet about the facilities that have been created or which aircraft will be based there. An indicator may come from the press release, which states, “facilities such as the state-of-the-art hospital and educational institutions etc. at PNS Siddique will enable the local populace access to quality services at their doorstep and set of a new era of prosperity in the region”. The existence of these facilities points to a sizable naval contingent at Turbat.

Which aircraft are likely to be based there? The Arabian Sea is around 75-80 kms away from PNS Siddique. As such, any PN aircraft based there would have to waste at least 150 kms of their total range in transiting just to reach and return from their primary operating area, the sea. This consideration would appear to rule out the basing of helicopters from 333 Squadron (Alouette), 222 Squadron (Harbin Z-9EC) or 111 Squadron (Seaking) there. Not that these helicopters cannot use Turbat as a staging base for disaster relief operations in the hinterland; still it makes more sense to keep them at a coastal base and stage them through Turbat for peacetime operations.

Similarly, Turbat would appear to be unsuitable for anti-ship strike aircraft flown by PN pilots on the Mirage V’s owned by the PAF and currently based at Masroor. The Mirages are to be replaced by Chinese JF-17’s next year, but Turbat is too far from potential operating areas, which would have to be in Indian waters. Given the density of traffic in the nearby Persian Gulf and attendant difficulties in identification, permanent basing of strike aircraft at Turbat is unlikely. This leaves the Orions belonging to PN’s 28 Squadron, the Fokker F-27’s belonging to 27 Squadron and the ATR 72-212A, Atlantic and Hawker aircraft belonging to 29 Squadron. Any of these aircraft could be based at Turbat.

A complicating factor is the destruction of two P 3C Orions (Tail Nos 84 and 87) by Tehrik-i-Taliban terrorists at PNS Mehran on 22 May 2011. The crowded environs of Karachi were subsequently adjudged as indefensible against terrorist attack and reports indicate that the remaining Orions may have been shifted to Pasni. However, Pasni is on the coast and has its own vulnerabilities, particularly to a strike from the sea. The eventual basing of P-3C Orions as well as other long range aircraft at Turbat, sufficiently inland to preclude a commando raid but not so far as to make an appreciable difference in their time on task, would appear to make eminent sense. Certainly any new face in a relatively small town would be easier to identify and track than in a bustling metropolis like Karachi.

Dispersal has certainly complicated the Indian Navy’s tasks, but the induction of new technology and equipment still keeps a successful strike within the bounds of possibility. What is certain is that Indian Naval planners will watch developments at Turbat and PNS Siddique with considerable interest.
http://archive.defensenews.com/article/ ... om-Karachi
ISLAMABAD — The Pakistani Navy this week commissioned a new air base intended to move its air assets away from the vulnerable and congested city of Karachi, and to help protect the coast and Pakistan’s maritime territory.

The new PNS Siddique Naval Air Base is in Turbat in the southwest province of Balochistan, near the strategic new deepwater port of Gwadar and to the Iranian border. Chief of Naval Staff Adm. Muhammad Asif Sandila was the chief guest at a ceremony Wednesday that marked the base’s official opening.

According to the Associated Press of Pakistan (APP), “The Aviation Base will strengthen seaward security along the Makran coast and beyond and will also lead to commercial flying activities, which would act as a catalyst for economic development of the Makran division in general and Kech District in particular.”

The Navy would not comment on what type of aircraft would be based there.

However, the consensus among analysts is that they are likely to be rotary and fixed-wing patrol types, and at present, at least, this may be all the base is able to support.

Analyst Kaiser Tufail, a former air commodore with the Pakistani Air Force, said PNS Siddique is currently unsuitable to base strike aircraft as it is “too far to pay a visit to our neighbors [India].” He noted, however, that Pasni, an air base shared by the Air Force and Navy, is “just 70 kilometers from Turbat.”

There have been security concerns about the Navy’s aircraft since the May 2011 attack on PNS Mehran Naval Air Base in Karachi that destroyed a number of aircraft, including two new P-3C Orion patrol planes.

The Navy’s Orions are now based in Pasni, but any remaining naval aircraft in Mehran “must get out,” said analyst Brian Cloughley, a former Australian defense attaché to Islamabad.

Enveloped by urban sprawl, Mehran is difficult to defend. Until it was hidden by stacked shipping containers, the apron at Mehran was visible from a flyover on the road just outside the base.

Though the new base is far safer than Mehran, it is nevertheless “somewhere else to have to guard,” Cloughley said.

However, PNS Siddique will also be another instrument of the Navy’s successful civilian outreach program, like its presence in the port of Ormara. In April the Navy shifted the bulk of its operational fleet, including it submarines, from the congested and polluted port of Karachi to Jinnah Naval Base in Ormara. The development of Jinnah Naval Base has led to considerable benefits for the local population.

Likewise, “facilities such as state-of-the-art hospital, education institution, etc., at PNS Siddique will enable the local populace access to quality services at their doorstep and set off a new era of prosperity in the region,” according to the APP report.
Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3486
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by Aditya G »

Jinnah Naval Base @ Omrara (the peninsula looks very similar to Gwadar!)

Image

Image
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34981
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by shiv »

^^Gosh that's a busy port!
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by Austin »

Sid wrote:But how it will be done? Boost phase interception represents a very very very small time window. Deploy such interceptors too close to border and they will be open to SEAD.

Next option will be to preempt their launch. That will require high investment in monitoring/surveillance equipment (satellite/planes/HUMINT) to continuously have an eye on them. If they look up, you go for a kill. As these are solid fueled, we will never get ready warning.
Yes its not easy even though the max distance that might be need to cover would be less than 500 km , Lets say we fly 24x7 AWACS that keeps track of every thing flying over pakistan and deploy EW sat over that area , it would still have a window of 2-3 minutes max from detection/tracting and sucessfully complete an interception.

Even tracking a TEL is not easy task as GW and even 2nd GW experience has shown allied forces could not track and kill any TEL inspite of complete air superiority. Pakistan knowing would do every thing possible to protect TEL from surveillance and SF mission to target it.

Practically we would have to wait for Terminal Defence using PAD/PDV/400/AAD types and at high altitude 150 km plus getting 3 chance at the target , shoot track shoot types

IF there is a war its very likely Pakistan would fire dozens of IRBM/BM with conventional warhead at targets in India and that probably we would know how capable ABM systems are in in real conflict , if the success ratio is 80% then nothing like it but if its low 20-30 % then we might have to rethink.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34981
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by shiv »

Austin wrote:
IF there is a war its very likely Pakistan would fire dozens of IRBM/BM with conventional warhead at targets in India and that probably we would know how capable ABM systems are in in real conflict , if the success ratio is 80% then nothing like it but if its low 20-30 % then we might have to rethink.
Austin as long as Pakistan thinks it is 80% who are we to change their view? :mrgreen:
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by Austin »

True Shiv :D

Looks like Gwadar and JNB offers direct access to Arabian Sea without any hindrance and is a deep water port.

Looking at the map the chinese can directly transport the energy from Gelf countries via land pipeline from Gwadar to some point where they can take to china mainland , That would save them the cost of transporting the energy via Arabian/Bay of Bengal sea , No wonder the Chinese are investing there also strategically this would reduce the vulnerability of energy supplies
Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3486
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by Aditya G »

JNB is home to the Submarine fleet. Makes it very interesting to us. Looks well protected as well thanks to the mountainous feature. The photo i attached previously is from south to north direction. You can see the Pak mainland's coastline in the distance. The photo is taken from the ridge, which offers natural protection from observations.

It will be interesting if our Brahmos can execute a steep dive attack on this target.

Elsewhere on the forum, somebody commented that we can target large parts of Pakistan from land based missiles, so why put them on a ship. While that may be true, the fact is Navy has not acquired any land based brahmos system - though it might eventually to replace the Styx based coastal battery.

The navy does not want to be confined to acting 200 Kms from the coastline - and thus is going to put missiles on ships. I am assuming that the number of targets will always be higher than the number of missiles available. And since our ships will have missiles, Navy will employ them when the time comes. Army and Air Force will thus be free to attack other targets using their systems.

Now we certainly have the capability to address the Pak Navy even though they have dispersed across the coastline.

However, I am speculating what PN's plans could be.

- Azmat class and other missile craft can hug the coastline near to these bases, with hope to deter IN ships from coming close enough. That should keep the Styx and Uran based ships away.

- PAF Mirage-Vs and JF-17s with AShMs will probably hold CAPs to deter IN at a farther out distance. But they will need to watch out for their own tails as well.

- My guess is that the PN will attempt an attack on Bombay High using P-3s Orions escorted by Mirage-IIIs. This will be a spectacular mission for them. The Mirages will require IFR. I think INS Vikramaditya's main role in a Pak confrontation will be block this attack. She can be positioned in a spot halfway between Oman and Mumbai. MiGs operating from that position can take down any sneaking P-3. Her powerful air search radar coupled with Ka-31s will provide the complete airspace picture. INS Kolkata and Kochi will orbit around offshore installations ready to launch Barak-8 SAMs against any cruise missile which is launched.

- PN F-22Ps will probably patrol close to coast as well.

- PN will rely on submarines for any offensive action. The chinese acquisition is going to be single largest order of any type of vessel in PN.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34981
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by shiv »

Austin wrote:the chinese can directly transport the energy from Gelf countries via land pipeline from Gwadar to some point where they can take to china mainland , That would save them the cost of transporting the energy via Arabian/Bay of Bengal sea ,
I am not sure I believe this. I doubt if it is cheaper to take a pipe via Baluchistan, and the Himalayas to Xinjiang and thence to Eastern China. But Pakistanis are certainly trying to sell that.

To my knowledge we have been hearing of oil pipelines via Pakistan for at least 15 year now but how come none is any nearer to fruition? In fact India can dominate the Arabian sea and Indian ocean. India will stop Chinese oil if we want - even it it is by pipeline. Stop needling India and we will help Chinese oil get through by sea.
BharadwajV
BRFite
Posts: 116
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by BharadwajV »

Harvard Wajahat has one more Testosterone Roleplay video for Aam Abduls:
http://video.dunyanews.tv/index.php/en/ ... k4BnlUrLIV
Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3486
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Post by Aditya G »

PNS Alamgir has been retrofitted with Harpoons, probably from the retired PNS Badr

Image
Locked