mysterious
New Member
Dont forget, we're not competing with India in an arms race. We're just trying to keep our minimum deterrance level.
what should be added in Pak Army?
- Thread starter yasin_khan
- Start date
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
The single biggest addition to firepower available for a land force these days in my view is an MLRS type system. I've spoken to a number of US Army Gunners about MLRS and it is simply awesome. No other single Artillery piece else can match it's firepower (ie: it's ability to annihilate an ENTIRE grid square from a full battery fire mission), nothing can match it's counter battery fire mission and it's mobility etc is outstanding, plus it has an integral, long range surface to surface missile system with about a 300klm range (ATACMS) . If you urgently need more firepower, than nothing else will match up with this as far as I can see...
Pakistan should explore the chineese WS-1B MLRS.
The WS-1B rocket with a new high performance rocket motor and warhead, reaches a maximum speed of Mach 5 and maximum flight altitude of 60km, giving a minimum firing range of 80km and a maximum firing range of 180km. The probability deviation is between 1% and 1.5%. The WS-1B rocket is longer than the WS-1, with length 6.182m but the same diameter. The take-off weight is 708kg with a 150kg warhead.
CPMIEC is developing a successor to the WS-1B, the WS-2, which will have a range extended to 350km and be armed with more accurate, guided rockets.
Detailed info about the system can be acquired here
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/ws1b/index.html
It would be cheaper & more reliable then its american counter part.
The WS-1B rocket with a new high performance rocket motor and warhead, reaches a maximum speed of Mach 5 and maximum flight altitude of 60km, giving a minimum firing range of 80km and a maximum firing range of 180km. The probability deviation is between 1% and 1.5%. The WS-1B rocket is longer than the WS-1, with length 6.182m but the same diameter. The take-off weight is 708kg with a 150kg warhead.
CPMIEC is developing a successor to the WS-1B, the WS-2, which will have a range extended to 350km and be armed with more accurate, guided rockets.
Detailed info about the system can be acquired here
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/ws1b/index.html
It would be cheaper & more reliable then its american counter part.
yasin_khan
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #44
It is very dificult to get it brother.
yasin_khan
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #45
with the current inventries we r in better position then Indians.
yasin_khan
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #46
But we need more.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
I have no doubt the Chinese MLRS would be cheaper, but I'm not sure about the reliability issue. US designed aircraft for example, have consistently higher availability rates than Sino-Russian aircraft. THAT's a demonstrated fact. Even the best designed bit of equipment is useless if it doesn't work. I think quality control has a lot to do with this.
yasin_khan
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #48
MLRS???????? :?
mysterious
New Member
Multiple Launched Rocket System(s)!!!
yasin_khan
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #50
i think aussie is right the chineese will be good and we will get it easily with TOT.
Admin: Please read the responses properly before typing your own. That is NOT what aussie said. :roll
Admin: Please read the responses properly before typing your own. That is NOT what aussie said. :roll
lalith, provide the article where it says sa won't do ne more deals with pak, and the darter deal was in sa newspapers and defence journals, not some rogue scientist.
ON TOPIC: we have the american m109s and m110s and we're building our own spa with china, similar to the spz2000 that kuwait chose from china (over competition from ASspa guns from uk and paladins from us), we're fine with our spa
there were reports that said we got the ws-1bs from china, those r good but we should get the ws-2 which have way more range
and we're getting 40 more cobras, so 60 cobras total (to be upgraded), we're fine in this department, but we need more utility/transport helis, we should try for the blackhawks (good or not, but they're just sexy)
and instead of spending more money on hardware, we should get ALL of our soldiers some kevlar helmets and vests, nvgs, and new stuff (we make all this stuff so shouldn't cost much money), they look like ww2 bhangis right now
p.s. does ne one know when the talha apcs r being inducted and how far is the saad ifv project?
ON TOPIC: we have the american m109s and m110s and we're building our own spa with china, similar to the spz2000 that kuwait chose from china (over competition from ASspa guns from uk and paladins from us), we're fine with our spa
there were reports that said we got the ws-1bs from china, those r good but we should get the ws-2 which have way more range
and we're getting 40 more cobras, so 60 cobras total (to be upgraded), we're fine in this department, but we need more utility/transport helis, we should try for the blackhawks (good or not, but they're just sexy)
and instead of spending more money on hardware, we should get ALL of our soldiers some kevlar helmets and vests, nvgs, and new stuff (we make all this stuff so shouldn't cost much money), they look like ww2 bhangis right now
p.s. does ne one know when the talha apcs r being inducted and how far is the saad ifv project?
lalith prasad
Banned Member
i cannot post the article about sa not selling dfencetechnology as it is pretty old immediately after india came to know of the sale of kentron missiles to pakistan india launched a protest with sa .their defence minister assured india that it was a rogue deal and in future no such deal will take place india and sa then signed a defence cooperation deal .the result is the bhim t-6 howitzer.by the way india has an ultimate requirement for3000+ sphs (155mm calibre tracked and wheeled).the favourites as of now are sa(other partcipants are israel with their atmos2000 and bofors) bofors are favourites for field gun .the sa are also setting up a facility at nalanda to manufacture the v-lap charges which will give these artillery guns a range of 60+kms.by the way buddy do me a favour compare information of the chinese howitzer with the bhim t-6 and then reply based on technical parameters(range,muzzle velocity,firing rate etc)which one is superior.the estimated deal foe the artillery guns for india is 2+billion dollars.
yasin_khan
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #53
its good news but only 40.i think some other attack helicopter should also be inducted.For transport we r getting 13 Mil Mi 17 hip transport helis.and i think they are very much good for transport.
yasin_khan
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #54
If we provide the above mentioned things what will they do?
Pakistani soldiers havnt got these things but they patroit they can do much with out these things.and what do u call them WW2 bhangis(sweeper) u should mind your language,only few countries individuals got these things.In Iraq and Afghanistan collation forces got every thing but still the Iraqis and Afghanis are killing them in gurilla attacks. :mad
mysterious
New Member
Yasin Khan, your post is only corrent to a certain extent. A better equiped soldier is a lot more effective than a brave fool without proper equipment. Sure, the bravehearts in the Pakistani Army are willing to do their duty whatever it may take but providing them with the 21st century equipment will make them more effective as troopers and cut back the casualties incurred in a conflict. If the US forces werent equipped with such advanced gear, I wouldn't be surprised if they had suffered (by now) some 5000-10000 soldiers! Losing just over a 1000 troops in Iraq in itself goes a long way in speaking in favor of providing your troops with the most advanced equipment to make them battlefield winners! This aint the 60s or 70s anymore. :smokingc:
Welcome shazz. Make your intros in the social forum not in this warzone. Thanks! 
Utelore, just 2 things.
1. Language.
2. Military knowledge.
Work on it. :cop
Utelore, just 2 things.
1. Language.
2. Military knowledge.
Work on it. :cop
Pakistan needs modularity.
Pakistan needs to dump the servile victorian era commonwealth/anglophone phoniness.
Pakistan should addopt Russian/Soviet orginizational tables.
My Pakistani orbat consists of
5 armored divisions made up of
1 t-80U/84 (320 tanks) (320 in service) to serve in 1st corps capital area
1 al khalied (320 tanks) under 180 in service soon to be the sole tank of the armored divisions
2 type 85s (640 tanks) 580 in service (to be modified and used as support vehicles for al khalied armored divisions)
1 type 59 (320 tanks) 2,100 t-55,59,ty69 and al zarrar in service (to be pased and used in the motor rifle regiments)
17 motorrifle divisions made up of 110 t-55/59 or al zarrar tanks each (1,870 tanks in total)
For now all Infantry are carried in m-113's however once pakistan fully gears its industry towards the al khalied the type 85s will be turned into chassis to support the al khalied tanks , a whole family of fighting vehicles is invisioned from 155mm sph, 23x4 turrets and 105mm armed infantry carriers.
work progresses on a 8x8 wheeled pakistani apc based on a commercial truck chasis.
pakistani reserve formations are based on some 1,000 125mm armed type 59s
pakistani armored forces 2010
t-80/u/84 1,000 (total cost from ukraine some 1 billion dollars)
al Khalied 2,000 (main produced battle tank)
al zarrar 5,000 (t-55s and chinese t-59s are being sold now at under the cost of luxury cars around some $40kusd the al zarrar upgrade costs less than $210k
IFV/APC
3,000 m-113/lookalikes (this figure is nearly complete)
2,000 converted t-55/lookalike carriers
2,000 wheeled 8x8 domestic systems
Others
320 203mm artilery
320 170mm koksun (n.korean system)
120 155mm gun on type 85
450 other 155mm systems
1,000+ 122mm d-30 howitzers on truck mounted platforms
1,000+ 105mm tank guns on d-30 trailers as simple anti tank guns
450 130mm m1930 obsolete artillery used in an anti tank and artillery support role.
Pakistan needs to dump the servile victorian era commonwealth/anglophone phoniness.
Pakistan should addopt Russian/Soviet orginizational tables.
My Pakistani orbat consists of
5 armored divisions made up of
1 t-80U/84 (320 tanks) (320 in service) to serve in 1st corps capital area
1 al khalied (320 tanks) under 180 in service soon to be the sole tank of the armored divisions
2 type 85s (640 tanks) 580 in service (to be modified and used as support vehicles for al khalied armored divisions)
1 type 59 (320 tanks) 2,100 t-55,59,ty69 and al zarrar in service (to be pased and used in the motor rifle regiments)
17 motorrifle divisions made up of 110 t-55/59 or al zarrar tanks each (1,870 tanks in total)
For now all Infantry are carried in m-113's however once pakistan fully gears its industry towards the al khalied the type 85s will be turned into chassis to support the al khalied tanks , a whole family of fighting vehicles is invisioned from 155mm sph, 23x4 turrets and 105mm armed infantry carriers.
work progresses on a 8x8 wheeled pakistani apc based on a commercial truck chasis.
pakistani reserve formations are based on some 1,000 125mm armed type 59s
pakistani armored forces 2010
t-80/u/84 1,000 (total cost from ukraine some 1 billion dollars)
al Khalied 2,000 (main produced battle tank)
al zarrar 5,000 (t-55s and chinese t-59s are being sold now at under the cost of luxury cars around some $40kusd the al zarrar upgrade costs less than $210k
IFV/APC
3,000 m-113/lookalikes (this figure is nearly complete)
2,000 converted t-55/lookalike carriers
2,000 wheeled 8x8 domestic systems
Others
320 203mm artilery
320 170mm koksun (n.korean system)
120 155mm gun on type 85
450 other 155mm systems
1,000+ 122mm d-30 howitzers on truck mounted platforms
1,000+ 105mm tank guns on d-30 trailers as simple anti tank guns
450 130mm m1930 obsolete artillery used in an anti tank and artillery support role.
mysterious
New Member
Sounds interesting as far as the inventory lists go! I'd still be reluctant to follow Russian ways of handling the army - would only create more problems!