Thread: No ‘Cold Start’ doctrine, India tells US

Originally Posted by zraver

India can't cross the border and penetrate to any depth without taking a beating. Tanks are slow and need a lot of fuel, there are canals in the way and enemy fire. Pakistani frontier units however have a high degree of mobility with trucks, know the terrain and can do damage far in excess of thier own weight before they die.

India's one big advantage was the Smerch. It gave India the ability to crush any formation that massed for a counter attack. Now Pakistan has that ability via the A-100 so they cancel out.

Z,

Getting past muddy/paddy killing zones is an experience long imbibed.
We learnt how to use it to our advantage. Good news is, we learnt that 1st.

And Z, I know you knew it.

Why should we promise no "cold start" doctrine?
The US govt still thinks that the Pak Army will fight for them. It is quite clear that the Pak Army, will bleed the US of every dollar possible and keep the Taliban alive. This way they can maintain their military edge against India.
I am sure the US realizes this,...I hope so.

Originally Posted by Tronic

Zrav, What about the recent exposure and growth in amphibious forces? They still seem very much in the experimental phase, but we are seeing more and more amphibious landings and assaults being practiced and even elements of the 54th Infantry Division, such as the 91st Infantry Brigade, converted into an "amphibious assault brigade". A set up of a totally independent command is being talked of which would bring together specialized amphibious operations elements of the navy and the army. Just wondering how much effect this could have on the military set up along both sides of the border.

That more of a punitive force than an invasion force. Great if you want to punish and possibly isolate say Karachi. But by itself it won't defeat Pakistan.

DCL,

Warfare is changing, more and more countries can now duplicate to some degree what the Coalition did to Iraq in 91. MLRS systems and modern top attack atgm or heavy duel warhead atgm's make any massed attack by armor an expensive proposition until protective technology catches up. There is a real danger that similarly equipped forces will simply end up doing a modern equivalent of Kursk. I am not sure India wants to publish the rolls of the dead of a battle of that scale. They certainly didn't act after Mumbai, so what ever the threshold for war is, its pretty high.

Cpt Lemontree,

The US is stuck, Pakistan is our main supply route and air access route to A-stan.

Originally Posted by zraver

That more of a punitive force than an invasion force. Great if you want to punish and possibly isolate say Karachi. But by itself it won't defeat Pakistan.

The Indian amphibious units are not Pak oriented. Why would we send units by sea, that can be detected and intercepted?...when we have the vast Thar desert.

Originally Posted by zraver

The US is stuck, Pakistan is our main supply route and air access route to A-stan.

The US has to rethink, use an air route via the north. The CIS countries are giving the puppydog look to you.....

Originally Posted by lemontree

The Indian amphibious units are not Pak oriented. Why would we send units by sea, that can be detected and intercepted?...when we have the vast Thar desert.

Captain, I was asked about thier use vis a vis Pakistan by DCL.

The US has to rethink, use an air route via the north. The CIS countries are giving the puppydog look to you.....

Pakistan is the shirtest route and brigns with it the least amount of politcal baggage with Russia and China. The CIS might long to be with us, but they stand in the shadow of two very militant powers. Ultimately, I think India is a much better bet than Pakistan, but India remains wary of a more formal relationship with the other giant democracy of the globe.

"The US has to rethink..."

Zraver's correct so long as we remain engaged in Afghanistan. We simply can't sustain the logistics necessary to service all aspects of our engagement otherwise. That includes much of the needs for our allies there also.

"...rethink[ing]..." really requires a presidential-level re-evaluation of our fundamental relationship with Pakistan. It's, IMHO, very much needed.

Originally Posted by zraver

Captain, I was asked about thier use vis a vis Pakistan by DCL.

by me, not DCL

Z,

Concur. However, the ATGMs can not function in isolation. Somebody needs to put in people and veehicles behind them and eventually they make a BIG Time target of themselves. I feel wary why people dismiss the arial advantages that the Indian forces would most certainly enjoy and employ....

And as Capt Lemomtree rightly opined, the Thar is a trecherous but huge theatre to operate in, the Paks can be out manouvered there in more ways than one. Also exposing our flanks also mean that they too are exposing a lot for us to kill.

Originally Posted by Tronic

by me, not DCL

Rightly so.

Infact I never placed my bets on assaulting frogs.

Originally Posted by Tronic

by me, not DCL

my mistake

DCL,

Concur. However, the ATGMs can not function in isolation. Somebody needs to put in people and veehicles behind them and eventually they make a BIG Time target of themselves. I feel wary why people dismiss the arial advantages that the Indian forces would most certainly enjoy and employ....

No they can't, but what they can do is attrit and slow the advance. Also fortifed villages and towns can be turned into atgm hell holes that can dominate several kilometers around them unless the Indians want to storm each location. On the defnesive vs a a heavy armor invader Pakistan's light forntier forces are likely to mimic the plans of the German territorials during the cold war. That bieng to attrit, slow down and canalize the attackers so that the invaders time table is thrown off and the defenders reserves get a clear pitcure of the main effort and weaknesses of the invader for a counter attack or reneforcement move.

India's advantage in the air is large but shrinking. As Pakistan begins deploying the HQ-12 SAM the deep battle is going to be hard fought. F-16's might not be the match of a SU-30 but long range modern SAM's help level the playing feild. If India can get deep with enough assets then the risk of a successful counter-attack goes way up.

Originally Posted by Deltacamelately

Rightly so.

Infact I never placed my bets on assaulting frogs.

No but a credible threat to Karachi can force the defenders to do things they might not other wise do. The more forces they have near the coast, the less they have in the middle and north. India can afford to create amphib units for no other purpose than the implied threat, a threat the smaller PA has to deal with in its planning and smaller respources base..

The problem with pointing an amphibious assault force at Karachi is that the Pakistanis can simply spam a lot of light anti ship missiles.

Originally Posted by zraver

my mistake


India's advantage in the air is large but shrinking. As Pakistan begins deploying the HQ-12 SAM the deep battle is going to be hard fought. F-16's might not be the match of a SU-30 but long range modern SAM's help level the playing feild. If India can get deep with enough assets then the risk of a successful counter-attack goes way up.

Actually it is gonna remain the same when India get its electronic warfare units fully modernized and up and running. In addition to the 3 existing Phalcons and 3 on order and 12-15 AEW&Cs on Embraer platforms, that is 17 more than what Pakistan can get and India has its own electronic and GPS jamming and anti-jamming units, not to mention those new radars on the MKIs and once (if ever) MoD decides on the MMRCA order, India will be fielding over 400 planes capable of surviving in high intensity aerial battlefield,

History has proven that large numbers of SAMs are not really effective deterrents when the attacking airforce has EW units support attacking planes with long range AEW&C assets, all of those which IAF has. Moreover, IAF can neutralize Pakistan's AEW&C assets with its anti AWACs missiles in its inventory. Pakistan does not have that in its inventory moreover, when Pakistan finally get those missiles in its inventory, IAF will be fielding roughly 100 Mk 1 Tejas that will be used to defend IAF's AEW&Cs assets, freeing up the MKIs, MMRCAs, Mirages, MiG-29s, and MiG-27s, and Jaguars for attacking in deep Pakistani territory.

Originally Posted by Skywatcher

The problem with pointing an amphibious assault force at Karachi is that the Pakistanis can simply spam a lot of light anti ship missiles.

each launcher requires a crew to fire it, personal to support it (surveyors for launch sites, technicans and mechanics, security force, radar stations and other intel assets etc and a budget to fund it. It still forces Pakistan to divert power away from where it might other wise deploy it. As long as the ratio of what India spends vs what Pakistan has to spend to defend against it is in India's favor its a win for India. Even more so since amphib units have other uses, which might be the actual intended use.

For example, lets say the amphib unit cost 100 million and its primary mission is south and East of Pakistan and for those missions 100 million is what India feels is a good investment. Even though India has aimed the units south and east Pakistan has to spend money which it does not have a lot of to build a counter just in case. If Pakistan wont or cannot spend the money to create new capability she has to either divert forces from elsewhere (good for India) or leave a known gap uncovered (good for India). This even though India spent that hundred million for missions elsewhere, it has a direct impact on the balance of forces vis a vis Pakistan.

BM,

Actually it is gonna remain the same when India get its electronic warfare units fully modernized and up and running. In addition to the 3 existing Phalcons and 3 on order and 12-15 AEW&Cs on Embraer platforms, that is 17 more than what Pakistan can get and India has its own electronic and GPS jamming and anti-jamming units, not to mention those new radars on the MKIs and once (if ever) MoD decides on the MMRCA order, India will be fielding over 400 planes capable of surviving in high intensity aerial battlefield,

India won't have anything even close to that she can actually use. Above I outlined a post where India's development of an Amphibious capability was going to force Pakistan in to a no-win situation due to the economic imbalance. Like Pakistan, India is in a similar spot with its air force vis a vis China. India has to preserve enough combat aircraft to defend herself from China. The amount of air power she can actually devote to Pakistan is smaller than the number of planes she owns.

History has proven that large numbers of SAMs are not really effective deterrents when the attacking airforce has EW units support attacking planes with long range AEW&C assets, all of those which IAF has. Moreover, IAF can neutralize Pakistan's AEW&C assets with its anti AWACs missiles in its inventory. Pakistan does not have that in its inventory moreover, when Pakistan finally get those missiles in its inventory, IAF will be fielding roughly 100 Mk 1 Tejas that will be used to defend IAF's AEW&Cs assets, freeing up the MKIs, MMRCAs, Mirages, MiG-29s, and MiG-27s, and Jaguars for attacking in deep Pakistani territory.

First, history is a very poor guide in this case. Modern SAM's like the S-300PMU2+, Patriot and HQ-12 are leaps and bounds ahead of what existed just a generation ago. Capable of hitting small targets traveling at ballistic speeds, large fighters and bombers traveling at horse and buggy speeds are in serious danger. LPI AESA technology, passive homing and freq hopping and other things make it entirely possible a lot of "modern" EW gear is worthless.

Secondly, India is not going to use a short range light fighter as an AWACS guard, the range is too short for both combat and combat radius. You use your best or close too it fighters to guard your HVT. India has too make sure that a PAF F-16/blk50 doesn't send a AIM-120 C-7 at one of those Phalcons and the only way to do that is engage the F-16 much farther away than the Tejas can reach.