PA Options against Indian Armour - ATGMs on MANPADS & Attack Gunship Helicopter - News & Discussions

[nahtanbob]

Maybe, maybe not.
First, those objects at which this multiplicity of armaments will be fired will not necessarily sit in one place and patiently await their martyrdom. They may - who knows? Greater acts of impertinence have occurred - fire back. At greater ranger, with greater explosive power.

There is that apocryphal story of the then 25000 strong Swiss army. One Swiss soldier was asked by an amused German officer what would happen if 50'000 Germans attacked.
"We'll fire twice and go home", said the Swiss.
The trouble is they aren't here helping to defend the smaller country. The trouble is the smaller country has always emphasised its warrior quality. It is quite possible that will be a battle winning quality some day. The possibility cannot be ruled out.

Swiss soldiers must be mighty arrogant. It took me a minute to digest this
Fire twice = 2 bullets x 25000 soldiers = 50000 German attackers

 

[Joe Shearer]

It is essentially Russia's playback against Ukraine

Let us not be so quick as to assume
Monkey see, monkey do.

 

[nahtanbob]

Let us not be so quick as to assume
Monkey see, monkey do.

Russia was not counting on all out & united American and European response. Now they have to outlast or hope to outlast the other side. It is not a fun situation to be in.

 

[nahtanbob]

However I do think it would still result in a statement where india is unable to advance and the Pakistanis unable to continue the push since they have over extended their supply lines logistics. Both armies are a load of tosh!! To be honest

you are right both armies are not built to fight over extended supply lines

 

[Joe Shearer]

Swiss soldiers must be mighty arrogant. It took me a minute to digest this
Fire twice = 2 bullets x 25000 soldiers = 50000 German attackers

Did I mention apocryphal?
Every year I grow more forgetful. And the Swiss more arrogant.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Russia was not counting on all out & united American and European response. Now they have to outlast or hope to outlast the other side. It is not a fun situation to be in.

Lol.
Urban legend has it that war is never a fun situation to be in. People die. Most awkward.

 

[nahtanbob]

Lol.
Urban legend has it that war is never a fun situation to be in. People die. Most awkward.

Yeah Putin cares a lot about loss of life

 

[Joe Shearer]

you are right both armies are not built to fight over extended supply lines

That is a function of arithmetic. I am not joking. Every kilometre deeper into hostile territory has a price, in terms of fuel spent on logistics, on loss of equipment and supplies due to attrition, on losses due to irregular resistance. These can be planned, but if and only if.
One of the two has global quantities of carriers in production, surplus capacity for arms and ammunition and fuel sufficient to make the transition. It will labour mightily cut there will be an achievable goal.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Yeah Putin cares a lot about loss of life

I'm sure he doesn't, but neither does anybody pushing was as a solution. It's a given, that lives will be lost. Then it comes to replacing that 100,000. And the next. And next.
Does anyone see any clue in this?

 

[Joe Shearer]

Given the rough parity of the forces here, the outcome might come down to the
generalship of both sides. Pakistanis as are trained on the many TOW system; and various other anti armours systems even if we hit every target (which they expected of us), Pakistanis will still have enough anti-tank missiles for you. India is not the Warsaw pact to overwhelm Pakistani defences. ,

In the past 75 years, there has been one Eftekhar Janjua, one Sagat Singh.

That is a factor, if we are to go by Major Amin, that can be left out in calculating.

 

[falcon34]

Tell me how much money you think a conventional war with India will cost per day

No one can answer this question. This is the question u ask after the war. If u want to get an idea of it, look into how much it costed america per day during the Gulf war.

 

[Joe Shearer]

As a military planner is it wise to assume the wars will be short ? if all Pakistani war planners assume their wars with India are short in duration you are making

No, no, that is precisely the point.

 

[KingQamaR]

An all out war between India & Pakistan will involve 500,000 Pakistani troops. Keep in mind you are running to the IMF for petty amounts of $700 million to $3 billion

I will repeat the question

I made some of the operative words in bold. Put a dollar figure if you can. I have a number based on some calculations.

As a military planner is it wise to assume the wars will be short ? if all Pakistani war planners assume their wars with India are short in duration you are making the lives of Indian war planners easy.

@Joe Shearer Am I missing something here ?

Yes, when the choice is to lose even more or against an existential threat. As bad as it is there are some things that are worse. So PLs do expect the Pakistanis to fight on until hostilities seize this would be there national survival it has no time frame on the length war.is short or long.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Yes, when the choice is to lose even more or against an existential threat. As bad as it is there are some things that are worse. So PLs do expect the Pakistanis to fight on until hostilities seize this would be there national survival it has no time frame on the length war.is short or long.

That does not always happen.
1971, surely, was an existential crisis. It lasted less than a month.

 

[Joe Shearer]

That is a function of arithmetic. I am not joking. Every kilometre deeper into hostile territory has a price, in terms of fuel spent on logistics, on loss of equipment and supplies due to attrition, on losses due to irregular resistance. These can be planned, but if and only if.
One of the two has global quantities of carriers in production, surplus capacity for arms and ammunition and fuel sufficient to make the transition. It will labour mightily cut there will be an achievable goal.

Just to close the loop.
Assuming an armoured division consumes 50,000 MT per day. It's daily supply will need 5,000 lorries (standard Ashok Leyland lorries with 12 MT capacity, loaded at 10 MT).
FUEL TANK - 375 LITRES
CONSUMPTION - 5 KMS PER LITRE
RANGE - 1,875 KMS
That is at starting point
For every 10 kms forward, assume 5% losses due to attrition.
At point 0 + 10, lorries needed 5000/95*100= 5263 lorries,
and so on.
Targets within Pakistan are within 300 kms of any starting point within Indian territory (not to be taken seriously please, just to fill out the argument).
That will give a realistic picture of sustainability of operations.
Clearly there are limits due to road and load carrying capacity. This is just an outline sketch, to give a feel.
There are, on the other hand, no limits on lorry numbers. The smaller manufacturer makes 16,000 vehicles a month.