Indian Army : Updates & Discussions

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,118
10,621
India
How do you reply to the Chinese or even Pakistani situation then?

We put most of our limited money into war-winning equipment for the air force and navy. Plus the army itself has focused more on tracked vehicles, we apparently do not have enough, and other technologies. So this has affected the modernisation of the infantry. China has almost completed the same, deeper pockets. PA prioritised itself at the cost of other services, but with lowered technical requirements, so they are largely APC based.

In any case, the PLAGF's posture against India is defensive, they have an offensive posture in the East, North and South. They plan to use their vehicles to defend themselves against an Indian attack on the plateau. They have to walk in the mountains. We have already seen how disastrous their vehicle-based tactics were in 2020.

Against Pakistan, yeah, a few dozen units of wheeled APCs/IFVs would be great. But I think the IA will prioritise FICV and FRCV for now.
 

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
3,613
3,477
Bangalore
We put most of our limited money into war-winning equipment for the air force and navy. Plus the army itself has focused more on tracked vehicles, we apparently do not have enough, and other technologies. So this has affected the modernisation of the infantry. China has almost completed the same, deeper pockets. PA prioritised itself at the cost of other services, but with lowered technical requirements, so they are largely APC based.

In any case, the PLAGF's posture against India is defensive, they have an offensive posture in the East, North and South. They plan to use their vehicles to defend themselves against an Indian attack on the plateau. They have to walk in the mountains. We have already seen how disastrous their vehicle-based tactics were in 2020.

Against Pakistan, yeah, a few dozen units of wheeled APCs/IFVs would be great. But I think the IA will prioritise FICV and FRCV for now.
SAM purchases are really costly items. MRSAM purchase will go for a few year and also QR SAM will start.

Requirements for long range SAM capabilities were for 10-12 Regiments. We have only contracted for 5 S400 systems. It means either we will buy more or maybe we are optimistic that we will have a layered system comparable to that locally. But even that will be costly.

And then their costly items like more satellites, MBRLs, Brahmos , Helicopters.

Army isn't really thinking for ground vehicles imo. Apart from the light tank initiative which I personally am not a big fan of.

For now the lowest hanging fruit is the Kestrel Platform.
And for APCs , an order for extra MILAN 2T and this year a bigger order for Konkurs were given.

So yeah we will be able to defend against the numerous M113 types. But offense will be a big big problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SammyBoi

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,118
10,621
India
SAM purchases are really costly items. MRSAM purchase will go for a few year and also QR SAM will start.

Requirements for long range SAM capabilities were for 10-12 Regiments. We have only contracted for 5 S400 systems. It means either we will buy more or maybe we are optimistic that we will have a layered system comparable to that locally. But even that will be costly.

Only IA-MRSAM and QRSAM are meant for the IA, along with IA-Akash Mk1P and Mk2. S-400 is for the IAF.

And then their costly items like more satellites, MBRLs, Brahmos , Helicopters.

Yeah, artillery and helicopters will be the most expensive of the lot.

Collectively, the deals are long term and the yearly spending on average will be limited and affordable. Like 150 FICVs a year will cost $600M and 60 LUHs a year will cost $300M. 20 LCH will cost $300M. 250 guns of various types will cost $750M to $1B. All SAMs will cost us $1.5B. Combined $3.7B a year. Easily less than a third of what the IA's modernisation budget can be by the end of the decade.

Army isn't really thinking for ground vehicles imo.

FICV and FRCV are long term priority programs. But they are meant to match MRFA and AMCA timelines resply. So they are not gonna interfere much with the initial lot of SAM, light helicopters and artillery purchases until 2028-30.

Apart from the light tank initiative which I personally am not a big fan of.

Many armies have gone for it though. Particularly the US and China. Others have upgunned tracked and wheeled IFVs for the role. So there should be a story behind it. Certain technologies must have caught up to make them viable, like radar and APS.

For now the lowest hanging fruit is the Kestrel Platform.

About 1000 should give us 3 IBGs.

So yeah we will be able to defend against the numerous M113 types. But offense will be a big big problem.

M113 is only a troop transport, it can't fight enemy armour. Its armour can only protect itself from 14.5mm (STANAG 4), so only small arms. Otoh, light IFVs can manage 30mm (Bradley, BMP etc) and upcoming heavy IFVs (Namer, Ajax, T-15 etc) will have tank armour. The point of the M113 is for the PA to get to the battlefield faster than the IA and allow the infantry to take up defensive positions without getting seriously mauled by artillery.

Survivability is the issue with motorised infantry. We can have wheeled APCs and even tracked APCs, but the armour is way too thin for anything beyond transporting troops. MRAPs and LMVs with add-on armour protected by an MBT squadron can do even more at a much lower cost. We can have some fast units based on wheeled IFVs, like Stryker BCTs, but we need more numbers in the armoured and mechanised units. We are at least 20% short of what we need.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,118
10,621
India
The same platform can be procured as a cheap APC, or an IFV or as a mortar carrier or with a larger caliber gun, maybe one from our T55s in store.

Based on the US SBCT, 1 brigade is composed of 330 Strykers in various configurations. And some more are being added, like for air defence. But, in the end, it sacrifices survivability for mobility, but a very high availability is a major advantage too.

It really depends, but I don't think we will need thousands of them.

The point is, if it doesn't have tank level protection, then it's merely a battle taxi. The point of these battle taxis is to allow the infantry to dismount long before they arrive at the objective, meaning it's to reduce the walking distance. A truck would have to stop much more further away, which means troops are a bit more tired when they reach the objective.

The same arguments made against light tanks can be made against wheeled APCs too.

 

RISING SUN

Senior member
Dec 3, 2017
12,091
5,938

Assessing India’s nascent nuclear triad​

With tensions rising in the Indo-Pacific, India is making progress in developing its nuclear triad. Ongoing developments and acquisitions should help improve the capabilities and credibility of India’s nuclear forces.


India’s incipient nuclear triad has been bolstered by recent events, some well publicised by New Delhi, others less so. After more than a decade since development began, the Agni-V intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) had its first user trial – conducted by India’s Strategic Forces Command – on 27 October 2021. The test was announced by the Ministry of Defence. Less heralded was the apparent launch in late November of India’s third nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine (SSBN), which is currently sitting in the water at the Naval Dockyard in Visakhapatnam. These events have occurred against the backdrop of growing tensions between India and China.

New Delhi’s continuing development of its nuclear-delivery systems is driven by a need to counter Beijing’s growing nuclear capability. In November 2021, then-Indian Chief of Defence Staff, General Bipin Rawat, described China as India’s biggest security threat. The three legs of India’s nuclear forces include air-delivered free-fall weapons, land-based ballistic missiles and, more recently, the beginnings of an SSBN capability.

Range matters​

Developed by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), the Agni-V was first tested in 2012, with at least eight subsequent trial launches carried out to date, including the one in October 2021. The DRDO implicitly continues to describe the Agni-V as an intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM), rather than as an ICBM, by claiming the system has a range of 5,000 kilometres, which is toward the upper limit of IRBM performance. Its suspected reach likely exceeds 5,500 km, the minimum range for an ICBM. More importantly, at least from New Delhi’s perspective, if deployed to basing options in southern India that are beyond the range of Chinese medium-range ballistic missiles (MRBMs) and IRBMs (which can strike targets in northern parts of India), the Agni-V places targets across China within reach.

The DRDO is also drawing on guidance and propulsion technology from the Agni-V as part of the recapitalisation of India’s MRBM inventory. A second test firing of the two-stage solid-fuel Agni-P was conducted on 18 December 2021. The DRDO has said it plans to replace India’s older Agni-I and -II short-range ballistic missiles with the newer system, which the DRDO has described as being ‘nuclear capable’ and highly accurate. The IISS estimates that India has 12 Agni-I and eight Agni-II launchers in service.

Beneath the surface​

The sea-based leg of India’s triad is progressing, though New Delhi has so far been more reticent to discuss or disclose any details about this programme. Satellite imagery of what is likely the third SSBN has shown it berthed at the Visakhapatnam Naval Dockyard. While the Indian Navy has made no announcement regarding the unnamed hull, its length, estimated to be more than 120 metres, suggests it is an SSBN, as does the raised missile compartment to the rear of the sail. Notably, the latest hull is longer than those of the first two Arihant-class boats, which may well indicate the third Arihant class is being built with a larger missile compartment. Whereas the first two submarines, INS Arihant and INS Arighat, have a four-tube configuration, the latest hull may have an eight-tube compartment.


satallite-imagery.png



It is believed that Arihant and Arighat are able to carry up to 12 K-15 short-range submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs). These are the first SLBMs developed by India. Given their comparatively small size, three K-15s can be accommodated in each missile launch tube. However, the K-15’s utility is limited by its 700 km range, which means, in a conflict with Pakistan, it would be confined to targets in the south of the country. The launch submarine’s room for manoeuvre would also be restricted, reducing its ability to remain hidden while at sea. To enhance the reach of India’s SSBNs, the DRDO has also been developing a longer-range SLBM, the K-4, for at least a decade. According to the DRDO, the K-4 is intended to have a 3,500 km range. Were the third Arihant class and any follow-on boats of this class to have eight launch tubes, combined with the eventual introduction of the K-4, this would increase the credibility of the sea-based leg of India’s deterrent forces.

Despite ongoing development and acquisition, India’s nuclear doctrine is based on what it views as a credible minimum deterrent and a no first-use policy. Its emphasis on fielding a triad likely reflects New Delhi’s perceptions of, and the need to respond to, Chinese and, to a lesser extent, Pakistani nuclear developments. It also reflects rising tensions in the Indo-Pacific region.
 

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
3,613
3,477
Bangalore
View attachment 23367
I don't understand our COAS signaling. Is he trying to say that our defense expenditure is really low and procurement of weapons going at a really slow rate? I have seen some Chandigarh lobby guys praising the statement on twitter too and I don't know what to make of it. @_Anonymous_ @Ankit Kumar @randomradio please explain
If GDP keeps improving a minimum like 5% , we should see upto 9% increase in the capital expenditures, it can be less also. Nothing too dramatic. Atleast for next 3-4 years.

We should remember that he would have been asked a certain question to which he replied. Without knowing the full context, it's not good to derive too many meanings.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: R73 FTW

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,118
10,621
India
View attachment 23367
I don't understand our COAS signaling. Is he trying to say that our defense expenditure is really low and procurement of weapons going at a really slow rate? I have seen some Chandigarh lobby guys praising the statement on twitter too and I don't know what to make of it. @_Anonymous_ @Ankit Kumar @randomradio please explain

Some people, especially the woke crowd, like to spend less on defence and more on tree huggers, even more so when egged on by anti-national elements. So time to time they need a reminder on how the world actually works.
 

R73 FTW

Member
Mar 21, 2022
43
15
Bharat
We should remember that he would have been asked a certain question to which he replied. Without knowing the full context, it's not good to derive too many meanings.
Here is the complete context to which he was speaking:
“For a country to prosper, you need a stable and peaceful environment. That will happen only if you have strong armed forces that will secure your borders. Therefore, whenever we talk of our armed forces and the expenditure made on our armed forces, we should not see it as an investment. It is an investment from which you can get good returns and it should not be seen as a burden on the economy,” said Naravane, who launched a book titled ‘Fifty Years of the 1971 War: Account from Veterans’ at the university in Lavad. The book, which is a compilation of accounts of various war veterans made by RRU, also contains a message from Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
 

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
3,613
3,477
Bangalore
Here is the complete context to which he was speaking:
“For a country to prosper, you need a stable and peaceful environment. That will happen only if you have strong armed forces that will secure your borders. Therefore, whenever we talk of our armed forces and the expenditure made on our armed forces, we should not see it as an investment. It is an investment from which you can get good returns and it should not be seen as a burden on the economy,” said Naravane, who launched a book titled ‘Fifty Years of the 1971 War: Account from Veterans’ at the university in Lavad. The book, which is a compilation of accounts of various war veterans made by RRU, also contains a message from Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
Capital outlay for Coast guard is hardly 300 million USD. In that amount are they supposed to buy new patrol vessels or replace chetaks? Budget is a problem but no immediate solution.
 
  • Like
Reactions: R73 FTW