Pakistan to raise 12,000 Marines in a new branch of Navy

[Signalian]

First let us decide if we want to employ this force for offensive ops or defensive ops. In case one wants to deploy this force for an offensive operation, then a lot of questions pop into ones mind:

1. How far away would be the offensive ops from the launch base/pad? Calc. round trip endurance of our surface combatants and one will figure out that our area of Ops can not be more farthr than the area around Jam Nagar.
2. What protection is in place to protect the amphibious flotilla from sea, undersea, and air attacks of the enemy and leave enough assets in place for regular sea patrol duties?
3. How far inland is the objective from the beach head and does it require a link up with land forces? Is part of pincer movement or an enveloping maneuver to secure a tactical advantage?
3. Or will it be a commando type raid?
4. How would we recover the force once limited objectives are met and retreat back into friendly territory? Would the withdrawal support group be tasked to stay off shore during the entire ops? If so than what would be enemy reaction and how do we protect the covering force??
5. What assets do we have to mount a resupply mission with protection?

I think the above points are just some of the questions that pop up in my mind, for starters, on a classic amphibious attack. With the current resources it is just not possible.

Yes one can launch commando type raids that can tie down a large part of enemy assets for coastal defense and for that you don't need a large force, a battalion of trained SSG(N) will do the job.but beyond that I don't see much happening here.

Let us not compare US Marines with our marines force and get carried away with dreams of Amphibious Operations. Furthermore, if India is gearing up for Amphibious ops, they are doing so for one other reason, to project force in its area of influence, i.e. Maldives and other Indian Ocean Islands etc.

Attacking Pakistan through an amphibious force is fraught with challenges for India as well. Only two nations have launched successful amphibious ops other than US/Allies in WWII/Korea, UK and Argentina. Both were touch and go situations. UK almost lost it and just managed to scrape by. And Argentina launched its ops against 24 Royal Marines in Port Stanley!!

You have to define the objective first like capture a strategic point, divert enemy forces by a diversionary attack, relieve forces surrounded near the coastline etc, then things will fall in place.

 

[Aamir Hussain]

Agreed and that is what I eluded to in my post.

IMHO even if we have a clear objective, seaborne operation is just not feasible for a force of the size of PN.

Commando type hit and run raids are a different preposition. Those are feasible and that is why min-subs are in the arsenal of PN.

 

[PakShaheen79]

Keeping in view the changing geopolitical alignment in the region, this was due since long. First proposals came in around 2009-10. If government has approved this, NAVY must put things in top gear.

And for those who are struggling to get rationale of this move. Please look for what kind of expeditionary forces Indian Navy is establishing. Our Navy may fail to prevent a shore landing by IN. So, better be prepared. Once on ground, only marine will offer first resistance. And please try to see the bigger picture first. Thank you.

 

[Aamir Hussain]

My response is to those members that feel that we should launch amphibious ops of offensive nature--IMHO it is not possible given the size and resources of PN

Equipping the Marine force to repel a seaborne invasion should and must be done with organic helo support, and shore based AShM and SAM's. Already I know that some measure are being taken by PN for enhanced surveillance along the creeks... I can't say much beyond that on this for obvious reasons.

 

[MastanKhan]

My response is to those members that feel that we should launch amphibious ops of offensive nature--IMHO it is not possible given the size and resources of PN

Equipping the Marine force to repel a seaborne invasion should and must be done with organic helo support, and shore based AShM and SAM's. Already I know that some measure are being taken by PN for enhanced surveillance along the creeks... I can't say much beyond that on this for obvious reasons.

Hi,

The first step to defense is a good offense---. By the time the shore batteries are used---the battle is already at a losing stage---.

For that reason---the navy needs heavy strike aircraft for naval missions---whose ability to fly out 350-450 miles out and carry two ashm's at least---give the enemy second thoughts---.

 

[GumNaam]

Hi,

The first step to defense is a good offense---. By the time the shore batteries are used---the battle is already at a losing stage---.

For that reason---the navy needs heavy strike aircraft for naval missions---whose ability to fly out 350-450 miles out and carry two ashm's at least---give the enemy second thoughts---.

can't the Thunder carry two ASHMs?

 

[MastanKhan]

can't the Thunder carry two ASHMs?

Hi,

The C802's---I believe yes---but not the CM400AKG's. But the problem is with the range---. With two AShM's---it only has one fuel tank to fly with---center tank---and that would not be enough.

 

[syed_yusuf]

Hi,

The C802's---I believe yes---but not the CM400AKG's. But the problem is with the range---. With two AShM's---it only has one fuel tank to fly with---center tank---and that would not be enough.

I think JFT can carry cm400akg also

 

[GumNaam]

I think JFT can carry cm400akg also

Only 1 I think.

 

[syed_yusuf]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vqszluzd4OI/VEKW7MDwj0I/AAAAAAAAJRA/I5_BRmxJErg/s1600/JF-17_CM-400.jpg

 

[GumNaam]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vqszluzd4OI/VEKW7MDwj0I/AAAAAAAAJRA/I5_BRmxJErg/s1600/JF-17_CM-400.jpg

Dang, I stand corrected. But two of these means no central fuel tank. But then again, with blk2/3 in-flight refuelling it may not be needed provided the Thunder gets air fueled right after take off.

@MastanKhan

 

[khanasifm]

Dang, I stand corrected. But two of these means no central fuel tank. But then again, with blk2/3 in-flight refuelling it may not be needed provided the Thunder gets air fueled right after take off.

@MastanKhan

Wrong again ??

Why not centerline tank ??

 

[GumNaam]

Wrong again

Why not centerline tank ??

because two anti shipping missiles and the two sidewinders combined exceeds the weight of 5000kgs. That is roughly the weight carrying capacity of the Thunder so there is no capacity left for a center fuel tank.

 

[khanasifm]

2x co8 plus centerline why not with cm-400 ??

 

[GumNaam]

View attachment 475579

2x co8 plus centerline why not with cm-400 ??

because CM400s is 2500kg each while the C802s are less than 1000kg each.