What's new

Mechanised Divisions Pakistan Army

How are Type 56s and G3s distributed on the squad level? Do they serve specific roles or are just issued randomly? The G3s would be great for precision shooting with magnified optics
I don’t believe they are distributed at all. Most PA squads now carry strictly type 56s, for good reason, G3s are far too big and unwieldy for modern use and need to be retired ASAP.
G3s are still used by sentries in cantonments and in places where a soldier might need to stay stationary more Ofer and such, but if you look at more recent photos and videos of both COIN ops and LOC you will almost strictly Type 56s.

I really don’t understand why they are buying rails and optics for G3s instead of replacing them entirely or putting them into a specific battle rifle role in smaller numbers (which tbf the DMRs already accomplish), it’s a waste of money in my book.

Even though they are higher quality rifles than the 56s and might be useful in niche roles, I really hope they will not be issued in big numbers to soldier, especially not mechanized infantry. People don’t understand how much the size and ergonomics of a weapon effects it’s usefulness, I would argue that a Pakistani soldier with a Type 56, with or without attachments, will be more effective than one with a G3, simply because of how heavy and huge the weapon is and how poor it’s ergonomics are.

Imagine walking a few kilometers with it and then trying to hit targets in a firefight or maneuvering in smaller spaces, it’s especially true for soldiers with smaller builds, I’ve seen PA soldiers carrying G3s look like the rifle is bigger than them. The last thing you want your gun to be in combat is a nuisance, and the G3 Will definitely be that for many. At some point you have to consider that there is also incompetency involved with the fact that PA doesn’t have a rifle replacement still.
 
. .
What exactly is the issue dear?
Image from a article titled Core Commander Karachi visited Hyderabad, Pano Aqil and Karachi.
fce34b6aef091b6fb2032870279690f8.jpg

Current discussion is that bossman says this image was taken at Bhawalpur while I say it was taken at Pano Aqil or Hyderabad.
 
.
Image from a article titled Core Commander Karachi visited Hyderabad, Pano Aqil and Karachi.
View attachment 917767
Current discussion is that bossman says this image was taken at Bhawalpur while I say it was taken at Pano Aqil or Hyderabad.
This image is not of Bahawalpur workshop. This particular workshop is in Sind, in 5 Corps area. That's why all officers are wearing 5 Corps shoulder insignias.
 
. .
I don’t believe they are distributed at all. Most PA squads now carry strictly type 56s, for good reason, G3s are far too big and unwieldy for modern use and need to be retired ASAP.
G3s are still used by sentries in cantonments and in places where a soldier might need to stay stationary more Ofer and such, but if you look at more recent photos and videos of both COIN ops and LOC you will almost strictly Type 56s.

I really don’t understand why they are buying rails and optics for G3s instead of replacing them entirely or putting them into a specific battle rifle role in smaller numbers (which tbf the DMRs already accomplish), it’s a waste of money in my book.

Even though they are higher quality rifles than the 56s and might be useful in niche roles, I really hope they will not be issued in big numbers to soldier, especially not mechanized infantry. People don’t understand how much the size and ergonomics of a weapon effects it’s usefulness, I would argue that a Pakistani soldier with a Type 56, with or without attachments, will be more effective than one with a G3, simply because of how heavy and huge the weapon is and how poor it’s ergonomics are.

Imagine walking a few kilometers with it and then trying to hit targets in a firefight or maneuvering in smaller spaces, it’s especially true for soldiers with smaller builds, I’ve seen PA soldiers carrying G3s look like the rifle is bigger than them. The last thing you want your gun to be in combat is a nuisance, and the G3 Will definitely be that for many. At some point you have to consider that there is also incompetency involved with the fact that PA doesn’t have a rifle replacement still.
G3s could make for decent battle rifles when equipped with magnified optics and something like bipods. Could help the typical squad at reaching out to longer ranges
 
.
G3s could make for decent battle rifles when equipped with magnified optics and something like bipods. Could help the typical squad at reaching out to longer ranges
DMRs exist for such a role, some of PAs DMRs are already based on the G3 platform.
 
.
DMRs exist for such a role, some of PAs DMRs are already based on the G3 platform.

But DMR does not exist in numbers like G-3, this might be the a reason for implementing G-3 in some units for specific roles. And it could be also that the G-3 is more robust and easier to maintain in difficult terrains then the DMR.
 
.
But DMR does not exist in numbers like G-3, this might be the a reason for implementing G-3 in some units for specific roles. And it could be also that the G-3 is more robust and easier to maintain in difficult terrains then the DMR.
The local DMRs in PA are based on the G3 itself, I do not see why it would be less robust or harder to maintain. The numbers issue also does not make sense because it’s a local weapon that they can produce more of, shoehorning a G3 into a role it is not designed for does not seem a good idea to me either, keep in mind you need a magnified optic for such a task, not a simple Red dot optic that is issued to infantrymen, at that point you’re just better off using an actual DMR.
Either way, if such an idea is being implemented, I’m yet to see it, it’s only something we’re speculating on this thread so far.
In fact I haven’t even seen any G3s with these new rails and attachments, only thousands of Type 56s.
 
.
Just went through the last few pages.

The Pakistani doctrine is for personnel carriers to deliver troops to the battlefield from where they will be on foot. There are pros and cons to this, but given the number of threats to moving vehicles on the modern battlefield, it seems judicious. In a defensive situation in Sindh/Souther Punjab (let's abbreviate as S/SP), there will be Bakter Shikn nests spread around. There won't be much CQB, hence the need for a large number of G3s.

In an attacking situation, I would like to remind readers of the training videos during Bajwa's time, especially one showing and F7 flying ultra low speed along with infantry on foot. You can expect very close air support. Given the widespread use of G3s, it seems logical that military planners do not want to engage the enemy at close quarters. The tip of the spear will be tanks and light/heavy artillery along with mechanized units (forgot the name given to baktar shikan carriers).

I would like to see IFVs being used for flanking maneuvers. I have previously lamented the highly linear thinking of our military planners, with no thought given to maneuvers in order to surprise the enemy.
 
. .
Just went through the last few pages.

The Pakistani doctrine is for personnel carriers to deliver troops to the battlefield from where they will be on foot. There are pros and cons to this, but given the number of threats to moving vehicles on the modern battlefield, it seems judicious. In a defensive situation in Sindh/Souther Punjab (let's abbreviate as S/SP), there will be Bakter Shikn nests spread around. There won't be much CQB, hence the need for a large number of G3s.

In an attacking situation, I would like to remind readers of the training videos during Bajwa's time, especially one showing and F7 flying ultra low speed along with infantry on foot. You can expect very close air support. Given the widespread use of G3s, it seems logical that military planners do not want to engage the enemy at close quarters. The tip of the spear will be tanks and light/heavy artillery along with mechanized units (forgot the name given to baktar shikan carriers).

I would like to see IFVs being used for flanking maneuvers. I have previously lamented the highly linear thinking of our military planners, with no thought given to maneuvers in order to surprise the enemy.
The point is not CQB. At the distances an average soldier can engage effectively (and at the distances an average firefight will take place, even if not CQB, that is less than 300 meters) the Type 56 is the same if not both more accurate and hence more deadly than a G3 due to lower recoil and less weight. To use the G3s range and cartridge at ranges beyond what is possible by a normal soldier effectively you need specialized training and Magnified optics, which sort of defeats the point of a normal infantry soldier. And keep in mind, this is all after the soldier has probably walked a few kilometers will full kit. Keep in mind the G3A3 is over 150MM longer and nearly a kilogram heavier than a Type 56-II when loaded (without any optics, rails etc).
 
Last edited:
.
New IABG raised at Sakrand or existing one shifted from Karachi to Sakrand?. Seems PA is one step closer towards closing the upper sindh gap b/w Pano Aqil - Hyderabad. @PanzerKiel
It's a whole mechanized division strength there now. All recently raised.

Mix of old and new raisings.
 
. .
Would you favour the G-3 in squad level, for specific roles ? @iLION12345_1 hates G-3 and Type-59/69 Tanks both thing which I love ^^
😂 I don’t hate them brother, The G3 is one of my favorite rifles, it feels much higher quality than the Type 56 too. In a world where we didn’t have such huge threats and adversaries I’d never complain about it, but the reality is that we do and it simply isn’t up to the task anymore. India is quickly modernizing its rifles, there is simply no argument for the G3 still being in service (doctrine or usefulness wise) apart from incompetence. India is going to fight the same war as us, if they think moving to smaller cartridges and rifles is the right move then they’re doing it for a reason. The average Pakistani is just naturally hot built to carry a G3 anyways, and there are no specific roles for it left either when DMRs exist.

The Type 59 and 69 are another story, you can love them all you want, but the truth is that every time we put our boys in those, we’re basically telling them that they’re expendable, that they’re not expected to survive in case that tank gets hit with literally anything, even an RPG7, or that they’re worth less than the guys we just put in an Al Khalid, that tank is cramped, ergonomically terrible and hence extremely stressful to operate, extremely hot because there’s no AC and unreliable because of its age.

I know soldiers follow orders, but if PA soldiers were more aware of this stuff, they’d refuse to get in those things, it’s just an unfair waste of crewmen. Sure a Type 59 is better than having no tanks at all in a certain sector, but can PA handle losing all those crews?
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom