PA Need Counter Rocket Artillery and Mortar System

[Basel]

The reason of creating this thread is to how Pakistan can counter enemy launched projectiles and other weapons specially over battlefield and areas like LOC.

To counter projectiles and missiles fired from enemy it's time PA should start looking into systems like these possibly combined with laser weapons.

@Ulla @Zarvan @Oscar @Horus @Areesh @MastanKhan @waz @Tempest II @IceCold @Thorough Pro @Azadkashmir @Irfan Baloch @TaimiKhan

 

[Stephen Cohen]

Such systems are too expensive

And they have not been battle tested in High intensity scenarios

 

[Path-Finder]

There was talk of obtaining Ground Based CIWS for such instance. Unfortunately that is all it was until something solid appears to further solidify the claim/rumor/news!

 

[SQ8]

The biggest issue is both mobility and accuracy of such systems. Currently these intercept systems tend to sometimes cost more than the projectile they intend to intercept.

 

[Basel]

The biggest issue is both mobility and accuracy of such systems. Currently these intercept systems tend to sometimes cost more than the projectile they intend to intercept.

Pakistan can work with China and Turkey to develop low cost solution as guns can be primary weapon while may be laser or something like FL-3000N can be secondary weapon for bigger threats.

 

[SQ8]

Pakistan can work with China and Turkey to develop low cost solution as guns can be primary weapon while may be laser or something like FL-3000N can be secondary weapon for bigger threats.

Pakistan does not have a proper Layered IADS ready for its battlefield formations, leave alone counter artillery systems.

Most of it is due to wilful subversion for corruption

 

[Basel]

Even a mini Gatling gun of 7.62 caliber may be good against small projectiles.

Pakistan does not have a proper Layered IADS ready for its battlefield formations, leave alone counter artillery systems.

Most of it is due to wilful subversion for corruption

But it's need of time as it can be multipurpose like MANTIS from Germany.

 

[Stephen Cohen]

@Basel You must have heard of MRSI

ie Multiple rounds ; Simultaneous Impact Artillery Shells

How will the system act against such Shells

Even Unguided shells can be launched simultaneously
with tremendous accuracy by experienced gunners

 

[Basel]

@Basel You must have heard of MRSI

ie Multiple rounds ; Simultaneous Impact Artillery Shells

How will the system act against such Shells

Even Unguided shells can be launched simultaneously
with tremendous accuracy by experienced gunners

It depends what solution is sorted although it's possible to handle it with mantis Type system.

 

[DJ_Viper]

The reason of creating this thread is to how Pakistan can counter enemy launched projectiles and other weapons specially over battlefield and areas like LOC.

To counter projectiles and missiles fired from enemy it's time PA should start looking into systems like these possibly combined with laser weapons.

@Ulla @Zarvan @Oscar @Horus @Areesh @MastanKhan @waz @Tempest II @IceCold @Thorough Pro @Azadkashmir @Irfan Baloch @TaimiKhan

You can use active protection in close quarter combat, or in situations where your enemy has limited ammo. Like Israel - Hizbollah scenario. But military to military, when in a war there are thousands of projectiles being fired, the cost of blocking everyone of them will bankrupt any economy. So that has never proven out to even make common sense.

So the theory is to save yourself from larger, more damaging objects like missiles, bigger rockets through missile defense shield. But that's it. Countering tank shells, cannon fire, small rockets being fired in a full war (millions a day) can never be done through some sort of an active protection system.

 

[GOLDENEAGLE1]

 

[Jacob Martin]

Pakistan could definitely use these. Things keep getting lobbed by the Iranians as well. Soon the Afghans too may have stuff to lob.

 

[Thorough Pro]

Agree with the first two, but cost should be compared with the lives saved not of the mortar shot down.

The biggest issue is both mobility and accuracy of such systems. Currently these intercept systems tend to sometimes cost more than the projectile they intend to intercept.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

The current marketing angle for C-RAM is aimed at low-intensity conflict and counterinsurgency operations, and for good reason, these systems do not have the depth, reactivity and feasibility to stop every projectile fired from a tank, artillery gun, mortar tube, etc.

@Oscar

If the funds are available, it'd be better to prioritize the procurement of weapon locating radars (e.g. Q-53, Saab Arthur or Giraffe 4A, etc) so that you can accurately ID the source of RAM fire and quickly neutralize it. Such radars can offer you the location of enemy fire, which you can then feed to the FCS of a howitzer or guidance suite of a MLRS rocket. This way you can at least reduce the RAM threat.

Some of these radars, e.g. Q-53 and Giraffe 4A, can offer coverage for low-altitude threats, which you could link to a C-RAM (e.g. Denel Cheetah). But you won't be able to scale C-RAM beyond perhaps some high value assets, such as the radar and C2 site managing combat operations. Moreover, you'll need to hope the enemy doesn't figure out that your location is a high value target, otherwise the C-RAM won't be able to handle a saturation strike.

OTOH it'll be interesting to see what work has been done to adapt C-RAM into point defence solutions for air-to-ground threats, like ALCM, PGB, ARM, etc.

 

[Basel]

You can use active protection in close quarter combat, or in situations where your enemy has limited ammo. Like Israel - Hizbollah scenario. But military to military, when in a war there are thousands of projectiles being fired, the cost of blocking everyone of them will bankrupt any economy. So that has never proven out to even make common sense.

So the theory is to save yourself from larger, more damaging objects like missiles, bigger rockets through missile defense shield. But that's it. Countering tank shells, cannon fire, small rockets being fired in a full war (millions a day) can never be done through some sort of an active protection system.

You don't counter or block all incoming projectiles, only the ones which are deemed threat to assets and people, example is Iron Done although intelligent AHEAD rounds can take out large number of projectiles if properly used with other assets.

The current marketing angle for C-RAM is aimed at low-intensity conflict and counterinsurgency operations, and for good reason, these systems do not have the depth, reactivity and feasibility to stop every projectile fired from a tank, artillery gun, mortar tube, etc.

@Oscar

If the funds are available, it'd be better to prioritize the procurement of weapon locating radars (e.g. Q-53, Saab Arthur or Giraffe 4A, etc) so that you can accurately ID the source of RAM fire and quickly neutralize it. Such radars can offer you the location of enemy fire, which you can then feed to the FCS of a howitzer or guidance suite of a MLRS rocket. This way you can at least reduce the RAM threat.

Some of these radars, e.g. Q-53 and Giraffe 4A, can offer coverage for low-altitude threats, which you could link to a C-RAM (e.g. Denel Cheetah). But you won't be able to scale C-RAM beyond perhaps some high value assets, such as the radar and C2 site managing combat operations. Moreover, you'll need to hope the enemy doesn't figure out that your location is a high value target, otherwise the C-RAM won't be able to handle a saturation strike.

OTOH it'll be interesting to see what work has been done to adapt C-RAM into point defence solutions for air-to-ground threats, like ALCM, PGB, ARM, etc.

One can't cover full border, it's about protecting assets and people and reducing loss against large for, and combined with counter battery fire capabilities defence can be much strengthened.