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

[khanasifm]

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.

Cm/400 is 400-900kg each depending on the source

http://www.deagel.com/Offensive-Weapons/CM-400AKG_a003099002.aspx

 

[GumNaam]

Cm/400 is 900kg each

2500kg is what Wikipedia says...

 

[khanasifm]

View attachment 475581
2500kg is what Wikipedia says...

Anybody can edit wkipeadia
Jane’s and other reliable source from paf and China quoted 400-900 kg

Plus y-12 and cm-400 not the same product

Lastly there is no single station to carry 2500 kg on jf

 

[GumNaam]

Anybody can edit wkipeadia
Jane’s and other reliable source from paf and China quoted 400-900 kg

Well if you are correct then I couldn't be happier to be wrong...[emoji4]

 

[Armchair]

There are people in this world, when you tell them an idea, their default answer is "no it can't be done". Unfortunately it is an organization culture in many parts of the Muslim world. What we need are more people who say "maybe, let's discuss / research / think about it".

@Signalian has some very interesting ideas about how a combined Marines / PA / PAF operation can take place on another thread. I highly encourage you to read this thread

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/karoonjhar-mountains-commanding-heights.558605/page-4#post-10507246

How can Marines and infantry be transported to this area? Let's think about it. Surely the experts and professionals can come up with ideas. History is full of examples of small determined forces defeating larger ones.

History is also full of examples of innovative ways to get things done. These has generally shown to have given the edge in battle.

How can marines be transported to Kutch? A combined thrust from multiple directions, coupled with heliborne assault and supported by a PN distractive attack on Dwarka, and a minor amphibious assault.

I hope your reaction to that plan, first and foremost, before anything can be meaningfully discussed, is not "no it can't be done". If that is your answer, you should do everyone a favor and get out of the military. Go join the civil services, its full of such people.

Here are some ideas on how an amphibious assault could be done (and I am not a professional so these are just random thoughts of an amateur, don't say no, tell us a better way, be an honest pro):

1. hovercraft assault over marshland and adjoining lakes

2. RHIB along the coast, speedboats

3. Build a troop-transport submersible, a basic one like the ones used by smugglers in the Americas to transport drugs from south to north america. They barely cost anything. Maybe an engineer can think about how this can be made better. Its basically a giant water-tank type mechanism that isn't a proper submarine, but can go just below the surface of the water, and putter to a location, pop up and disembark troops.

 

[Signalian]

There are people in this world, when you tell them an idea, their default answer is "no it can't be done". Unfortunately it is an organization culture in many parts of the Muslim world. What we need are more people who say "maybe, let's discuss / research / think about it".

@Signalian has some very interesting ideas about how a combined Marines / PA / PAF operation can take place on another thread. I highly encourage you to read this thread

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/karoonjhar-mountains-commanding-heights.558605/page-4#post-10507246

How can Marines and infantry be transported to this area? Let's think about it. Surely the experts and professionals can come up with ideas. History is full of examples of small determined forces defeating larger ones.

History is also full of examples of innovative ways to get things done. These has generally shown to have given the edge in battle.

How can marines be transported to Kutch? A combined thrust from multiple directions, coupled with heliborne assault and supported by a PN distractive attack on Dwarka, and a minor amphibious assault.

I hope your reaction to that plan, first and foremost, before anything can be meaningfully discussed, is not "no it can't be done". If that is your answer, you should do everyone a favor and get out of the military. Go join the civil services, its full of such people.

Here are some ideas on how an amphibious assault could be done (and I am not a professional so these are just random thoughts of an amateur, don't say no, tell us a better way, be an honest pro):

1. hovercraft assault over marshland and adjoining lakes

2. RHIB along the coast, speedboats

3. Build a troop-transport submersible, a basic one like the ones used by smugglers in the Americas to transport drugs from south to north america. They barely cost anything. Maybe an engineer can think about how this can be made better. Its basically a giant water-tank type mechanism that isn't a proper submarine, but can go just below the surface of the water, and putter to a location, pop up and disembark troops.

I am not specifically replying your post but disappointingly pointing out a fact that I have seen over the years of my stay on PDF.

Most members on PDF prefer discussing weapons especially, weapon xyz vs weapon abc, rather than tactics, strategy and operational planning. Just a very few members will actually put those weapons in scenarios, but this is where the weapon discussion becomes limited because the scenario itself will include different types of weapons, terrain, numbers, logistics, time and days, formations etc and above all a target. No one type of conventional weapon can win a war, its a joint effort of different systems (armed and un-armed) interlinked or supporting each other.

Just considering the Hovercraft from your post, if you post a topic just on hover crafts, type used in Pakistan and India, you will get pages of discussions, mostly dissing rival nation's hovercraft. Now a few will start discussing uses of hovercraft in a certain scenario, focusing on its usage and benefits. Bring in a full scenario, where hovercraft is just one variable in a bigger equation, and the great minds who were fully engrossed in discussion as hover craft experts will diminish and at times you may find yourself alone in bringing out a full fledged scenario.

I have experienced this many times in Army forum discussing MBT's, Gunships and other AFV's. As long as i keep limited to a certain MBT regarding its specifications like gun, armor, power plant etc, I will keep getting replies, when i shift into its usage and operations in formations, the replies will start to dim out, and as soon as i step into a scenario where the MBT is a small variable and other major factors need to be considered, the replies actually vanish. Thank God for @Ulla and now you guys @FuturePAF and yourself.

 

[fitpOsitive]

Many questions remain unanswered. All we know so far is that it will be headed by a 3 star Admiral.

What will be the purpose of such force?
Why the sudden need for Marines?
Where will they operate? Are they meant to guard Gwadar?
What equipment will they have? Is Pakistan finally getting Amphibious assault ships which are considered vital for any amphibious military to effectively operate?

Pakistan Seeks New Force for Sea Boundaries
ISLAMABAD — Pakistan is to raise a new force to help safeguard its sea boundaries, but analysts are perplexed as to how the force is to be raised even though there is a need to improve security.

The move was announced Tuesday by Pakistan's Minister for Ports and Shipping Senator Kamran Michael who said a force of 12,000 Marines was to be raised and headed by a three star general. He added the Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif had sanctioned the program and the defense ministry had commenced work on establishing the force.

However, neither the defense ministry nor the Pakistan Navy would provide details of the proposed force when contacted by Defense News.

It is not understood how this Marine force will be established, whether it will be an entirely new force, drawn from other Marine units, or an expansion of existing units that will be re-tasked.

There is no time frame given for when it will become operational.

Pakistan's maritime area of interest has been very topical of late.

The move to establish the new force comes as work on the US $36 billion Sino-Pakistani economic corridor to connect Pakistan's deepwater port of Gwadar with western China gets underway, and against the backdrop of an expansion in the size of Pakistan's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).

In March the United Nations' Commission on Limits of Continental Shelf also accepted Pakistan's claim to extend its EEZ to the continental shelf limits and extended it from 200 nautical miles to 350. This amounts to an additional 50,000 square kilometers, taking the total EEZ from 240,000 square kilometers to 290,000 square kilometers.

Regarding the establishment of this new force, former Australian defense attache to Islamabad Brian Cloughley says an initiative of this size will take a monumental level of organization and training, the scale of which may not yet be apparent.

"Recruiting, alone, will take years. Of course it's an excellent idea, but it would be better to build on the Coast Guard and the [Maritime Security Agency] — combine and expand the two, under the legal cover of the latter."

Asked as to whether this may be part of the recently announced Sino-Pakistani economic corridor program and if the Chinese would help equip the new force he said, "I have no doubt that the Chinese will be most supportive and will probably provide equipment."

There could yet be another theory as to how the force will be established however. Though the move was announced by the Minister for Ports and Shipping, Cloughley does not believe the force will be tasked solely with port security.

"I think the new force is intended to assume the duties currently performed by the Coast Guard and the Maritime Security Agency (MSA), not just to concentrate on ports."

Similarly, analyst Haris Khan of the Pakistan Military Consortium think tank agrees there needs to be some form of change, but that this should focus on capacity building for the MSA.

"What is required is that the MSA needs expansion and it needs to incorporate the Coast Guard," he said. "There is already a viable structure of command and control of the MSA which operates under the supervision of Pakistan Navy."

Highlighting the MSA's assets in having "close to 2,500 personal, four Barkat class OPVs, three Shanghai II class FAC, ten 13 meter interdiction patrol craft, and three BN Defender aircraft", Khan says this provides a good core capability.

The Coast Guard is a land-based paramilitary force currently under control of the Army. The MSA is a maritime paramilitary unit under the control of the Navy.

Analysts dispute the effectiveness of the Coast Guard, but it made headlines this month when it seized just over 3,000kg of hashish during a raid in the town of Pasni, Balochistan. It was destined for the gulf where it would have been worth an estimated US $50 million and is one of the largest ever seizures of the drug.

There is, however, an apparent shortage of assets to effectively patrol the EEZ, and Khan believes "the MSA should be provided more sea vessels for interdiction, more fixed wing aircraft should be added, and particularly helicopters."

There is already some indication of more assets on the way for the MSA.

Last October, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency sent notification to Congress of the State Department's intention to provide eight GRC43M cutters to Pakistan under a foreign military sales transfer.

These are intended to help Pakistan ensure security in its coastal waters and the EEZ.

Though nothing has been heard of this proposal since then, Khan understands it may have progressed to the stage where Pakistani personnel have traveled to the US to undergo training on the type.

Ultimately, however, Khan is unconvinced of the wisdom of establishing a new force, and highlights that there are already a number of organizations of overlapping responsibility including various provincial level Anti Narcotics Force units that complicate matters and drain resources.

"Establishing a brand new organization will take a lot of time and energy and the financial burden would be something the already weak finances of the country cannot bear. This hodgepodge of several different paramilitary forces only creates financial burden."

This is indeed a perfect news. I can see the point. Good planning.
Now we need to bring police under federal rule. This will be second step.

 

[MastanKhan]

I think JFT can carry cm400akg also

Hi,

Only 1

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

Hi,

You have the center fuel tank---but then you have a very limited flight time---.

So---What is needed is to ditch the two BVR missiles and put put two smaller fuel tanks in their place---have conformal fuel tanks as well---.

 

[Maarkhoor]

Hi,

You have the center fuel tank---but then you have a very limited flight time---.

So---What is needed is to ditch the two BVR missiles and put put two smaller fuel tanks in their place---have conformal fuel tanks as well---.

Humm so it is far better to install permanent fuel link with JF-17 so that it remain flying till infinity....Sir itna fuel kiyoun chahiye ...Air engagement especially against enemy bogies never lasted more than 20 to 30 mins...

 

[Super Falcon]

Maribes need seprate aircrafts from fix wing to helicopters and dedicated ships and air defence system to fully get out of tge marines

 

[Storm Force]

Maribes need seprate aircrafts from fix wing to helicopters and dedicated ships and air defence system to fully get out of tge marines

The marines are as good s their supporting equipment

You need amphibious assult ships
Landing craft
light armour
Artillary
Heavey and light helicopters

At this moment with no carriers or BLUE water Navy in sight ........ What and where will these 12000 men be used ......... DO YOU ACTUALLY NEED THEM ie you have no territorial off shore islands a small coast line and cant project any naval or serious air power especially logistically power beyond your borders.

WHAT IS THE DOCTRINE or PLAN

 

[khanasifm]

Pak marines are not to invade but to defend its shore line end of story do not try to Micmac USA [emoji631] with 700 billion plus defense budget no one can

Most of pak marine battalions are deployed in its AoR creek, Karachi, gawadar, pasni, omara, Jivani ....

 

[Aamir Hussain]

@Armchair. While I am trying to digest myriad of ideas floated by you in various threads and really like your OFTB thinking, conventional attack on Dawarka is not going to happen again. let us not discount the enemy response from lessons learnt from that attack back in 65'. There are atleast two major air bases in operational area of Dawarka equipped with SU a/c. No surface vessel can hope to reach closer than 500 NM from Dawarka without being challenged.

What can be done is LACM strike to cause diversion by our undersea assets but it would be followed up by a similar type of retaliatory strike on Pakistani Ports, i.e. KHI or PQA. Are we up for that? Do we have defensive systems in place to take down supersonic cruise missiles? All measure taken during time of war are weighed by cause and effect analysis in preceding war games and that is a cost most military planners were unwilling to take in many war game scenarios played in War College! I was a witness to burning oil tanks and sunk cargo vessels in Karachi Port in 71' war. It was almost daylight in the night due to fires of burning oil tanks and we did not see the sun for a week in port area of Karachi. Fire-boats from Iran had to be brought in take out the fires set in 75 of the 125 tanks in the main tank farm of Kemari!!!

All recent inductions in PN, for ramping up for a fight in creek areas, is exactly the opposite to what you are suggesting..instead of launching operations from the creek areas the force is being beefed up to defend against such an operation being mounted from the other side of the border!!! And to check increasing infiltration of enemy operatives for sabotage/subversion/and terrorist activities! IN has a definite plan to cut off the creeks area in the event of war with Pakistan and PN is busy beefing up its surveillance, an logistics assets in the creeks area through purchase of passive surveillance systems both elcro optical and FLIR systems, shallow draft transport boats and induction of land based AShM systems. Beefing up the Marine Force with Air Mobile assets is also one of the steps taken with the acquisition of Seaking Commando Helos for fast response. We will sea increase in ManPads and procurement of ATGM for use against landing crafts, very soon

 

[Armchair]

@Armchair. While I am trying to digest myriad of ideas floated by you in various threads and really like your OFTB thinking, conventional attack on Dawarka is not going to happen again. let us not discount the enemy response from lessons learnt from that attack back in 65'. There are atleast two major air bases in operational area of Dawarka equipped with SU a/c. No surface vessel can hope to reach closer than 500 NM from Dawarka without being challenged.

What can be done is LACM strike to cause diversion by our undersea assets but it would be followed up by a similar type of retaliatory strike on Pakistani Ports, i.e. KHI or PQA. Are we up for that? Do we have defensive systems in place to take down supersonic cruise missiles? All measure taken during time of war are weighed by cause and effect analysis in preceding war games and that is a cost most military planners were unwilling to take in many war game scenarios played in War College! I was a witness to burning oil tanks and sunk cargo vessels in Karachi Port in 71' war. It was almost daylight in the night due to fires of burning oil tanks and we did not see the sun for a week in port area of Karachi. Fire-boats from Iran had to be brought in take out the fires set in 75 of the 125 tanks in the main tank farm of Kemari!!!

All recent inductions in PN, for ramping up for a fight in creek areas, is exactly the opposite to what you are suggesting..instead of launching operations from the creek areas the force is being beefed up to defend against such an operation being mounted from the other side of the border!!! And to check increasing infiltration of enemy operatives for sabotage/subversion/and terrorist activities! IN has a definite plan to cut off the creeks area in the event of war with Pakistan and PN is busy beefing up its surveillance, an logistics assets in the creeks area through purchase of passive surveillance systems both elcro optical and FLIR systems, shallow draft transport boats and induction of land based AShM systems. Beefing up the Marine Force with Air Mobile assets is also one of the steps taken with the acquisition of Seaking Commando Helos for fast response. We will sea increase in ManPads and procurement of ATGM for use against landing crafts, very soon

Hi Amir, thanks for this excellent discussion. Yes, you are right, and it is no secret PN is focused on a limited defensive capability against a much larger, better funded, better armed, more numerous enemy.

You also make a very important point that PN would not want to go up the escalation ladder. I think this is specially true in a limited skirmish scenario. But in the event of an all-out-war, it may be unwise to sit and wait for India to go bonkers on your coast and on Karachi. Which they will do, given that the fires in Karachi in 1971 was a big historical psychological boost for them.

It is the general policy of most professional generals / admirals / Air Commodores to think defensively and minimize chances of them being blamed for more risky initiatives that go wrong. This is why generals during war are seldom generals during peace-time. Something well-learned in WW2. The skill set and psyche needed are totally different.

The best military men always prepare solid defenses, but never focus on defense alone. Nations with pedigree always have loftier aims than that, and its soldiers have the pedigree to think more ambitiously. Unfortunately because of the 200 year odd colonial legacy, this is a problem in the subcontinent.

Be that as it may, a handful of mini-submarines and UUVs would cost very little. Low-cost 1000 ton corvettes would basically be A2D assets, not offensive assets.

In 1971, PN didn't think offensively. It sat the war out, sitting at port. They thought defensively and the results are for all to see. If in a future war, IN knows that PN will only act defensively, they will have a huge psychological, tactical, operational and strategic advantage. An unassailable advantage.

Would PN really risk its highly expensive large submarines for port assaults? No. IN knows that. So it will be able to put all its mind, all its resources, on making substantive attacks against Pakistani soil. Devastating assaults on Karachi, Qasim, Ormara, Gwadar, etc. Once the assaults begin, PN has no chance of doing anything other than defend.

Now, if they felt their ports could be attacked, the whole game changes. They have to hold back assets and invest in assets to defend their western ports. Their mindset is now thinking of defense. Their assets are being utilized in manners that mean that it will be harder to concentrate forces and attack PN decisively.

In a future war, if people like myself or @Signalian are planning things - the battle will be an offensive one, one designed to decisively defeat India. This of course is something no one is thinking of, or very few and far between. The scenario myself and Signalian were playing out, we had planned an attack on Kutch, taking over the entire district, and assorted airbase.

You can check it out here: https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/karoonjhar-mountains-commanding-heights.558605/

Basically its a move to cut off Kutch from India, with a multi-pronged assault, from multiple directions.

In such a scenario, not only would Dwarka need to be attacked, but we were thinking of landing marines at the coast, small numbers. How can that be done with the two airbases you mentioned in play? Surprise, support from PAF and other ideas can surely come into play.

Can we think of it? Is it dangerous? Yes, war is a dangerous business. Can we minimize risks? If such a plan succeeds, you are basically neutralizing, an entire Indian air base, a naval base, and have another airbase within artillery range. Meaning, Indian forces have to divert their assets, that were meant to "cut Pak into half" and naval forces that were meant to make landings along the Pakistani coast and devastate Karachi, and air force assets that were meant to bomb Pakistani soil.

All of which would now be tied to trying to regain Kutch, an area naturally defensible given the topography. This is just an example of how a meaningful offense is the best defense.

Similarly, if PN had legged strike aircraft, IAF / IN would need to spend a lot of money and time to set up the necessary infrastructure to protect their soft belly - their Western coast. One squadron of JH-7A, just by potential threat would push India into investing serious money and resources on defense. Again indicating that the best defense is a good offense. Or at least the capability for it.

Coming down to costs - how much would a simple 450 ton mini submarine cost? Probably around 50-70 million.
How much would a 1000 ton corvette cost? - Probably about 80 million.
How much would a proposed CAS aircraft cost? 4-6 million. Compare that to the 50 million per unit T-129s
How much would a JH-7A cost? Perhaps China could be convinced to take 30 million a unit.

Calculating the mere threat of such assets, how would India need to respond and how much would that cost? A whole lot more of their resources for sure.

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi Amir, thanks for this excellent discussion. Yes, you are right, and it is no secret PN is focused on a limited defensive capability against a much larger, better funded, better armed, more numerous enemy.

You also make a very important point that PN would not want to go up the escalation ladder. I think this is specially true in a limited skirmish scenario. But in the event of an all-out-war, it may be unwise to sit and wait for India to go bonkers on your coast and on Karachi. Which they will do, given that the fires in Karachi in 1971 was a big historical psychological boost for them.

It is the general policy of most professional generals / admirals / Air Commodores to think defensively and minimize chances of them being blamed for more risky initiatives that go wrong. This is why generals during war are seldom generals during peace-time. Something well-learned in WW2. The skill set and psyche needed are totally different.

The best military men always prepare solid defenses, but never focus on defense alone. Nations with pedigree always have loftier aims than that, and its soldiers have the pedigree to think more ambitiously. Unfortunately because of the 200 year odd colonial legacy, this is a problem in the subcontinent.

Be that as it may, a handful of mini-submarines and UUVs would cost very little. Low-cost 1000 ton corvettes would basically be A2D assets, not offensive assets.

In 1971, PN didn't think offensively. It sat the war out, sitting at port. They thought defensively and the results are for all to see. If in a future war, IN knows that PN will only act defensively, they will have a huge psychological, tactical, operational and strategic advantage. An unassailable advantage.

Would PN really risk its highly expensive large submarines for port assaults? No. IN knows that. So it will be able to put all its mind, all its resources, on making substantive attacks against Pakistani soil. Devastating assaults on Karachi, Qasim, Ormara, Gwadar, etc. Once the assaults begin, PN has no chance of doing anything other than defend.

Now, if they felt their ports could be attacked, the whole game changes. They have to hold back assets and invest in assets to defend their western ports. Their mindset is now thinking of defense. Their assets are being utilized in manners that mean that it will be harder to concentrate forces and attack PN decisively.

In a future war, if people like myself or @Signalian are planning things - the battle will be an offensive one, one designed to decisively defeat India. This of course is something no one is thinking of, or very few and far between. The scenario myself and Signalian were playing out, we had planned an attack on Kutch, taking over the entire district, and assorted airbase.

You can check it out here: https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/karoonjhar-mountains-commanding-heights.558605/

Basically its a move to cut off Kutch from India, with a multi-pronged assault, from multiple directions.

In such a scenario, not only would Dwarka need to be attacked, but we were thinking of landing marines at the coast, small numbers. How can that be done with the two airbases you mentioned in play? Surprise, support from PAF and other ideas can surely come into play.

Can we think of it? Is it dangerous? Yes, war is a dangerous business. Can we minimize risks? If such a plan succeeds, you are basically neutralizing, an entire Indian air base, a naval base, and have another airbase within artillery range. Meaning, Indian forces have to divert their assets, that were meant to "cut Pak into half" and naval forces that were meant to make landings along the Pakistani coast and devastate Karachi, and air force assets that were meant to bomb Pakistani soil.

All of which would now be tied to trying to regain Kutch, an area naturally defensible given the topography. This is just an example of how a meaningful offense is the best defense.

Similarly, if PN had legged strike aircraft, IAF / IN would need to spend a lot of money and time to set up the necessary infrastructure to protect their soft belly - their Western coast. One squadron of JH-7A, just by potential threat would push India into investing serious money and resources on defense. Again indicating that the best defense is a good offense. Or at least the capability for it.

Coming down to costs - how much would a simple 450 ton mini submarine cost? Probably around 50-70 million.
How much would a 1000 ton corvette cost? - Probably about 80 million.
How much would a proposed CAS aircraft cost? 4-6 million. Compare that to the 50 million per unit T-129s
How much would a JH-7A cost? Perhaps China could be convinced to take 30 million a unit.

Calculating the mere threat of such assets, how would India need to respond and how much would that cost? A whole lot more of their resources for sure.

Hi,

Thanks for an excellentpost---and the truth is---none of those naval vessels would post an imminent threat to the enemy flotilla like a sqdrn or two of the JH7A's---.

Why---because of the range of their strike capability----almost 300-500 KM for AShM's---. One out of 3 missiles will break thru the barrier---and will wreak havoc .

Whomsoever rules the skies---will control the war---.