This is a discussion on Indian Army News and Discussion within the Army & Security Forces forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; "one of the reason why the t72's failed during the gulf war was that they were dug into the ground ...
View Poll Results: Which Attack Helicopter Should Indian Army opt for
"one of the reason why the t72's failed during the gulf war was that they were dug into the ground as fixed fortified posistion and here were sitiing ducks for the us battle tanks which were roaming around freely."
The truth is a) T-72s lacked precious seconds once they had US tanks in sight and more importantly their range was short, the shells even if fired first bounced off the grounds. b) Some units were well dug in but chose to run away from the tanks rather than fight, many of the hits were on the tanks already crippled by air strikes. Some republican guards stood ground and fought well but lost out due to overwhelming air advantage and ofcourse superior tactics and gadetery employed by the US tanks.
India's performance in Kargil was nothing above average. It is said that 90% of the bombs from aircrafts were off the targets and Mirage-2000 precision ammunition had to be brought in to take out strongholds. Indian soldiers also lacked quality weapons and no above par performance was seen either in infantary or artellery units. It took artellery, like forever, to prove advantage over the the Pakistani counterparts, and by that time, India was on verge of placing new emergency orders to south Africa for replenishment.
India might not have much choice vis-a-vis turning away from cheap and what so called rugged Russian equiptment, but they should not follow Russian/Soviet war fighting tactics. Time and again they have proven outdated as seen by the Russian performance in Chechenya-II war where 'hand picked' units with best equiptment performed with rag tag results and could at best win only a stalemate.
"one of the reason why the t72's failed during the gulf war was that they were dug into the ground as fixed fortified posistion and here were sitiing ducks for the us battle tanks which were roaming around freely."
The truth is a) T-72s lacked precious seconds once they had US tanks in sight and more importantly their range was short, the shells even if fired first bounced off the grounds. b) Some units were well dug in but chose to run away from the tanks rather than fight, many of the hits were on the tanks already crippled by air strikes. Some republican guards stood ground and fought well but lost out due to overwhelming air advantage and ofcourse superior tactics and gadetery employed by the US tanks.
India's performance in Kargil was nothing above average. It is said that 90% of the bombs from aircrafts were off the targets and Mirage-2000 precision ammunition had to be brought in to take out strongholds. Indian soldiers also lacked quality weapons and no above par performance was seen either in infantary or artellery units. It took artellery, like forever, to prove advantage over the the Pakistani counterparts, and by that time, India was on verge of placing new emergency orders to south Africa for replenishment.
India might not have much choice vis-a-vis turning away from cheap and what so called rugged Russian equiptment, but they should not follow Russian/Soviet war fighting tactics. Time and again they have proven outdated as seen by the Russian performance in Chechenya-II war where 'hand picked' units with best equiptment performed with rag tag results and could at best win only a stalemate.
one of the reasons why the bombs were off target is because that they are conventional dumb bombs without any form of guidance ,dropped from considerable altitude(to keep the aircraft out of reach of the stinger missiles fired by the millitants),the targets were nothing but stone blocks arranged to form a bunker and then add to it the rarefied atmosphere,snow storms and fog which made the acquisition of the targets difficult,that is the reason why india had to use israeli laser guided bombs.
the only russian weapons that india used besides the fighters were the bm21 grad rocket launchers which performed very well,you must remember that most of the russian aircrafts used during the kargil war were the very old mig21's ,mig23's and mig27's,of this the mig21's and the mig23's were slated for retirement,considering this they performed very well.
also during the kargil war most of the battles were fought by soldiers at 15000+feet altitude hence tanks could not be used there,but the russian designed 130mm artillery gun and the mortars also proved to be very usefull.
the fact is india has no complaints regarding the russian technology except for the difficulty in getting the spares which has been rectified now.
"one of the reasons why the bombs were off target is because that they are conventional dumb bombs without any form of guidance ,dropped from considerable altitude(to keep the aircraft out of reach of the stinger missiles fired by the millitants),the targets were nothing but stone blocks arranged to form a bunker and then add to it the rarefied atmosphere,snow storms and fog which made the acquisition of the targets difficult,that is the reason why india had to use israeli laser guided bombs."
Wrong and expensive bombing and repulsion strategy, ill preparation at nearly all levels......all these ended up costing $2B+ for Kargil (my figure might even be grossly wrong and leaning on the lower side). I wonder what kind of defense forces India would be fielding in the event it does not have to face a very hostile and offensively active neighbour. Soviet/Russian central command type mindset was written all over the Indian response. Indians were fighting Siachen glacier war for more than 15 years before Kargil...............guess that did not help in learning about the high altitude warfare.
4th Largest force in the world, still does not have any respectable inter-services coordination......it is not expensive if you put your mind and experience to it.
"one of the reasons why the bombs were off target is because that they are conventional dumb bombs without any form of guidance ,dropped from considerable altitude(to keep the aircraft out of reach of the stinger missiles fired by the millitants),the targets were nothing but stone blocks arranged to form a bunker and then add to it the rarefied atmosphere,snow storms and fog which made the acquisition of the targets difficult,that is the reason why india had to use israeli laser guided bombs."
Wrong and expensive bombing and repulsion strategy, ill preparation at nearly all levels......all these ended up costing $2B+ for Kargil (my figure might even be grossly wrong and leaning on the lower side). I wonder what kind of defense forces India would be fielding in the event it does not have to face a very hostile and offensively active neighbour. Soviet/Russian central command type mindset was written all over the Indian response. Indians were fighting Siachen glacier war for more than 15 years before Kargil...............guess that did not help in learning about the high altitude warfare.
4th Largest force in the world, still does not have any respectable inter-services coordination......it is not expensive if you put your mind and experience to it.
you have a point but dont forget each army has their own planings ,in our case i think they arre doing their best .about t72 is a good trank, with weatern electronics it can be leathel.in iraq they dont have any support from anyone and these t72 where not even upgraded to the current status.
I think Focus puts up a really good point. does any one know what Indian armed forces tactical doctrines most closely pattern? The response to Kargil was certainly inadequate, but one must also keep in mind that was more than 5 years ago, and led to the impetus of change and modernization that has been occuring for the past few years.
with regards to russian equipment, I'm sure some things are worse than Western counterparts, but some things are better, namely price. So i think India is really going after what it can afford rather than getting the best on the market, since given the military budget, price has to be a major consideration.
I agree the T-72s seem to be getting a little long in the tooth, even with their much publicized upgrade program. In my opinion, india really should move away from this platform in favor of (what appears to be) the much better T-90. Arjun, i feel is a failure as an operational tank and should only be used as a tech demonstrator for a future attempt (although that is another story for a different thread).
One last question, does air defence come under the perview of the army, airforce, or is it shared by both depending on the defensive platform?
Indian armed forces tactical doctrine comes from New Delhi politicians. The defense minister of India is usually a person who probably has never even loaded a gun in his life. Professionalism is lacking in the armed forces from soldier to the general staff. This however does not mean that you 'hand pick' few generals and send them to Fort Knox in US for a 6 week refresher seminar....................all BS!
Indian armed forces tactical doctrine comes from New Delhi politicians. The defense minister of India is usually a person who probably has never even loaded a gun in his life. Professionalism is lacking in the armed forces from soldier to the general staff. This however does not mean that you 'hand pick' few generals and send them to Fort Knox in US for a 6 week refresher seminar....................all BS!
ermm have you ever trained with their Rajput, Sikhi and Ghurka regiments? or their mountain light infantry? the equipment might be a bit dated but they keep their stuff clean. as for their armour, while its mostly Russian, their armour tactics and formation are still more Brit/German.
don't know about their Defence Minister but from what I hear about their infantry, the spirit is there though the equipment might not.
T-90/Arjun hibrid. You heard it here first folks.
There have been talk about it. Indian talk isn't just talk most of the time. It happens. I still remember the time some one ruined the Lahat suprise for us and the Crystal Maze and the Derby and the VLS Barhmos on Rajput.
I agree the T-72s seem to be getting a little long in the tooth, even with their much publicized upgrade program. In my opinion, india really should move away from this platform in favor of (what appears to be) the much better T-90. Arjun, i feel is a failure as an operational tank and should only be used as a tech demonstrator for a future attempt (although that is another story for a different thread).
focus what you have said is right & indian army knows what to do.
And to you harapa about arjun ,t-72,t-90 please refer the topic "Project Rhino T-72 Upgrade Program" in this www.bharat-rakshak.com
Before making any coment please check whether it is some what right
T-90/Arjun hibrid. You heard it here first folks.
There have been talk about it. Indian talk isn't just talk most of the time. It happens. I still remember the time some one ruined the Lahat suprise for us and the Crystal Maze and the Derby and the VLS Barhmos on Rajput.
hey dabrownguy can you please give me a link to that site. What i think is ,you went wrong with t-90 actualy it is t-72 +arjun hybrid called tank ex has got some point since r&d is now upgrading t-72 to 90% of t-90 std.
if my calculations are right then by 2015 indian army will have
front line
----------
t-90---------1000+
arjun(upgraded)--------1000+
t-72(upgraded)---------1500+
one more thing unlike pakistanis india left the idea of upgrading t-55.
for more info please refer "roject Rhino T-72 Upgrade Program" in www.bharat-rakshak.com
to know about indian army's proffessionalism maybe you should ask the united nations or try to find out more information on operation khukri.
also no armed forced are perfect ,not even usa.
indian troop live by fire almost every day.
they are involved in almost everything from gaurding the borders,combatting terrorists ,suprevising elections,disaster management etc.
and yet they have the decency of not involving themselves in coups and rebellions like many other so called armed forces do,that itself is a proof of their commitment ,professionalism and discipline.
will there be any derivative of arjun .why i said this because most of you are saying that arjun was a faluire (i dont belive it).
about tankex i am little bit confused, is there any connection b/n ajay & tankex.
ajay(undefeatable) is the indian name for the t-72 main battle tank which the indian army currently has.
tank-x is a derivative of the arjun and the t-72,this new tank is being developed by the drdo on its own initiative,it is a cross between the arjun and the t-72,it has the arjun's turret,120mm gun,fire control system,kanchan armour,ergonomic interior design mounted on the t-72 chasis and running gear and powered by a 1200hp diesel engine(arjun is powered by the 1400hp german engine and the t-72 is powered by the russian designed 750hp deisel engine).
the tank-x weighs the same as the t-72ajeya (47.5 tons) but is equipped with the more powerfull 120mm gun capable of firing the israeli lahat missiles ,and the superior kanchan armour,with a higher rated engine.
there have been reports of another project known as the main battle tank karna ,but iam not exactly sure wether it is the official name of the tank-x project or a completely new design battle tank project.
Re: Indian Ground Forces News and Discussion 
