What's new

Indian LCH, new threat for Pakistan in Siachin and Kashmir?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pakistan has no such issue. Roads and paths have been built that lead up to the posts.



Not with the UAE they aren't. Also no one will pay for Pakistan's purchases bro.
I don't think so.
 
Pakistan has no such issue. Roads and paths have been built that lead up to the posts.



Not with the UAE they aren't. Also no one will pay for Pakistan's purchases bro.

dear many posts don't have access to roads and even helicopters can not reach all posts.
 
Why you don't think HJ-12 will not be good???

Also FN-3000N (9km range) customized for high altitudes upgraded with PL-10 AAM (20km range) will be good point defence solution for many posts.

Chief designer reveals data on China's new Luoyang PL-10 AAM - IHS Jane's 360
.
Defense Updates: FL-3000N / HHQ-10 Missile CIWS Air Defense System

It's an anti-tank missile bro with an effective range of 2000 m to 4000m.

dear many posts don't have access to roads and even helicopters can not reach all posts.



The Indians rely on helicopters made indigenously, which are probably the only choppers that can reach such heights, whereas Pakistan has simplified the logistical nightmare by building roads and paths to all of its positions across the glacier.

All about the Siachen Glacier: the conflict, perspectives of India and Pakistan, geography, history and the possible resolutions | Siachen Glacier: Pristine beauty, and the war at the top of the world
 
This thread is complete BS. No matter what Indian fanboy claim LCH is not a major threat for Pakistan in Siachen and aong LOC. In fact Pakistan can counter this "threat" with equipment that Pakistan currently has. I don't think we need to buy something new to particularly counter this thread.

So Indian fanboys. You tried hard. But sorry. Not impressed. :lol:
 
Last edited:
It's an anti-tank missile bro with an effective range of 2000 m to 4000m.

That is good range in mountains to handle infantry or attacking enemy post and warhead can be changed as per need, if Pakistan want to use it against other targets, you know China don't mind customizing weapons as per Pakistan's needs.

It's an anti-tank missile bro with an effective range of 2000 m to 4000m.





The Indians rely on helicopters made indigenously, which are probably the only choppers that can reach such heights, whereas Pakistan has simplified the logistical nightmare by building roads and paths to all of its positions across the glacier.

All about the Siachen Glacier: the conflict, perspectives of India and Pakistan, geography, history and the possible resolutions | Siachen Glacier: Pristine beauty, and the war at the top of the world

If underline part is true then deployment of SAMS to handle LCH type threat will not be a big issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: waz
Jatt, the US deployed massive airpower, far disproportionate to the enemy they were facing. Virtually any ammunition, arms depo of any use was destroyed in the air campaign. The Taliban had precious few. In Iraq Manpads were actually in short supply. How many times did you hear of an insurgent using one in Iraq? Virtually never. There were not many around to begin with.

Source: Indian LCH, new threat for Pakistan in Siachin and Kashmir? | Page 14
Feel like you don't understand.
The only thing safe from a attack helicopter is a bunker/base. You need a lot of guns/ and eyes. Everything else it can dominate from the sky, so the air superiority is key. Best bet at shooting down a helicopter is not SAMs or even shoulder mounted manpads, its to have air denial via other birds like F-16s. The helecopter is support unit, meaning you can take it close to the battlefield and as far as you control the skies you yes, useless against america. Unless you can achieve air denial. So for India and attack helecopter can be an offensive weapon whom has the greater air superiority vs the PAF.
Suppose India goes to war against China.
PLAAF have very few bases in Tibet, high altitudes restrict payload, increase fuel consumption etc..
IAF has the number advantage in this arena and time/distance to target. They will have air superiority closer to the battlefield or over it vis the PLAAF. So the PLA would can not be in filled so close to the objective. Meaning a longer trek, by road to the battlefield. This also means not only are the Indian soldiers less tired, they have the ability to do emergency evac and other logistical support that can be done via helicopters or air drops.
Now the PLA knew this, which is why in decades over time, they built extensive tunnels and bunkers close to the Indian border in the middle of nowhere. Best crazy bunker/trenches you can google earth. Point being these positions are what the helicopters can't get too near because over time the PLA stockpiled stashes of small arms like manpads and heavy guns to mortars and shells. these are rather big bunkers and the Indian side doesn't have an equivalents to this. But it is only a small deterrence.
The same is true for the Indo Pak border, like the PLA the PA would be using its helicopters for infills and support and engage in attacks when the enemy is cut off or gets to far ahead of their support. Ie they will operate were they have at least some air cover.
 
How many advance MANPAD one LCH can handle??? Because there won't be just one or two coming, also newer versions of MANPADS can handle chaff & flares. Also MANPADS can be guided by other guidance systems like radar or EO/IR systems one example is RBS-70.
its about ammount of chaffs and flairs which onli the defnce forces know who handle and use such systems we civillians can onli dream to know the actual truth but its not about how amny MANPADS LCH can handle as no one is going to tell you ... nice try

point is ANZA has a flight cieling of 4KM and range of 5 KM while flight cieling of LCH is 6.5KM and combat range of its ATGMs is 6-8 KM rest you can calculate yourself ... cheers mate :coffee:
 
its about ammount of chaffs and flairs which onli the defnce forces know who handle and use such systems we civillians can onli dream to know the actual truth but its not about how amny MANPADS LCH can handle as no one is going to tell you ... nice try

point is ANZA has a flight cieling of 4KM and range of 5 KM while flight cieling of LCH is 6.5KM and combat range of its ATGMs is 6-8 KM rest you can calculate yourself ... cheers mate :coffee:

If you read my discussion here with @waz & @Blue Marlin you will have your answer about, how Pakistan can handle LCH threat.

If you belive that Anza can only hit that high & distance and its seeker can not differntiate between chaff, flare and target then I wish you also fly attack mission against them. :D
 
If you read my discussion here with @waz & @Blue Marlin you will have your answer about, how Pakistan can handle LCH threat.

If you belive that Anza can only hit that high & distance and its seeker can not differntiate between chaff, flare and target then I wish you also fly attack mission against them. :D
in case of war once has to take calculated risks and we will take then head on dont worry worry about your assets will be blown to pieces by owr prowling LCHs :D good luck with your anza's
 
in case of war once has to take calculated risks and we will take then head on dont worry worry about your assets will be blown to pieces by owr prowling LCHs :D good luck with your anza's

Your LCH will be blown into peices before it can even have Pakistani posts at high altitudes in its weapons range.

You are totally unaware of PA's new air defence capabilities. :D

@waz please enlightment him about it. :)
 
Feel like you don't understand.
The only thing safe from a attack helicopter is a bunker/base. You need a lot of guns/ and eyes. Everything else it can dominate from the sky, so the air superiority is key. Best bet at shooting down a helicopter is not SAMs or even shoulder mounted manpads, its to have air denial via other birds like F-16s. The helecopter is support unit, meaning you can take it close to the battlefield and as far as you control the skies you yes, useless against america. Unless you can achieve air denial. So for India and attack helecopter can be an offensive weapon whom has the greater air superiority vs the PAF.
Suppose India goes to war against China.
PLAAF have very few bases in Tibet, high altitudes restrict payload, increase fuel consumption etc..
IAF has the number advantage in this arena and time/distance to target. They will have air superiority closer to the battlefield or over it vis the PLAAF. So the PLA would can not be in filled so close to the objective. Meaning a longer trek, by road to the battlefield. This also means not only are the Indian soldiers less tired, they have the ability to do emergency evac and other logistical support that can be done via helicopters or air drops.
Now the PLA knew this, which is why in decades over time, they built extensive tunnels and bunkers close to the Indian border in the middle of nowhere. Best crazy bunker/trenches you can google earth. Point being these positions are what the helicopters can't get too near because over time the PLA stockpiled stashes of small arms like manpads and heavy guns to mortars and shells. these are rather big bunkers and the Indian side doesn't have an equivalents to this. But it is only a small deterrence.
The same is true for the Indo Pak border, like the PLA the PA would be using its helicopters for infills and support and engage in attacks when the enemy is cut off or gets to far ahead of their support. Ie they will operate were they have at least some air cover.

Jatt Saib I totally understand. The base or bunker is the last place you want to be when gunships come calling. Unless they have been deeply built underground, they will be blown to high heaven by attack choppers. This is what they excel at i.e. the destruction of less mobile or stationary targets. Pakistan does have 150 posts there, some of which are fluid. I didn't say that the best way of dealing with attack helicopters is a shoulder mounted missile. What I did write about was portable radars that are networked with air-defence systems, one being the RBS-70. That is the greatest danger to attack helicopters bar fixed winged aircraft. Their lack of speed and manoeuvring ability makes them ideal targets for such systems. These portable systems have the ability to track and engage the attack helicopters beyond the range of their own target acquisition radars.
These systems are the paramount threat and this is coming out of the mouths of the US's own Apache pilots, who I spoke to. So no offence but I'll take the words of the professionals over other posters.
The Indian airforce won't achieve air superiority either, thus letting its gunships run riot. This has been discussed many times on here and I don't wish go off-topic.

in case of war once has to take calculated risks and we will take then head on dont worry worry about your assets will be blown to pieces by owr prowling LCHs :D good luck with your anza's

Guru my friend, the Anza (plenty of those) is probably the last thing that LCH would have to worry about. There are far more dangerous things that that. You may want to read the posts between myself and @Blue Marlin .
 
Jatt Saib I totally understand. The base or bunker is the last place you want to be when gunships come calling. Unless they have been deeply built underground, they will be blown to high heaven by attack choppers. This is what they excel at i.e. the destruction of less mobile or stationary targets. Pakistan does have 150 posts there, some of which are fluid. I didn't say that the best way of dealing with attack helicopters is a shoulder mounted missile. What I did write about was portable radars that are networked with air-defence systems, one being the RBS-70. That is the greatest danger to attack helicopters bar fixed winged aircraft. Their lack of speed and manoeuvring ability makes them ideal targets for such systems. These portable systems have the ability to track and engage the attack helicopters beyond the range of their own target acquisition radars.
These systems are the paramount threat and this is coming out of the mouths of the US's own Apache pilots, who I spoke to. So no offence but I'll take the words of the professionals over other posters.
The Indian airforce won't achieve air superiority either, thus letting its gunships run riot. This has been discussed many times on here and I don't wish go off-topic.
waz, when we are discussing LCH which is designed to operate at high altitude and remote areas usually mountainous, shooting a combat helicopter is only possible when it comes into the range of the portable SAM. Now looking at the vast land of unmanned land of the Kashmir and the Siachin, either the Sam operator is good on Luck to get in range of the chopper or his portable radar, gives him high range. You have mentioned RBS-70 and networked with air defense system, but I the air defense systems if you mean with the Ground Radar, then its difficult to be deployed in extreme mountaneous terrain and even if they are deployed, the natural slopes, hills, mountains are the barriers they have to be faced to detect the helicopter who is can fly at the high altitute but now far way from the ground.
Now coming up with the RBS-70 or the anza portable sam, the modern combat helicopter have many countermeasures and sensors, which was not present in the chopper which was targetted during the kargil war. Namely other than chaffs, flares, MAWS, LWS, RWS, and hardkill laser based DIRCM and LCH is getting them also, its not final which but Russian, French, Israeili and Sweedish are bidding.

How effective is the RBS-70 laser guided sam or the Anza against DIRCM or softkill weapons respectfully, but thinking that LCH is no threat and could be handled with portable sam and network radars is not a good idea. LCH is build with the past experience of the Kargil, to fulfil Indian Armed force, and definitely gives IA an edge over the adversaries.

Thanks
@Blue Marlin
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom