Support elements of Pakistan army

[JK!]

I recently bought a pocket guide of the british armed forces that also detailed support elements such as:

The Royal Logistics Corps and vehicles in service
The Royal Corps of Engineers and vehicles in service or ordered
The Royal Corps of signals
Intelligence Corps
Medical Corps
Royal Military Police.

There seems to be very little information on such elements of the Pakistan Army as I can only really find stuff on offensive weapons.

can anyone give information on this?

If there are pictures of vehicles available please share them and also give details of numbers in service and structures of platoons etc.

 

[Keysersoze]

I recently bought a pocket guide of the british armed forces that also detailed support elements such as:

The Royal Logistics Corps and vehicles in service
The Royal Corps of Engineers and vehicles in service or ordered
The Royal Corps of signals
Intelligence Corps
Medical Corps
Royal Military Police.

There seems to be very little information on such elements of the Pakistan Army as I can only really find stuff on offensive weapons.

can anyone give information on this?

If there are pictures of vehicles available please share them and also give details of numbers in service and structures of platoons etc.

Bear in mind mate that the Logistical arm for the British army is regarded as being "oversized" in relation to the fighting arms.

 

[zraver]

That view that western armies have to much tail vs the amount of tooth they have has been relaibly refuted in a conventional war scenerio. America's drive to baghdad was only possible beucase of the logisticts corps. Beucase modern war eats up so much material you need either large support assets (western models) or build up periods followed by action and then a pause for reconstatution (Soviet model).

Given that Pakistan's army is geared towards a conventional type of fight and is outnumbered things that increase strategic mobility (well develope dlogistics network) are a plus. Both pakistan and India have faced serious logistics related mobalisation problems in the pat, and who ever improves in this area the most will gain crucial hours in the opening phases of a war.

This is even more crucial for Pakistan becuase she has less tools to make war with.

 

[TomCat111]

This is even more crucial for Pakistan becuase she has less tools to make war with.

The problem with your hypothesis is that you are naively assuming Pakistanis plan to conduct deep incursions and occupy large swaths of Indian territory. Well, Pakistani strategy is mainly a defensive one for which they have already developed a highly reliable and redundant logistical infrastructure.

 

[Keysersoze]

That view that western armies have to much tail vs the amount of tooth they have has been relaibly refuted in a conventional war scenerio. America's drive to baghdad was only possible beucase of the logisticts corps. Beucase modern war eats up so much material you need either large support assets (western models) or build up periods followed by action and then a pause for reconstatution (Soviet model).

Given that Pakistan's army is geared towards a conventional type of fight and is outnumbered things that increase strategic mobility (well develope dlogistics network) are a plus. Both pakistan and India have faced serious logistics related mobalisation problems in the pat, and who ever improves in this area the most will gain crucial hours in the opening phases of a war.

This is even more crucial for Pakistan becuase she has less tools to make war with.

Yes but in the case of the UK the logistical arm is oversized even for a modern western army.

You are correct however in your analysis. As the old saying goes "Amateurs talk tactics.....Professionals talk logistics"

 

[Awesome]

The problem with your hypothesis is that you are naively assuming Pakistanis plan to conduct deep incursions and occupy large swaths of Indian territory. Well, Pakistani strategy is mainly a defensive one for which they have already developed a highly reliable and redundant logistical infrastructure.

I agree. Logistics and the mobilization of those logistics was never a problem on Pakistan's side. In fact one of the reasons India had to back off of the 2002 stand off was because they were losing big time. 10 months after and they still weren't battle ready.

The only real time we faced logistical problems was after the earthquake when our infrastructure of roads was torn apart.

There was a discussion about how we need more choppers. I think our road based infrastructures pretty good. From China to the coast of Karachi we are pretty much linked up and plans are already underway on building motorways and rail links to them.

 

[zraver]

My view is neither offensive or defensive, but given Pakistans lack of successes vs India in the past including the recent kargil brew up, assuming any part of the "old" system works is rather foolish.

With both sides developing and deploying cruise missiles, advanced aircraft and bombardment weapons fixed logistal sites are death traps and/or easily neutralized or isolated with attacks on road and rail hubs leading from them.

Given that India has devloped a world class assult bridging system I am inclined to beleive they have also developed a modern breaching strategy designed to rapidly penetrate Pakistans canals. If I am right this puts forward deployed fixed sites under threat.

If just a few key points fall a fixed logistcs/support network is severed.

It is easier to sustain a combat tempo with more support troops

The more support troops you have, the more you will have imediately avaible during a mobalization crisis and the sooner you will reach minimum levels to begin operations.

this is just a couple of points why haivng a large and fairly mobile and robust support network is the sign of a first rate military.

 

[Awesome]

My view is neither offensive or defensive, but given Pakistans lack of successes vs India in the past including the recent kargil brew up, assuming any part of the "old" system works is rather foolish.

With both sides developing and deploying cruise missiles, advanced aircraft and bombardment weapons fixed logistal sites are death traps and/or easily neutralized or isolated with attacks on road and rail hubs leading from them.

Given that India has devloped a world class assult bridging system I am inclined to beleive they have also developed a modern breaching strategy designed to rapidly penetrate Pakistans canals. If I am right this puts forward deployed fixed sites under threat.

If just a few key points fall a fixed logistcs/support network is severed.

It is easier to sustain a combat tempo with more support troops

The more support troops you have, the more you will have imediately avaible during a mobalization crisis and the sooner you will reach minimum levels to begin operations.

this is just a couple of points why haivng a large and fairly mobile and robust support network is the sign of a first rate military.

What's the alternative to a fixed logistical system?

All I see is a good fleet of helicopters being used with the roads down. Several roads such as the M series are already under construction.

With India the logistics are to maintain the flow horizontally and vertically. Since we are a narrow country, most of our concerns are keeping the country connected from China to Karachi (North to South)...

We have the GT road connecting Lahore to Karachi. M1 connects Lahore to Islamabad. Further up we are connected to China with the Karakoram High way.

The coast of Pakistan is connected with the Coastal Highway. For the past 5 years or so there's been a renewed effort to get all of Pakistan super connected. A rail link between China and Pak is also on the cards. A lot of logistical support comes from China at times of war, so I'm guessing we need alternatives to the Karakoram highway.

 

[Keysersoze]

Well a good system to look at in regards to logistical systems would be Finland's.

It was in a similar situation with Russia, and were able to decentralise most of their units and support. They planned for a major strike on all their fixed bases and had redundacy by the bucket load. their units were designed to operate independently for long periods with minimal support.

On a related theme it was one of the reasons I favour the Rooivalk helo over any others as it was capable of operating with minimal logistics for extended periods, from frontline areas.

 

[sword9]

I agree. Logistics and the mobilization of those logistics was never a problem on Pakistan's side. In fact one of the reasons India had to back off of the 2002 stand off was because they were losing big time. 10 months after and they still weren't battle ready.

That is hyperbole, "they were losing big time". The main reason to pull back was the lack of surprise. That is why "cold start" was instituted.

The same mobilisation was effected by Pakistan, as per Gen Musharraf's statements it was $1.4 billion of hard pressed money.

Had IA kept PA on edge for a longer time, another $1.5 billion would have gone down the drain. The total amount would be $3 billion equalent to the arms aid being provided by the US.

For India it was an affordable $65 billion, (keeping in mind that Indian armed forces had annually return approx the same amount as unused funds).
http://www.rediff.com/money/2003/jan/16defence.htm

 

[Keysersoze]

That view that western armies have to much tail vs the amount of tooth they have has been relaibly refuted in a conventional war scenerio. America's drive to baghdad was only possible beucase of the logisticts corps. Beucase modern war eats up so much material you need either large support assets (western models) or build up periods followed by action and then a pause for reconstatution (Soviet model).

Given that Pakistan's army is geared towards a conventional type of fight and is outnumbered things that increase strategic mobility (well develope dlogistics network) are a plus. Both pakistan and India have faced serious logistics related mobalisation problems in the pat, and who ever improves in this area the most will gain crucial hours in the opening phases of a war.

This is even more crucial for Pakistan becuase she has less tools to make war with.

I thought that the Soviet model was based upon the Echelon system with the various category units taking over when the logistical (and military) force of one had been expended? I do remember they were very big on Arty (and assorted other means)"softening up" prior to attack. But I thought the aim was to punch through Germany within the approximate two weeks before reinforcements could arrive at European ports.

 

[zraver]

The Red Army never demonstrated an ability to sustain an operational tempo much past a tanks onboard fuel storage.

One reaosn they added aux tanks was beciase they knew the forces would go into combat with what they had. The first echelons didnt need the aux tanks, they were there for follow on forces to use so when they were passed forward they had a full internal load of fuel.

It was easier for the Red Army to load everything and they pass it forward as needed. developing a nimble logistic network ran contrary to thier whole concept of battle.

 

[Awesome]

That is hyperbole, "they were losing big time". The main reason to pull back was the lack of surprise. That is why "cold start" was instituted.

The same mobilisation was effected by Pakistan, as per Gen Musharraf's statements it was $1.4 billion of hard pressed money.

Had IA kept PA on edge for a longer time, another $1.5 billion would have gone down the drain. The total amount would be $3 billion equalent to the arms aid being provided by the US.

For India it was an affordable $65 billion, (keeping in mind that Indian armed forces had annually return approx the same amount as unused funds).
http://www.rediff.com/money/2003/jan/16defence.htm

I missed out a word or two in that statement, "India was losing big time in logistics". Though you seemed to have understood.

Hey money would be the issue always. And you are right cold start was initiated after the 2002 attempt and it mainly addresses issues of logistics and mobilization.

India wasted 65 bil US$ in that move? Wow I didn't know that. That's definitely not affordable. But anyway the point is, even if India had the money it wasn't able to spend it in getting the the troops and weapons where they should have been.

Pak was hard pressed mainly because we were manning the Afghan-Pak border. In fact Pak had already started converting highways into airstrips to be used as runways and training the citizens on how to cover in temp trenches and bunkers.

When it comes to logistics its far easier for Pak in the beginning. I'm just concerned that we should have one unbreakable method connecting all the regions when everything else fails.

 

[zraver]

When it comes to logistics its far easier for Pak in the beginning. I'm just concerned that we should have one unbreakable method connecting all the regions when everything else fails.

Get a copy of Walmarts distibution software (it's the best in the world for tracking and shipping. As soon as you buy something: Bentonville, Arakansas knows it and a replacement item is automatically ordered onto the stores next truck delivery. The program also tracks use habits so that a store with a higher than normal sales of a certain item gets extra on its next shipment) and create a multi-trunk/ redundant fiber optic high speed computer network linking a wide network of smaller distribution each with a wide vareity of stores, serviced by mutliple truck pools. Not very cost efficent in peace time but a life saver in war.

But it will be uber expensive

Also consider placing bridging material near vulnerable crossing sites

 

[dabong1]

Does anybody remember during the standoff between pakistan and india right at the start when the indian army near the border was ready to attack. There where reports of a convoy of indian trucks carrying ammunition to the front line that caught fire and upto 40 trucks where destroyed.This delayed the initial assault by the indians for a day or two giving the pakistani's time to counter.I heard that the trucks where attacked by pakistani intelligence who knew that if the ammo reached the indians they whould have the advantage.
If any body has the report that i have mentioned could you put the link on the forum please.....i can not find it.