Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 06 Dec 2010 06:57

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news- ... ed-missile

Pakistan Army conducted training fire of anti-tank guided missile at Tilla Ranges near Jhelum here on Sunday. The test of locally-made missiles has been carried out in different times to examine performance of the weapons and enhance the overall capabilities of Pakistan Army.

kmc_chacko · Post by **kmc_chacko** » 06 Dec 2010 08:09

Prem wrote:http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news- ... ed-missile
Pakistan Army conducted training fire of anti-tank guided missile at Tilla Ranges near Jhelum here on Sunday. The test of locally-made missiles has been carried out in different times to examine performance of the weapons and enhance the overall capabilities of Pakistan Army.

very strange & funny website

Pak army successfully tests Anti Tank Guided Missile

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan army successfully tested fire an Anti Tank Guided Missile at Tilla Range near Jehlum here on Sunday.

According to military sources, Corps Commander Gujranwala, Lieutenant General Raheel Sharif was also present at the occasion. The missile was tested during the ongoing exercises of Pak army in Tilla range. According to military officials Pakistan receives these missiles in the decade of 1970 however these are small in size. Now these missiles are updated according to the needs of modern era. These missiles can successfully hit tanks.

On the occasion, Corps Commander Gujranwala Let. Gen Raheel Shareef applauded the professional capabilities and exercises of Pak army. According to ISPR the test fire was successful which is aim to review the capacities of war needs.

http://www.onlinenews.com.pk/details.php?id=172009

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 06 Dec 2010 20:59

not sure if anyone has realized the implication of this:-

the F-16-block52 has a ferry range of 4000km using the big external drop tanks but excluding the 700gal CFT. if we top up the CFTs, perhaps the range will be 4700km let us say.

the great circle route from karachi to karwar is roughly 1700km one way.....so 3400km for a round trip.

Suppose a troop of 4 F-16 takes off from karachi with a accompanying IL78 tanker. 1000km out over the sea, the Midas tops them all up and heads off for home, going to gwader unescorted and putting as much distance between itself and indian coast as possible during the return leg.

the F16s had taken off with full CFT, full drop tanks(3), 4 x 500lb guided bombs, one sniper-xr pod and two amraams each. let us say the ordnance reduces its range from 4700km to 3500km max.

due to the refueling 1000km out, its onward journey to karwar (700km) and return leg (1700km) = 2400km will be comfortably covered with 1000km of fuel range to spare.....so you can play around and increase payload or refuel much nearer the Pak shore (say 500km and send a couple bandar's along to escort the Midas back) and this would still work.

Goa is nearer and comfortably within this algorithm.

even Kochi is within the extremity of this scheme.... probably Hyderabad too if they fly over uttara kannada and enter AP from the west.

and it could likely empty the internal tanks first , then pump the drop tanks fuel into internal tanks and release the drop tanks to reduce weight and increase the range/speed on the way home.

we need to be prepared for this very powerful and long range strike a/c. it will be a difficult customer , flying low and fast at night, using NVG & sniper pod, and pack a sting if a A2A loadout F-16 or two is sent along with it armed with 6 amraams each.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 06 Dec 2010 21:17

singha-ji, you have shivered too long in the goat cave, time to change your dhoti. quite apart from awacs cover over the sea approaches, the IN will also be parked in the middle on AA picket and CAP with 29K's

but let us not be complacent

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 06 Dec 2010 21:27

IN will have one carrier with a dozen Mig29K for forseeable future. the arabian sea is a large place. we are far from having the number of awacs needed to even maintain *one* on permanent station around 500km off the karachi coast (would take around 3 I think for a 24x7 patrol).

there are rich pickings all down the coast in the form of sea ports and billion $$ power plants / industries....they do not have to attack a heavily protected target like karwar just the softest links in the chain.

NDTV will do the rest in raising mass hysteria , panic and shame the goi with a street campaign to pull back fighter squadrons from the front to provide coastal cover...kind of like the DooLittle raid having a impact far beyond the limited physical damage wrought.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 06 Dec 2010 21:31

I have speculated about this modality of attack. It certainly is possible.
But the only problem for pakistan is that there are at least 4 MAJOR air bases in India's western coast with long range maritime strike and multirole aircraft tasked to meet just this eventuality.

India can deploy a long range AESA radar on the western coast and that can cover a lot of territory. As it is there are a lot of strategically important installations on the western coast or just off it.

When Hamid Gul was threatening to Nuke Bangalore, I had supposed that they would use one such modality using F-16s or use Jihadis in a JDAM attack in a Mumbai style shore landing.

Incidentally the latter is a bigger danger than the first. I think that the Pakistanis don't have the balls to try the aerial attack unless they are in an all out war or are in a situation when a part of their country is about to scecede imminently.
The shore landing terrorist route is something they have been very actively training for. The sea tigers wing of the LET which has trained with their Navy and the SSGs is apparently tasked with such a mission. The 8 fools who came to Mumbai were not the last of the lot.

Just this week, a small ship-more of a fishing dhow with Iranian navigators and upto 8 pakistani citizens aboard were intercepted off Lakshadweep! It is easily possible for the pakistani terrorists to board one of the thousands of ships that pass between the persian gulf to the malacca and get off the coastline of India -western, southern or eastern, and then simply be received on the coast.

The ISI-LET were also actively seeking safehouses and local sympathizers in southern India in Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Karnataka. South India is defenitely on their cross hairs.

Abhibhushan · Post by **Abhibhushan** » 06 Dec 2010 21:49

Singha said

flying low and fast at night, using NVG & sniper pod, and pack a sting if a A2A loadout F-16 or two is sent along with it armed with 6 amraams each.

Calculating a route based on 'Max Ferry Range' it would be fatal to mix a segment that is low and fast at night for any significant length. Perhaps a non nuclear attacker following this flight plan would be able to inflict only minimal damage if any? Per haps his flight back will not be very assured either? I mean even if PAF decides to visit Karwar, could we not just say 'Bring em on!' ?

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 07 Dec 2010 02:22

PAF is primarily a defensive force. Though the F-16s give a thoroughly modern strikeability, i doubt they will send the crown jewels on a long range strike - though one-off spectacular mission is plausible.

If the PAF were to prioritze, they would gain more from running counter air and SEAD missions on airbases and radar site rather than attack an empty naval facility.

mirza · Post by **mirza** » 07 Dec 2010 03:04

PAF AM already confirmed that CFTs would be provided with the new batch aircrafts. 6 more will be delivered to PAF this month and the deal will be concluded

mirza · Post by **mirza** » 07 Dec 2010 03:07

MIRV technology within Pakistani grasp now.

Pakistani engineers, with help from the Chinese, are also said to be in the advance stages of developing MIRV technology for its missiles. This would allow the military to fit several warheads on the same ballistic missile and then launch them at separate targets.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-11888973

mirza · Post by **mirza** » 07 Dec 2010 03:14

According to latest issue of a Turkish defence magazine called S&H, Turkish officials came to terms with Pakistani officials to further modernize Pakistani OHP frigates with Havelsan Genesis Combat Management System. Counterparts will append the signatures until the end of this year. According to agreement, First ship will be modernized in Turkey, Istanbul and other 3 would be in Karachi shipyard.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 07 Dec 2010 05:43

Singha wrote:not sure if anyone has realized the implication of this:-
the F-16-block52 has a ferry range of 4000km using the big external drop tanks but excluding the 700gal CFT. if we top up the CFTs, perhaps the range will be 4700km let us say.
the F16s had taken off with full CFT, full drop tanks(3), 4 x 500lb guided bombs, one sniper-xr pod and two amraams each. let us say the ordnance reduces its range from 4700km to 3500km max. due to the refueling 1000km out, its onward journey to karwar (700km) and return leg (1700km) = 2400km will be comfortably covered with 1000km of fuel range to spare.....so you can play around and increase payload or refuel much nearer the Pak shore (say 500km and send a couple bandar's along to escort the Midas back) and this would still work. Goa is nearer and comfortably within this algorithm. even Kochi is within the extremity of this scheme.... probably Hyderabad too if they fly over uttara kannada and enter AP from the west. and it could likely empty the internal tanks first , then pump the drop tanks fuel into internal tanks and release the drop tanks to reduce weight and increase the range/speed on the way home.
we need to be prepared for this very powerful and long range strike a/c. it will be a difficult customer , flying low and fast at night, using NVG & sniper pod, and pack a sting if a A2A loadout F-16 or two is sent along with it armed with 6 amraams each.

Not happening Saar. Let us look at solah C series figures for a moment:
9000kg empty wt.
19000kg MTOW
3250kg internal fuel = approx 2000km ferry range clean.
Add 2 X 600 gal EFT (3000kg) + 1 X 300 (1000kg) gal centerline + CFTs (~1250kg - 450gallons) and capacity goes up by 5200kg in fuel.
Max payload on F-16blk 50 is around 6500kg. (MTOW ~ 19000kg - 9000kg empty + 3250kg int fuel).
At present "tanker" config, the bird weighs a hefty 9000+8250kg fuel+ 200kg for CFTs + 300kg per EFT and pylon X 3 = 1000kg = 18500kg + pilot/ammo/fluids etc = 19500kg (and I am counting the 300 gal EFT empty weight the same at 600 gal since I dunno what the 600 gal big boy weighs empty).

Where is room for weapons? At most couple of AAMs, add a feather to the bird and it is going to shed a wing!

And at this configuration what kind of range can we expect? 4500km ferry? And this is on a hi-hi-hi profile. On a lo-lo-lo profile as you suggest, range will reduce by half to around 2200km (the mighty su-30 for example can do a mere 1300km on full fuel and almost clean config at sea level, drag will be much higher with EFT, CFT and whatnot).

Combat radius is normally half of ferry range, IOWs it will struggle to make it 1100km roundtrip with this kind of config at said lo-lo-lo. Even at altitude, it is not going to make more than 2500km return trip with payload (nowhere near the reqd. 3400km to Karwar)

If it ditches the lo profle and goes hi-lo-hi, it will be much more susceptible to detection - it can't stray too far from the coast - I believe there are at least two THD 1955 types on the way (around Mumbai) along with possible coverage via Aerostats indicating takeoff from PAF bases. Then there is always the danger of a PHalcon type hanging around somewhere. If it is war time, coverage will be more intense and the flight of the falcons will be under scorching scrutiny. Perhaps radar pickets laid by the IN en route as well. And then what sort of radar coverage does Goa/Karwar get?

Interesting but rather difficult odds. Better off to ditch fizaya and focus on your LeT rats to do something meaningful.

CM

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 07 Dec 2010 05:48

mirza wrote:PAF AM already confirmed that CFTs would be provided with the new batch aircrafts. 6 more will be delivered to PAF this month and the deal will be concluded

mirza wrote:MIRV technology within Pakistani grasp now.

Jai Bajrang Bali to you brother. If you are Packee I have heard too much crap like this from Pakis to believe it. Even your PAF chiefs and Army chiefs are basically liars. There is a separate dedicated thread for lies that emerge from Pakistanis. This is not the place.

mirza · Post by **mirza** » 07 Dec 2010 09:25

none of what i posted are incorrect. Go follow the deal closely. You will learn what you seek to learn. Can't think of the last time the service chiefs told a lie. They talked about AEW&C capability in 2004. Did you balk at that news then too?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 07 Dec 2010 09:47

mirza wrote:none of what i posted are incorrect. Go follow the deal closely. You will learn what you seek to learn. Can't think of the last time the service chiefs told a lie. They talked about AEW&C capability in 2004. Did you balk at that news then too?

Stop talking rubbish. Pakistais have always hyped up both their capabilities and what they are likely to get in future. Only 20% of what they claim actually appears and lying is a fact of life for Pakistanis. I need to learn nothing from Paki hyperbole and lies - you are basically a lying mouthpiece for Pakistan. Pakistanis will have MIRV capability only when an MIRV lands on a target somewhere. And Pakistani F-16s with conformal tanks need to be seen in photographs before your likely lies will be believed. Come back and thumb your nose at me when that happens Paki liar.

Why does this moron even have to stay on here. Kick the bugger out.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 07 Dec 2010 10:33

mirza wrote:MIRV technology within Pakistani grasp now.

Birader you are mistaken, MIRV Tecknologe is not with its grasp but in fact Pakistan has already mastered , perfected and deployed it. And that is old newj, Pakistan has since moved on to the next level of Tecknology that is Djinn powered directed energy WMDs. It the only reason that they have hardly bothered to test fire any of their mijjiles in the last few years.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 07 Dec 2010 11:02

If Mirza indeed is Pakistani, then BRF isn't the place for him is it?

mirza · Post by **mirza** » 07 Dec 2010 11:14

clearly not. I thought it was a professional military forum with people who can debate free of emotional outburst and tantrums. Perhaps shivy is always like this, but based on post count seems by now he'd have ideally learned how to debate sensibly on military tactics without resorting to cheap ad hominem theatrics and general hullabaloo.

to get back on subject regarding F-16s;

CFTs main purpose is to be used in strike missions because u need that extra pylon(s)...for the time being, F-16s have traditionally had a purely air defensive role in Pakistan (F-16 was used to shoot down the israeli made drone which indians were using under trial back in 2002!). That is why they rarely leave the country, even for exercises with allied air forces. We generally like to keep them on standby. Another reason why the mid life updates for all A/B/C Block 15/30 aircrafts by Turkish Aerospace Industries would be carried out in Pakistani Nation.

I have no literature confirming this. But I will take the PAF AM's word for it --considering everything else he has stated regarding the handful of other acquisitions he has seen under his tenure (IL-78 Midas mid air tankers, Saab & Chinese AEW&C, new F-16s, and inauguration of JFT facility @ Kamra) was proven to be on point and correct. I personally think CFTs are ugly, and totally KILL the sleek profile of the aircraft. But they have purely practical purposes, and would be very instrumental for deep strike missions in enemy territory.

It isn't in the nature of Pakistani service chiefs to make things up --especially our Air Force which is a professional force with standards to uphold.

it will be difficult, even upon procurement, to find pictures of F-16s with CFTs as it is rare that they are out-fitted in the first place --except for special deep strike missions.

36 F-16C/D Block 50/52 aircraft with either the F100-PW-229 or F110-GE-129 Increased Performance Engines (IPEs) and APG-68(V)9 radars;
7 spare F100-PW-229 IPE or F110-GE-129 IPE engines;
7 spare APG-68(V)9 radar sets;
36 Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing Systems (JHMCS);
36 AN/ARC-238 SINCGARS radios with HAVE QUICK I/II;
36 Conformal Fuel Tanks (pairs) that fit along the aircraft's sides to give them extra range;
36 Link-16 Multifunctional Information Distribution System-Low Volume Terminals; DID has covered the tactical uses of MIDS-LVT Link 16 systems;
36 Global Positioning Systems (GPS) and Embedded GPS/Inertial Navigation Systems;
36 APX-113 Advanced Identification Friend or Foe Systems;
36 Advanced Integrated Defensive Electronic Warfare Suites without Digital Radio Frequency Memory (DRFM); or AN/ALQ-184 Electronic Counter Measures pod without DRFM; or AN/ALQ-131 Electronic Counter Measures pod without DRFM; or AN/ALQ-187 Advanced Self-Protection Integrated Suites without DRFM; or AN/ALQ-178 Self-Protection Electronic Warfare Suites without DRFM;
1 Unit Level Trainer;

http://www.f-16.net/news_article1878.html

FYI -- the # aircrafts was reduced to 18 from 36; for several reasons, not limited to the fact that PAF will be evaluating and is very likely to induct a squadron of 18 FC-20 aircrafts of Chinese origin.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Dec 2010 11:30

Marko, I had read of some 'ferry type' 2200 ltr / or gal (cant remember clearly) external tanks and for that max range was 4000km. I added up CFTs to get 700km extra. ofcourse the plane will fly like a pregnant pig laden with so much fuel and huge drop tanks but its not the military but psyops effect we need to look at. space can be found to hang a couple 500lb bombs surely.

Karwar will ofcourse empty, but might have some capital ships parked in drydock for repairs. Goa and Kochi will have ships always under repair or construction. not very war changing or damaging targets but psyops/H&D plays down the left field. Power plants along the coast supplying the mumbai-thane-pune belt would be a grevious loss to the economy.....ofcourse it needs a lot of munitions to take such a large target out of commission.

once alerted, the F-16s will likely have a hard time making it back though as they cannot rely on a tanker for return leg or deviate too much off the economical great circle route. IAF long range interceptors from Pune or Jamnagar might be able to catch them, guided by pickup from shore or ship based search radar.
if they fly low to evade radar, then more fuel consumption....or maybe based on RWR cues they would fly at sea level only for certain zones where radar cover is detected...

its a tough job, but PAF might consider a few such for H&D and to divert vital resources down south under political pressure from PMO/state CMs/media.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 07 Dec 2010 11:34

Mirza, why don't you go to Pakdef instead? They are not very friendly with any Indian who does register there either.

rsharma · Post by **rsharma** » 07 Dec 2010 11:39

shiv wrote:. Come back and thumb your nose at me when that happens Paki liar.

Why does this moron even have to stay on here. Kick the bugger out.

With all due respect Shiv.. i think this is really uncharacteristic of a person with your seniority and experience.. why let yourself off the hook so much, as to come down to the level of the Pakroach.. Peace Brother..!!!!!!!!!!

It is not a new piece of news what Mirza is claiming.. though i personally think CFT for PAF Vipers might be very much possible.. but mostly have been coming across such tall claims for many years on forums with presence of Paki members, that it is really hard to make any sense out of all these wet-dreamish wishlists.. MIRVs/ 5th Generation stealth version of the Thundar-Bandar/ home made AESA radar for the Bandar MLU and what not.. all i do is just have a good laugh rather than engage in Verbal jousting with the Pakroach claiming such things..

u cannot fight a pig unless u wet 'ur feet with the muck in the sty.. but.. does one really need to fight a pig.. is the pig worth it..????

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 07 Dec 2010 11:43

IIRC, one former (?) member, Hari Sud had written a scenario almost the one like Singha jee wrote about.

Mirza
Don't you mean, Chinese selling/donating MIRVs ? Since when Pakistan started developing anything ?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 07 Dec 2010 11:44

Folks, 'mirza' should not trouble us any more.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Dec 2010 16:18

I dont understand whats the big deal for CFT on block52 - every other operator of this type or block60 like israel and UAE seems to have it...so it would be part of the std eqpt kit.

it will improve the range/loiter time. but its not a magic bullet - DPSA use implies you better have a plan and means to escape after dropping bombs on a target 1000km away - cft or not. for AD use it has more value imo in not needing tankers to maintain station....but heavier the fuel load more sluggish the plane...there has to be a balance between fuel load and role.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 07 Dec 2010 18:02

rsharma wrote:
u cannot fight a pig unless u wet 'ur feet with the muck in the sty.. but.. does one really need to fight a pig.. is the pig worth it..????

rsharma with regard to Pakis I disagree vehemently with your view. They have made an art form of lying to themselves and others. The average internet Paki cannot differentiate between "would like to have" and "Have already got" and a whole lot of information reported in the press as statements by Paki officials including chiefs of staff are complete rubbish and utter lies. This ranges from Levitating train project in Karachi, world's higehst tower in karachi, to "advanced space and satellite program" of Pakistan, "Pakistan developed JF-17" - when every has known fr the past 6-8 years that the JF 17 was being designed in China for a PAF requirement. Lies lies lies is what pakis live by and I cannot stand to see the idiots who really should be on their own websites come on here. Conformal packs and MIRVs are the same stuff.

However - I do admit that the the JF-17 in Pakistani hands is as maneuverable as a MiG 29 and can fly higher than most aircraft. As you can see from this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lo9ew6bAjLs

rsharma · Post by **rsharma** » 07 Dec 2010 19:09

shiv wrote: However - I do admit that the the JF-17 in Pakistani hands is as maneuverable as a MiG 29 and can fly higher than most aircraft. As you can see from this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lo9ew6bAjLs

Now thats more like it..!!! why loose 'ur temper where such caustic sarcasm suffices..

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 07 Dec 2010 22:02

Singha wrote:Marko, I had read of some 'ferry type' 2200 ltr / or gal (cant remember clearly) external tanks and for that max range was 4000km. I added up CFTs to get 700km extra. ofcourse the plane will fly like a pregnant pig laden with so much fuel and huge drop tanks but its not the military but psyops effect we need to look at. space can be found to hang a couple 500lb bombs surely.

It would definitely have to be a one time only kamikazee type move. From what I have reade at the F-16l.net site, the 2200 ltr tank is probly the 600 gal beast I referred to - yes it is available. The 16 can carry 3 of these iirc BUT it is not jettisonable and weighs a bloody ton each. The 370 gal tank (1400ltr) weighs around 300kgs each iirc, the CFTs are the lightest since nothing hangs off them ~ 200kg for the set. In a massive "tanker" loadout, the bird would have additional weight of around 1000kg just in fuel tanks conservatively. Then the external fuel would represent another 6500kgs in pure extra weight. Now the solah is already weighing at its MTOW or v.close to it. If they somehow fit another 500kg worth of weapons, it is going to have a time taking off. To take off with this load out it loses about 1000kg of fuel.

Let us assume that it goes up with only half the tanks filled up, and the top up is done by a Midas mid air 400km offshore. Now there is the problem of range - can the 16 manage to fly 1300km one way on a lo profile?

its a tough job, but PAF might consider a few such for H&D and to divert vital resources down south under political pressure from PMO/state CMs/media.

Agreed, it would certainly be one for the books - lots of chuzpah if they manage this.

CM

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 09 Dec 2010 11:07

Indian plan to deter Pakistan more myth than reality

Basically contains stuff we've heard of before but also forms perhaps the most important factor in why we have not hit back @ TSP after parliment attack , 26/11 or even sheepishly avoided crossing the LOC during Kargil. The army would have been more than willing to fight but the capability was just not there.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 09 Dec 2010 13:39

Nihat wrote:Indian plan to deter Pakistan more myth than reality

Basically contains stuff we've heard of before but also forms perhaps the most important factor in why we have not hit back @ TSP after parliment attack , 26/11 or even sheepishly avoided crossing the LOC during Kargil. The army would have been more than willing to fight but the capability was just not there.

It is advisable that one does not form an opinion based on some report in the media - which itself is based on assessment of US Ambassador - and we do not know whether he is speaking truth or not. As for the Ladwig fellow and his assessment of the Cold Start (there is a paper by him) - it is not worth the paper on which it is written.

Coming to Parliamentary attack and Op. Parakram - IA and other Services were ready twice to hit out at TSP - and the plan in mid June was so audacious, that PA leadership was shitting brick in their pants....what do you think made Mushirat sing peace songs and that too, on PTV?

There are many facets to CSD and while it lacks some of the more glamorous stuff like IBG, the requirement for ability to hit TSP in shortest time possible is a matter of intense debate in the IA - something which arose after 2001 mobilization. And something on which they have worked quitely. All is not lost...so, let us drop the pessimistic attitude.

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 09 Dec 2010 16:17

what the US ambassodor says is a moot point and I'm assuming that no such thing as Cold start exists but still , considering the changes in warfare after TSP went nuclear the emphasis has to be on rapid and severe punishment being dished out by India before the dog starts barking "Nuclear War" and the world gets paranoid. It is in this context that I get the feeling our TSP war doctrine is too far Army centric (perhaps because historically army has had the most crucial role vis-a-vis TSP)

Shorter distances in TSP mean shorter deployment time for them and numerically too while TSPA is only half of IA, still we have troops comitted to China and for COIN which cannot be moved at the drop of a hat. Even if the tanks from our side start rolling in a week from a terror strike, it's still doubtful how much land we would be able to extract from TSP before 3.5 step in.

My issue is that in a terror strike scenario we have put too much reliance on ground invasion whereas the Navy and Air force might have a much bigger role in a blitz.

Hitting ports , Army HQ and RHQ / ISI offices, power plants, nuke stations, fuel depots, vital motorways and terror camps using SLCM , Land based CM , aircrafts , destroyers etc would cause much more damage to TSP and cause much less to us in terms of time and casualty rate.

While I don't claim to know more than the planners at MoD and Army HQ but the thought does occur that perhaps over reliance on Army has kept us from evolving a more dynamic and effective TSP centric war doctrine.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 09 Dec 2010 16:29

Why is it assumed that the IA will be the tool used by the GOI to punish the TSP if the decision to do so is taken by the GOI.

The IAF can be used to hit the targets in the TSP. While the IA is deploying to the Frontiers.

Any deployment by the PA to the border in this senario will have to be under the gaze of the IAF and its strike wings. They can be harrassed, delayed and hurt by the IAF in an attempt to get to the border.

Once at the border, as the IAF and Indian military intellegence will know exactely where the TSPA is. They can be hit in the field as well.

Just how effective will the PA and the PAF be in this senario can be debated.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 09 Dec 2010 22:08

Pakistani media publish fake WikiLeaks cables attacking India

According to the reports, US diplomats described senior Indian generals as vain, egotistical and genocidal; they said India's government is secretly allied with Hindu fundamentalists; and they claimed Indian spies are covertly supporting Islamist militants in Pakistan's tribal belt and Balochistan.

"Enough evidence of Indian involvement in Waziristan, Balochistan," read the front-page story in the News; an almost identical story appeared in the Urdu-language Jang, Pakistan's bestselling daily.

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 10 Dec 2010 01:05

rohitvats wrote:...the requirement for ability to hit TSP in shortest time possible is a matter of intense debate in the IA - something which arose after 2001 mobilization. And something on which they have worked quitely. All is not lost...so, let us drop the pessimistic attitude.

The Cold Start as a rapid mobilization objective was formulated in 1995 after the previous year's Tri-Services exercises revealed short-comings in this regard.

To link it with terror/counter-terror issues is a distraction. X-Border terrorism is like a thorn in the foot; you don't try to take out a thorn with an axe - you do it with a needle. Yes, you can take use an axe to cut-down the plant from where the thorn came... but you had better come in prepared with thick-clothing and be ready to root out the plant and burn it completely - otherwise thorns will keep pricking you. It requires Total War, not Cold Start.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 10 Dec 2010 13:00

Pakistan papers apologise after running anti-India fake WikiLeaks cables
Times of India

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 10 Dec 2010 13:21

ParGha wrote:
<SNIP>

The Cold Start as a rapid mobilization objective was formulated in 1995 after the previous year's Tri-Services exercises revealed short-comings in this regard.

SNIP>

I was not aware of the 1995 development - thanx for the input. What I've been given to understand that post 2001 mobilization, there was an intense debate especially wrt the mobilization time frame of 21 Corps.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 10 Dec 2010 14:54

Apparently India did not initiate a military strike post 26/11 because it feared a "disproportionate response" from Pakistan.

Frankly speaking there is no point to TOE analysis or talking about mechanization when this is what the "leadership" decides in a nuclear bunker.

Somehow the Pukes never seem to be scared by our disproportionate response to their disproportionate response.

I sometimes wonder as to why this conventional force modernization is being done anyway.

because if it is for deterrence/defensive purposes then what is the guarantee that it will actually do so when the staple/stock belief in policy making circles is that Pakistan is unpredictable. Moreover if the fear of disproportionate response precludes the possibility of India engaging it effectively anyway then what is the guarantee that India has the stomach to engage Pakistan on any band in the escalation spectrum regardless of who initiates hostilities?

For clarity I can turn this argument into a simple two player dynamic game. But its just not worth the time and effort. Because this isn't a game- the outcome is known - inaction on the Indian side.

Seriously if Pakistan mounts a conventional attack on us tomorrow will the Armed Forces be allowed to respond or will they be made to hold back because the Pukes may go nuclear?

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 10 Dec 2010 17:45

Nihat wrote:...the emphasis has to be on rapid and severe punishment being dished out by India before the dog starts barking "Nuclear War" and the world gets paranoid.

The Paks have already set out their Nuclear First Strike Doctrine and the Red Lines which must not be crossed. When pushed to a corner, they can neither touch - nor do they wish to touch - any part of the world except India. So it is really India and Indians who should be paranoid about it, not the rest of the world. The maximum others have to fear is a JDAM smuggled in (in response to which Pak will be sent back to stone age). For India that is the minimum in the Atomic Nightmare scenario. So I don't understand what you mean by "the world gets paranoid"?

chiragAS · Post by **chiragAS** » 10 Dec 2010 18:50

16's flying south...
unless they are carrying nano nukes.. they wont dare to loose their precious rare birds .
wondering how much (if they ever get hold of such light weight nukes) damage can it cause??

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 10 Dec 2010 19:06

D Roy wrote:Seriously if Pakistan mounts a conventional attack on us tomorrow will the Armed Forces be allowed to respond or will they be made to hold back because the Pukes may go nuclear?

1998: The Paks openly demonstrate nuclear weapons capability.

1999: The Paks infiltrate Kargil and adjoining districts on the LoC. India hits back with ground and air forces, but under constraints not to cross the LoC.

The precedent is right there -- the forces will be ordered to hit back, but will be kept on a tighter ROE than is common.

I don't think the Paks will want to ever fight a conventional war on their own; however they may be ORDERED to launch a conventional war by China for China's strategic reasons (this is the primary reason why the conventional forces are still relevant in this age of terrorism and nuclear warfare).

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 10 Dec 2010 19:24

ParGha, if India targets specific high value targets within pakistan (power stations/air bases/karachi port etc) without moving in ground forces inside pakistan do you think pakistan would really go nuclear, knowing fully well that they will be wiped out in return ?