Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Pakistan Army related discussion: November – December 2009

129 posts in this topic

Posted · Report post

It's like saying that F-16A is a tried and true platform so we shouldn't go for anything better. Like SSAAD said, these are two different systems. Javelin is just a different beast.

If the Army considers a shoulder launched system heavy for a certain purpse, then wouldn't a 4 man portable system be way too heavy? And saying that it is the only difference is just not correct.

We are talking about javelin in context of the current conflict. It's a perfect counter-insurgency weapon.

It can be used by the SSG. Baktar Shikan? not so much.

It can be used in a top-attack or line of sight mode and is a truly F&F IR guided missile. Baktar shikan is a 2nd generation wire guided, line of sight weapon.

And Javelin is actually a Fire, Forget, Run, and Change position system. You can't just fire a TOW and change positions before the enemy knows where you are.

Even if it is possible to develop a super IR seeker and stick it on an old generation wire guided missile and turn it into a F&F system, It will still be a few years before it can be deployed.

So the point is that they both types have their place in an Army. But in counter-insurgency, Baktar Shikan can't do many thing that a Javelin can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

To clarify and paraphrase - the Army believes Javelin (for the time being) is equivalent to what "W" said about using a million dollar missile (Tomahawk) to hit a camel in the butt.

Also current weapons are adequate for indian armour, so purchase of an entirely new weapon system is infeasible at the moment. But who knows, there are some big fish that are trying to push this deal, so it might become reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

There are systems other than javelin that are better than an RPG, but also a lot cheaper. Will the US potentially pay for replacing each ~ $80K javelin missile that is fired?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

It's like saying that F-16A is a tried and true platform so we shouldn't go for anything better. Like SSAAD said, these are two different systems. Javelin is just a different beast.

Javelin is a system carried by infantrymen and used to destroy tanks, Baktar Shikan is also a Anti-Tank Missile which can also be carried by infantrymen as it was done in 1992 in the Bosnian War against Serbian tanks (it has been UPGRADED since), by saying tried and tested i didn't mean that old is gold. i meant it works, is reliable and that its not a DRDO project which stays on the shelf permanently.

If the Army considers a shoulder launched system heavy for a certain purpse, then wouldn't a 4 man portable system be way too heavy? And saying that it is the only difference is just not correct.

the army never said it was too heavy, they just said why blow up a bunker with a Javelin and waste $80,000 to destroy that one single bunker, when you can use RPG-7, Recoilles rifle, Artillery, Mortars, JDams, cobra gunships, etc etc etc to do the exact same thing for a much cheaper price. what is more important then destroying a tank today is the ability to destroy another one tomorrow, in a country with such limited budget as ours, we need to be as efficient as possible to have a decent stamina in a war.

It can be used by the SSG. Baktar Shikan? not so much.

do you know what you just said? anyhow observe the picture.

http://www.china-defense-mashup.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/26_17897_5e0b8f2a392114d.jpg

It can be used in a top-attack or line of sight mode and is a truly F&F IR guided missile. Baktar shikan is a 2nd generation wire guided, line of sight weapon.

And Javelin is actually a Fire, Forget, Run, and Change position system. You can't just fire a TOW and change positions before the enemy knows where you are.

top attack, side attack, underground super space attack, all sales jargon...what really matters when you buy such things is Hit and Penetration probability at various ranges.

with Baktar shiken 90% of the times you fire it at a tank 3Km away, it will blow that thing up. you can also fire it at targets 6Km away and still the odds are in your favor to blow up the target.....as for the javelin, never mind hitting a target 6km away, you cant even hit a target 3k away, the only advantage of the javelin i can think of is as you said top attack, but in real terms if a baktar shiken can penetrate MOST TANKs 90% of the times from 3km away, is the extra 10% of penetration probability really worth US$440,000 for 1 launcher and 4 missiles??

Even if it is possible to develop a super IR seeker and stick it on an old generation wire guided missile and turn it into a F&F system, It will still be a few years before it can be deployed.

So the point is that they both types have their place in an Army. But in counter-insurgency, Baktar Shikan can't do many thing that a Javelin can.

its not super at all, it is a simple IR seeker you might find in several precision guided munitions already being produced and exported by Pakistan. the seeker can be integrated into the missile by removing the present guidance system and replacing it with a IR based one. everything thing else such as the rocket motor, servos, etc stay the same. the technology is already there in Pakistan, the only thing we need to do is integrate it.

5 years or so ago they said they where going to replace the wire guided mechanism with a laser guided one, i have NO idea if the upgrade is on line or not as they never released any further information.....as for counter insurgency, Javelin's top attack ability is good for demonstrating on sheds, but not so good at penetrating cave networks in mountains. baktar shiken would have a advantage over the Javelin in Swat or waziristan environment, simply because it does the same thing yet has more then twice the range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Asalamo-a-laikum.

Javelin ATGMs have been used to great effect in Afghanistan, and as they are lighter and more potent than the Bakhtar Shikan, if we're getting them for free we should say "Yes please".

I know we'd be better off with more helicopters of all types, but it would not be a massive loss of any kind to accept a number of Javelin ATGMs.

Speaking of helicopters, who says we've rejected the Chinese WZ-10? It seems to have a very good service ceiling amongst other things. It's not a bad helicopter by any account. I'd just like to know on what grounds has this decision been made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Asalamo-a-laikum.

Javelin ATGMs have been used to great effect in Afghanistan, and as they are lighter and more potent than the Bakhtar Shikan, if we're getting them for free we should say "Yes please".

I know we'd be better off with more helicopters of all types, but it would not be a massive loss of any kind to accept a number of Javelin ATGMs.

main concern i would think about the javelin is the range and the fact that it doesn't offer anything better then what the baktar shiken could after a 1 year upgrade program.

Speaking of helicopters, who says we've rejected the Chinese WZ-10? It seems to have a very good service ceiling amongst other things. It's not a bad helicopter by any account. I'd just like to know on what grounds has this decision been made.

i don't know anything about the rejection/acceptance of the WZ-10 but i have heard that the Chinese are using American engines in them which they brought from Canada by saying they will be used in civilian helicopters as replacement parts..there was a big tussle between USA and Canada about this a few years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Asalamo-a-laikum.

I get what you're saying. You're essentially right, but if we accepted Javelin's we'd have the missile's in service sooner, and we wouldn't be spending our own money. I'm not saying we should abandon any proposed Bakhtar Shikan upgrade, only that Javelin may give us a useful capability earlier, cheaper, and give us a bit of 'breathing space'.

Regards WZ-10, the Chinese are testing a number of engines on it. I wouldn't be surprised if they pulled a 'fast one' with the Canadians, but I don't think that in itself would be grounds to reject the helicopter.

Our AH-1Fs are wearing out fast, and they have limited service ceiling so cannot be used against terrorists at higher altitudes. Post AH-1F American gunships such as the Twin Cobra/Super Cobra/King Cobra and Apache etc have much improved capabilities in this regard, and when it comes to British Apaches, the capability is even better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

do you know what you just said? anyhow observe the picture.

http://www.china-defense-mashup.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/26_17897_5e0b8f2a392114d.jpg

Ali,

I can guarantee, no infantryman would want to go into battle carrying this beast above. ATGMs in the Pakistani inventory can at best be deployed in static positions for hunter-killer AT teams. There isn't a lot of flexibilty in moving these ATGM systems around because of the insane weight.

You are absolutely right that these systems (BS and TOW) pack a massive punch, however that comes at the cost of their weight. You need something in the weight category of an RPG-7 to get the infantry to carry it. Currently even the RPG-7 system is a two man effort with one jawan with the launcher and some rounds and another with additional rounds. So even if Javelin was considered, I think two-man teams are a foregone conclusion and we have the same composition in place in the infantry for it.

I think the issue around Javelin is in line with the challenges that the Pakistani infantry has faced. There is an effort in place to upgrade the infantry kit and firepower. We are slowly seeing this happen. However back in 2004 or so, the then VCoAS had said that UBGL as a standard for the infantry was being considered. Since we are almost 6 years out and that has still not happened, tells me that maybe money is an issue and as such the PA may want to focus on these capabilities first before going for ATGMs etc.

CSF or US money going to Javelins at this time may be better spent on acquiring UBGLs (but that can only happen if we can decide what the next battle rifle of the Pakistan Army will be...or get a UBGL that is compatible with the existing and future infantry rifle).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Asalamo-a-laikum.

I get what you're saying. You're essentially right, but if we accepted Javelin's we'd have the missile's in service sooner, and we wouldn't be spending our own money. I'm not saying we should abandon any proposed Bakhtar Shikan upgrade, only that Javelin may give us a useful capability earlier, cheaper, and give us a bit of 'breathing space'.

Regards WZ-10, the Chinese are testing a number of engines on it. I wouldn't be surprised if they pulled a 'fast one' with the Canadians, but I don't think that in itself would be grounds to reject the helicopter.

Our AH-1Fs are wearing out fast, and they have limited service ceiling so cannot be used against terrorists at higher altitudes. Post AH-1F American gunships such as the Twin Cobra/Super Cobra/King Cobra and Apache etc have much improved capabilities in this regard, and when it comes to British Apaches, the capability is even better.

What is insane is that we have been able to convince the Americans to sell F-16s to us but I simply cannot understand why next generation attack helicopters cannot be had. I know Americans are tough to negotiate with, however if the wear and tear is starting to show on the Cobras, then maybe they can be convinced that AH-1Zs or non-Longbow equipped Apaches would help our efforts out greatly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Asalamo-a-laikum.

I get what you're saying. You're essentially right, but if we accepted Javelin's we'd have the missile's in service sooner, and we wouldn't be spending our own money. I'm not saying we should abandon any proposed Bakhtar Shikan upgrade, only that Javelin may give us a useful capability earlier, cheaper, and give us a bit of 'breathing space'.

Regards WZ-10, the Chinese are testing a number of engines on it. I wouldn't be surprised if they pulled a 'fast one' with the Canadians, but I don't think that in itself would be grounds to reject the helicopter.

Our AH-1Fs are wearing out fast, and they have limited service ceiling so cannot be used against terrorists at higher altitudes. Post AH-1F American gunships such as the Twin Cobra/Super Cobra/King Cobra and Apache etc have much improved capabilities in this regard, and when it comes to British Apaches, the capability is even better.

the problem is that the compensation we are getting from USA is not unlimited and that money could be used for things which are much more urgent and necessary, whether the money is free or not is subject to debate, but what is established is that we can use that money on what ever we want (subject to US approval) like you would a voucher for a store. so i guess we should use it as efficiently as possible and since the Javelin is not going to bring any new capabilities, i don't think its even necessary.

about the WZ-10, i was thinking if their having problems getting a engine, maybe thats why we rejected it? also we can get T-129 from the Italians/Turks so maybe we might go for that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

What is insane is that we have been able to convince the Americans to sell F-16s to us but I simply cannot understand why next generation attack helicopters cannot be had. I know Americans are tough to negotiate with, however if the wear and tear is starting to show on the Cobras, then maybe they can be convinced that AH-1Zs or non-Longbow equipped Apaches would help our efforts out greatly.

From my knowledge, the AH-1Z has not been cleared for export to anyone yet.

The U.S. has put up many AH-64As up for sale, it even offered a number to South Korea. I think the issue Pakistan faces with regards to the Apache is the high maintenance and operation costs of the chopper. The other issue is the time it will take to induct this system, which is completely new to the PA. Isn't the requirement for attack helicopters urgent? Can an Apache purchase be pitted into the same sphere? I doubt it...whether Apache, Tiger or T-129, the next-generation gunship is being pursued for long-term uses - not the immediate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Ali,

I can guarantee, no infantryman would want to go into battle carrying this beast above. ATGMs in the Pakistani inventory can at best be deployed in static positions for hunter-killer AT teams. There isn't a lot of flexibilty in moving these ATGM systems around because of the insane weight.

CSF or US money going to Javelins at this time may be better spent on acquiring UBLs (bit that can only happen if we can decide what the next battle rifle of the Pakistan Army will be...or get a UBL that is compatible with the existing and future infantry rifle).

it is indeed a big weapon, but it can also be quickly and easily disassembled into 4 parts, which are carried by each of the 4 man crew, the total amount of weight each of the crew members carries is about the same as the wieght of Javelin per person. the system was very successfully used in Bosnia against Serb tanks and it can definitely be moved after each firing as was proven in this war.

the advantage of the javelin is that after firing the missile the crew don't need to do anything more and simply need to move off, so it is faster to disappear after firing the missile, but this advantage is negated by the fact of its limited range and cost because of which we will have no tactical nor strategic advantage by acquiring javelin.

overall i think we are agreed that there are a lot of things we can get which we urgently need instead of blowing our money on something we don't even have a need for right now. we can enhance our infantry firepower far more effectively by spending the money on UBGLs, NVG's, Thermal Sights, etc etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

RPG-32 might be a good idea, but probably expensive and hard to get out of Russia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Well if the Javelins are being offered to us for free I say we accept them and then sell them on the black market with a mark up of course. The proceeds can then be used towards getting those damned UBGL standard for our infantry. Truly shocking that it has taken this long to standardise the UBGL or get a laser guided seeker on the bakter shikan!

I've read reports that the WZ10 is essentially a copy of the T129. Whether this is true or not I don't know but what I do know is that the PA needs to get its arse into gear and select and acquire a next generation attack helicopter that is accessible and will cater to our security requirement for the next 15 -20 years. That leaves the T129, WZ10 or if funding permits we could try and revive the Rooivalk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Someone mentioned before that the Stryker ICV was also offered by the US. Would it not make more sense to spend the cash on some Strykers instead of Javelins? Strykers could improve safety of troops in FATA and can be used on eastern front in the long term. But pak should try to get more helicopters, that has to be number 1 priority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Asalamo-a-laikum.

Well, HK said earlier that a Stryker type vehicle for troop transport has been a requirement for the PA since some time in the early 1980s. As you can see from lack of such vehicle in service, things are moving painfully slowly. Even now that we have a pressing need there's still no movement on this area. I think they may be holding out for some of those behmoth ambush and mine resistant vehicles that Western troops are keen to get their hands on in Afghanistan. Fat chance though. They cost a phenomenal amount and western troops are worth more than pakistani ones. So don't hold your breath.

Perhaps the 'tracked mafia' in the PA is dead set against wheeled AFVs, but if they are, why has it taken so long to give the M-113, Saad, and Al-Talha APCs a simple upgrade like fitting bar armour to defeat RPG-7s which the Taliban have by the thousand?

As I've mentioned before the PA has had plenty of time to get itself in gear and get a new service rifle, introduce a UBGL in service (POF can make them and I know that other state owned manufacterers actually have), so if you ask me what we really have here is a case of dithering and a slovenly approach to modernisation. It simply takes too long. May be there have smeply been too many cups of tea on offer? Perhaps they think they can get everything of the Yanks, but believe me that won't happen. Units that can select their own equipment already have a UBGL and other things as standard. We just haven't seen them yet.

As for the next generation attack/gunship helicopter for the PA, well, don't hold your breath there either. They're still chasing the Yanks for more, and they don't have any to give right now. The next option people mention is Turkey. Turkey won't have any T129s for YEARS and the initial ones will have Israeli equipment in them which they won't be able to pass on Pakistan even if they wanted to. So it may be the end of the decade before we can expect the T129 to enter Pakistani service if it were selected.

I'd wager lots of money that the WZ-10 can be operational in numbers muc faster. Either that or we scour the planet for Mi-35s and ask the South Africans to upgrade them to the latest SuperHind variant, which will still be faster than opting for the T129. In fact Hinds of any variant would be far more useful nder current circumstances than some of the things we appear to be chasing.

This dithering is costing lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

What do you folks make of this?

WHEN Willie Brigitte was sent to Pakistan for terrorist training, he thought his identity would be safe.

A fair assumption, since it has just been revealed it was rogue elements in Pakistan's own army that trained, armed and deployed him to Australia to carry out a terrorist attack.

British and US intelligence agencies are understood to be taking a belated interest in the Brigitte case, with revelations by now retired French investigative judge Jean-Louis Brugiere that secret evidence not revealed in open court during Brigitte's trial showed complicity in terror plots by a significant number within Pakistan's military.

It also showed the extraordinary lengths they went to conceal to Western allies their identities as double agents.

Brigitte was sent to Pakistan for military training in 2001 and spent four months with the al-Qaeda-backed Lashkar-e-Toiba group in the Punjab mountains learning to handle explosives.

He was also given counter-terrorist training and learnt how to keep a low profile as a sleeper agent, before he was given his first mission to run false passports for deployed terrorist assassins in Afghanistan. In 2003 he was deployed to Sydney and linked up with members of an already established terror cell.

Transcripts from in-camera evidence in his 2007 trial reveal Pakistan security forces supplied trainers and arms to Lashkar-e-Toiba extremists as they trained hundreds of foreign operatives in a complex in the mountains.

When CIA officers came to inspect the complex, believing it to be a Pakistan military outpost, troops on the ground were given 24 hours notice to move Brigitte and dozens of other foreign terrorists-in-the-making 4500m up the mountains. Their presence at the camps was concealed.

One army/LET officer Brigitte met was called Sajid and it is he who sent the French national to Sydney to link up with an already established terror cell. It is Sajid who British M15 now suspect has plotted - and is still plotting - a terror attack in Britain.

There is an Interpol warrant for his arrest as well as a number of Pakistan military and intelligence officers identified as terrorists.

Source: Daily Telegraph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Until we see this Interpol warrant or some other solid proof beyond some French guy trying to sell his book, it's hard to know the truth.

What we do know is that right now the West is desperately trying to save their war in Afghanistan and they may come up with any number of stories to either blame Pakistan or have us fight their war when we have our own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

What do you folks make of this?

Source: Daily Telegraph

Bull Sh*t!!!

They cant win it themselves so they are blaming it all on PA and making a mess for Pakistan!

They fail to mention that all these 'Mujahdins' were funded by CIA using American dollars and weapons to fight against the soviets!

I think we need to write this to the news paper!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

The latest issue of AW&ST has an article about UAE arms acquisition and also touches upon regional arms acquisitions. It mentions about Pakistan that Tiger helicopter is being touted for Pakistan Army Aviation however defence officials in Washington think that this is a big ticket item for Pakistan and Pakistan can not afford it. Instead they are trying to offer AH-6i Little Bird (the article has a typo as AH-64i) to Pakistan. Also refurbishing/overhauling old US AH-1 airframes to give to Pakistan is on the cards. There is also talks of updating Pakistan's Bell-206 helicopters (26 in number) and arm them with FLIR and machine guns. I have paraphrased and will try and quote the exact lines later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

The latest issue of AW&ST has an article about UAE arms acquisition and also touches upon regional arms acquisitions. It mentions about Pakistan that Tiger helicopter is being touted for Pakistan Army Aviation however defence officials in Washington think that this is a big ticket item for Pakistan and Pakistan can not afford it. Instead they are trying to offer AH-6i Little Bird (the article has a typo as AH-64i) to Pakistan. Also refurbishing/overhauling old US AH-1 airframes to give to Pakistan is on the cards. There is also talks of updating Pakistan's Bell-206 helicopters (26 in number) and arm them with FLIR and machine guns. I have paraphrased and will try and quote the exact lines later.

Systems such as the Tiger, T-129, etc, can only be acquired over the medium or long-term. For example, T-129 is still under development. The Tiger would need to be ought new-built, and the full & proper induction would take years. The PA requires systems ASAP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Systems such as the Tiger, T-129, etc, can only be acquired over the medium or long-term. For example, T-129 is still under development. The Tiger would need to be ought new-built, and the full & proper induction would take years. The PA requires systems ASAP.

The only possible option is more Cobra's, but the americans have not been forthcoming in this space...;

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

The only possible option is more Cobra's, but the americans have not been forthcoming in this space...;

Correct me if I'm wrong, but since they're not in production, getting old airframes can sometimes be more troublesome to maintain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Also refurbishing/overhauling old US AH-1 airframes to give to Pakistan is on the cards.

They've been saying this for the last 10 years. The little birds look interesting but would it not make more sense to get the fennecs to fill the ALOH role? I think we can forget about the US fulfilling our helicopter needs as its been all talk and very little substance. Its about time that the tri services come up with a comprehensive strategy to fulfill their helicopter needs. We are going to have to pay for it and its about time we stopped trying to get vital military equipment through aid.

Another thing I as disappointed to see the Falco deal be given to AWC. We have a vibrant UAV industry in the private sector which needs all the support it can get. Its about time that the private sector starts seeing offsets from big ticket acquisitions.

Plus in relation to the 5 AW109's that are serving in 6 sq PAA are they really intended for relief operations or to fly our esteemed politicians to their office and back? (just wondering why they weren't ordered by the MoI and given to a civil agency??)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Sultan,

Its a the same old story...broke (no money) government, resource starved armed forces scrounging for funding from aid etc. all the time....it would be a proud day to see the national defence budget being aligned with key acquisitions and procurements on the basis of need and preference rather than making do with second hand or aid funded equipment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0