Modernisation of Indian Army Infantry

[Kumaoni]

Idk maybe Desert Storm, Iraq was the 4th most powerful military then so not like they were ragtag


Remind me again who won WW2.

Iraq is nowhere near the 4th most powerful military at that tome. They had been bloodied by the Iranians, suffered from sanctions, and more importantly were severely disadvantaged against American satellites which are the bread and butter of American victory in Iraq. The Americans practically bombed Iraqi Moreover, their tanks were Cold War relics, and practically scratch copies of what the Soviets could offer at that time. Moreover, in the 70s and 80s, Indian officers trained Iraqi officers. No Iraqi officer ever trained an indian one. We were ahead of the Iraqis back then.

WW2. Britian largely defeated Japan on the ground, Soviets and British defeated Germans in Africa and Eastern Europe. More importantly, WW2 was not won, it was lost by the Nazis.

Nazis kicked the living shit out of every single army 1 to 1. They lost as they overstretched their logistics lines, and even against the Soviets, they really battered the Russians and kicked their asses even in defeat.

 

[MikeTheInfantryman]

Iraq is nowhere near the 4th most powerful military at that tome. They had been bloodied by the Iranians, suffered from sanctions, and more importantly were severely disadvantaged against American satellites which are the bread and butter of American victory in Iraq. The Americans practically bombed Iraqi Moreover, their tanks were Cold War relics, and practically scratch copies of what the Soviets could offer at that time. Moreover, in the 70s and 80s, Indian officers trained Iraqi officers. No Iraqi officer ever trained an indian one. We were ahead of the Iraqis back then.

WW2. Britian largely defeated Japan on the ground, Soviets and British defeated Germans in Africa and Eastern Europe. More importantly, WW2 was not won, it was lost by the Nazis.

Nazis kicked the living shit out of every single army 1 to 1. They lost as they overstretched their logistics lines, and even against the Soviets, they really battered the Russians and kicked their asses even in defeat.

Hmm you're right about Iraq. Also didn't know we trained Iraqi officers. That's a fun fact for me


Not being offensive but on WW2 tho, that cracked me up. Britain mainly fought in South East Asia against the IJA. Hell, the IJA wouldn't probably would've cared if they lost those territories only. What did break them up really was the assault from US, mainly the Marines who Island hopped all the way from Midway and Philippines to Okinawa, freeing up the Pacific fron the IJN. Japan surrendered because Uncle Sam dropped two suns on them, not because Britain defeated them in SEA. British casualties in the "far east" theatre was 90k while the USMC casualties were at 669k. Fun fact the USMC fought only against the IJA in WW2, so I'm even excluding the US army casualties who served in the Pacific. In the Western Front in Europe, 70% of the casualties were American. During the Western Invasion of Germany, Most units deployed were American.


Regarding the Nazis, they were a professional army, and they were a peer to peer adversary for allied armies in Western Europe. After Operation Overlord, in which American forces did meet resistance, the only major counterattack was the Battle of the Bulge. After that the wehrmacht was constantly on the defensive. They did beat Soviets 1 to 1 though. Britian topped the Americans in the African theatre where British troops were mainly behind the rapid successes of the Allies in Africa.



Sometimes I wonder why I took history in school. Now I know why.

 

[MikeTheInfantryman]

Also, I wanted to know why the helmet cover of the new MKU helmets are in the old bush stroke pattern? I haven't seen any helmet cover in the new camo that's being issued

 

[Kumaoni]

Hmm you're right about Iraq. Also didn't know we trained Iraqi officers. That's a fun fact for me


Not being offensive but on WW2 tho, that cracked me up. Britain mainly fought in South East Asia against the IJA. Hell, the IJA wouldn't probably would've cared if they lost those territories only. What did break them up really was the assault from US, mainly the Marines who Island hopped all the way from Midway and Philippines to Okinawa, freeing up the Pacific fron the IJN. Japan surrendered because Uncle Sam dropped two suns on them, not because Britain defeated them in SEA. British casualties in the "far east" theatre was 90k while the USMC casualties were at 669k. Fun fact the USMC fought only against the IJA in WW2, so I'm even excluding the US army casualties who served in the Pacific. In the Western Front in Europe, 70% of the casualties were American. During the Western Invasion of Germany, Most units deployed were American.


Regarding the Nazis, they were a professional army, and they were a peer to peer adversary for allied armies in Western Europe. After Operation Overlord, in which American forces did meet resistance, the only major counterattack was the Battle of the Bulge. After that the wehrmacht was constantly on the defensive. They did beat Soviets 1 to 1 though. Britian topped the Americans in the African theatre where British troops were mainly behind the rapid successes of the Allies in Africa.



Sometimes I wonder why I took history in school. Now I know why.

The IJA itself was very primitive and not hard to beat. The reason for their early successes was because of their superior navy power and their overwhelming superiority in armor, coupled with poor decisions of upper brass. Their navy was what caused trouble, and Americans can be credited with winning there, but winning against the army? Dude read about how Chinese guerilla fought IJA ro stalemate, or Indian successes in Imphal and Kohima, one battle was literally called Stalingrad of east! On the ground the Indians and Chinese and British fought the most battles! It was hardly any comparison. In okinawa by 1945 most of what the Americans faced were militiamen, as most of their army was broiled in conflict with China and British India

 

[abingdonboy]

PLA in the 1980s, a significant % of IA still around this standard

 

[MikeTheInfantryman]

The IJA itself was very primitive and not hard to beat. The reason for their early successes was because of their superior navy power and their overwhelming superiority in armor, coupled with poor decisions of upper brass. Their navy was what caused trouble, and Americans can be credited with winning there, but winning against the army? Dude read about how Chinese guerilla fought IJA ro stalemate, or Indian successes in Imphal and Kohima, one battle was literally called Stalingrad of east! On the ground the Indians and Chinese and British fought the most battles! It was hardly any comparison. In okinawa by 1945 most of what the Americans faced were militiamen, as most of their army was broiled in conflict with China and British India

I think we're going way off topic here and into a back and forth argument so let's leave it here and agree to disagree on this

 

[MikeTheInfantryman]

PLA in the 1980s, a significant % of IA still around this standard

View attachment 216965

I like how they carried like 10 grenades on them. Also interesting camo. Is that a Soviet DPM clone?

 

[Kumaoni]

PLA in the 1980s, a significant % of IA still around this standard

View attachment 216965

IA had similar gear in the late 80s-90s

 

[Love Charger]

@Kumaoni , @MikeTheInfantryman
Talking about iraq ?
Let's start, Iraqi army in September, October of 1980 when it invaded iran was small and had mostly Soviet equipment, then there was a republican guard which during the course of iran iraq war went on to become full fledged divisions with best tanks ( asad babils ) , best equipment etc .
Some divisons were named as medina munawwara , Baghdad , nebuchadnazzer , Hammurabbi .
Initially they were designated to defend areas Baghdad and prevent coup but when iran started to regain its areas in Kurdistan by supporting barzani bro's and in centre axis and finally in south fighting on majnoon island and shatt al Arab.
The Iraqi army begin to crack after repeated defeats in qasr e Shirin ، eslam e Abad and their goal of reaching ahvaz the capital khuzestan was unfinished hell Baghdad at one point seemed was within reach of pasadaran or basij .in Mehran mandali axis on centre , hell at one point iran reached and cut of road between Basra and Baghdad during one of their 12 or ,13 operations called as karbala like karbala 1 karbala 3 and so on.
Then what happened ? As soon as iranis crossed at salmanchech in south near Basra , or when they crossed and captured sulaymaniyah in north , they were met by a wall , literally go see the desert South of Basra on Google Earth , you will understand the impact of trench warfare .
Massive , walls of defense with interlocking fields of fire
Hence as iranis had held on to abadan the iraqis held on to Basra using tabun gas liberally .
Also , Iraqi army was blostered by a peoples army .
They were not republican guard nor the regualr army , they were conscripts and levies who provided meat shields .
This was a mass of humanity not a army , Iranians wiped the floor with Iraqi airforce with their tomcats and phenonixes , hell one pilot killed three mig 21s with one pheonnix missile due the massive damage the warhead could inflict ( it was made to enage a bomber ).
All in all Iraqi army had mirages ,yes indeed with exocets for naval strikes and they gained whatever they lost to iranis in Kurdistan and and south during ala al Tawakalna operation.too .
But that was the end , gulf war was just 2 years after iran iraq war ended.
The fact that Iraqi army suffered due to western weapons iranis had early in war didn't make them realise taht now they would those guys who actually made those weapons like tomcats and phenonixes etc .
They destroyed them from afar , iranis suffered after their stocks of western jets and weapons dwindled and they had to literally buy Chinese maal to fight.

 

[Love Charger]

The IJA itself was very primitive and not hard to beat. The reason for their early successes was because of their superior navy power and their overwhelming superiority in armor, coupled with poor decisions of upper brass. Their navy was what caused trouble, and Americans can be credited with winning there, but winning against the army? Dude read about how Chinese guerilla fought IJA ro stalemate, or Indian successes in Imphal and Kohima, one battle was literally called Stalingrad of east! On the ground the Indians and Chinese and British fought the most battles! It was hardly any comparison. In okinawa by 1945 most of what the Americans faced were militiamen, as most of their army was broiled in conflict with China and British India

IJA with superior armour ? Hahha you are a funny guy arent you .

 

[Kumaoni]

IJA with superior armour ? Hahha you are a funny guy arent you .

Yeah their armor was superior in slim river, which led to a compleyerout of British and Indian forces from there

 

[MikeTheInfantryman]

@Kumaoni , @MikeTheInfantryman
Talking about iraq ?
Let's start, Iraqi army in September, October of 1980 when it invaded iran was small and had mostly Soviet equipment, then there was a republican guard which during the course of iran iraq war went on to become full fledged divisions with best tanks ( asad babils ) , best equipment etc .
Some divisons were named as medina munawwara , Baghdad , nebuchadnazzer , Hammurabbi .
Initially they were designated to defend areas Baghdad and prevent coup but when iran started to regain its areas in Kurdistan by supporting barzani bro's and in centre axis and finally in south fighting on majnoon island and shatt al Arab.
The Iraqi army begin to crack after repeated defeats in qasr e Shirin ، eslam e Abad and their goal of reaching ahvaz the capital khuzestan was unfinished hell Baghdad at one point seemed was within reach of pasadaran or basij .in Mehran mandali axis on centre , hell at one point iran reached and cut of road between Basra and Baghdad during one of their 12 or ,13 operations called as karbala like karbala 1 karbala 3 and so on.
Then what happened ? As soon as iranis crossed at salmanchech in south near Basra , or when they crossed and captured sulaymaniyah in north , they were met by a wall , literally go see the desert South of Basra on Google Earth , you will understand the impact of trench warfare .
Massive , walls of defense with interlocking fields of fire
Hence as iranis had held on to abadan the iraqis held on to Basra using tabun gas liberally .
Also , Iraqi army was blostered by a peoples army .
They were not republican guard nor the regualr army , they were conscripts and levies who provided meat shields .
This was a mass of humanity not a army , Iranians wiped the floor with Iraqi airforce with their tomcats and phenonixes , hell one pilot killed three mig 21s with one pheonnix missile due the massive damage the warhead could inflict ( it was made to enage a bomber ).
All in all Iraqi army had mirages ,yes indeed with exocets for naval strikes and they gained whatever they lost to iranis in Kurdistan and and south during ala al Tawakalna operation.too .
But that was the end , gulf war was just 2 years after iran iraq war ended.
The fact that Iraqi army suffered due to western weapons iranis had early in war didn't make them realise taht now they would those guys who actually made those weapons like tomcats and phenonixes etc .
They destroyed them from afar , iranis suffered after their stocks of western jets and weapons dwindled and they had to literally buy Chinese maal to fight.

Didn't Saddam send his own bloody airforce to the Iranians during Desert Storm? Literally funny how he sent that to his enemy without much hesitation

 

[MikeTheInfantryman]

Yeah their armor was superior in slim river, which led to a compleyerout of British and Indian forces from there

I think the British divisions in Burma suffered because most units were heavily mechanised for Desert warfare and not for jungle warfare, where light infantry usually rules. Slim himself admitted that the units were in bad shape to fight in the jungles right from his start of tenure in India/Burma because they couldn't move through the jungles fast enough and had to use the roads, which was really risky since IJAF had complete air superiority after the Battle of Rangoon

 

[MikeTheInfantryman]

@Kumaoni , @MikeTheInfantryman
Talking about iraq ?
Let's start, Iraqi army in September, October of 1980 when it invaded iran was small and had mostly Soviet equipment, then there was a republican guard which during the course of iran iraq war went on to become full fledged divisions with best tanks ( asad babils ) , best equipment etc .
Some divisons were named as medina munawwara , Baghdad , nebuchadnazzer , Hammurabbi .
Initially they were designated to defend areas Baghdad and prevent coup but when iran started to regain its areas in Kurdistan by supporting barzani bro's and in centre axis and finally in south fighting on majnoon island and shatt al Arab.
The Iraqi army begin to crack after repeated defeats in qasr e Shirin ، eslam e Abad and their goal of reaching ahvaz the capital khuzestan was unfinished hell Baghdad at one point seemed was within reach of pasadaran or basij .in Mehran mandali axis on centre , hell at one point iran reached and cut of road between Basra and Baghdad during one of their 12 or ,13 operations called as karbala like karbala 1 karbala 3 and so on.
Then what happened ? As soon as iranis crossed at salmanchech in south near Basra , or when they crossed and captured sulaymaniyah in north , they were met by a wall , literally go see the desert South of Basra on Google Earth , you will understand the impact of trench warfare .
Massive , walls of defense with interlocking fields of fire
Hence as iranis had held on to abadan the iraqis held on to Basra using tabun gas liberally .
Also , Iraqi army was blostered by a peoples army .
They were not republican guard nor the regualr army , they were conscripts and levies who provided meat shields .
This was a mass of humanity not a army , Iranians wiped the floor with Iraqi airforce with their tomcats and phenonixes , hell one pilot killed three mig 21s with one pheonnix missile due the massive damage the warhead could inflict ( it was made to enage a bomber ).
All in all Iraqi army had mirages ,yes indeed with exocets for naval strikes and they gained whatever they lost to iranis in Kurdistan and and south during ala al Tawakalna operation.too .
But that was the end , gulf war was just 2 years after iran iraq war ended.
The fact that Iraqi army suffered due to western weapons iranis had early in war didn't make them realise taht now they would those guys who actually made those weapons like tomcats and phenonixes etc .
They destroyed them from afar , iranis suffered after their stocks of western jets and weapons dwindled and they had to literally buy Chinese maal to fight.

Seems like trench warfare is here to stay in any peer to peer conflict. Ukraine is also having the same stuff and heck, even we have some trenches in Arunachal.


All you need now is a whistle

 

[NoobWannaLearn]

Also, I wanted to know why the helmet cover of the new MKU helmets are in the old bush stroke pattern? I haven't seen any helmet cover in the new camo that's being issued

Army holds ip for new camo on private company can use it without there permission so no company will make those helmet covers until army gives them a go

 

[nongaddarliberal]

Leopards are ass. Already got exposed in Ukraine: Abrams are also ineffective in winter terrain

If Leopards are ass, I have very bad news about the T90. The main problem with the Leopard 2 is that most of its ammunition is stored in an unsealed compartment and that the older versions l, a4-a5 have armour which is not as thick as the Abrams or Challenger. Well, the T-90 is much worse in both those aspects. Same as the T 72, its ammo is stored unarmoured right below the 2 people in the turret. And it's Armour is even weaker.

Leo 2 and all western tanks have the advantage of hunter killer capability, where the commander has his own independent thermal sight that can rotate 360 degrees, giving much better situational awareness. Something our T 90 bhishma doesn't have. The quality of their thermal sights and aiming systems are also much better. The latest versions of western tanks take it several steps further by installing thermal cameras all around the tank that gives the commander and loader 360 degree awareness.

Western tank designs are better than the T series any day any where. And the only tank in the Indian fleet which can potentially match them is Arjun. Another genius decision by the top brass, to give up a western style tank in favour of an upgraded T 72.

 

[Corvus Splendens]

It costs like 1300 dollars ( 1lakh something) for a good infantry gear with PCs, warbelts and pouches and an IFAK (excluding the price for the plates itself)

If focused on Infantry modernisation only, there's like approx 4 lakh troops in total


The cost is running into 56 million dollars lmao

The Army is spending upwards of 10 million dollars for 25 odd jetpacks alone. They absolutely have the money, they just don't care enough.

 

[Kumaoni]

If Leopards are ass, I have very bad news about the T90. The main problem with the Leopard 2 is that most of its ammunition is stored in an unsealed compartment and that the older versions l, a4-a5 have armour which is not as thick as the Abrams or Challenger. Well, the T-90 is much worse in both those aspects. Same as the T 72, its ammo is stored unarmoured right below the 2 people in the turret. And it's Armour is even weaker.

Leo 2 and all western tanks have the advantage of hunter killer capability, where the commander has his own independent thermal sight that can rotate 360 degrees, giving much better situational awareness. Something our T 90 bhishma doesn't have. The quality of their thermal sights and aiming systems are also much better. The latest versions of western tanks take it several steps further by installing thermal cameras all around the tank that gives the commander and loader 360 degree awareness.

Western tank designs are better than the T series any day any where. And the only tank in the Indian fleet which can potentially match them is Arjun. Another genius decision by the top brass, to give up a western style tank in favour of an upgraded T 72.

All tanks are ass if used incorrectly, just look at what happened to the Pattons in 1965! The t series aren’t being used and modified correctly. But I prefer British tanks in general

 

[Kumaoni]

The Army is spending upwards of 10 million dollars for 25 odd jetpacks alone. They absolutely have the money, they just don't care enough.

MFers had an 88 crore Defence deal for tanks, infantry vehicles, and air forces. They absolutely have the funds I’m sick and tired of this BS funds excuse. They keep buying the same shit T90 tanks that were only good back in the day. Nowadays it’s junk

 

[jai jaganath]

Hmm you're right about Iraq. Also didn't know we trained Iraqi officers. That's a fun fact for me


Not being offensive but on WW2 tho, that cracked me up. Britain mainly fought in South East Asia against the IJA. Hell, the IJA wouldn't probably would've cared if they lost those territories only. What did break them up really was the assault from US, mainly the Marines who Island hopped all the way from Midway and Philippines to Okinawa, freeing up the Pacific fron the IJN. Japan surrendered because Uncle Sam dropped two suns on them, not because Britain defeated them in SEA. British casualties in the "far east" theatre was 90k while the USMC casualties were at 669k. Fun fact the USMC fought only against the IJA in WW2, so I'm even excluding the US army casualties who served in the Pacific. In the Western Front in Europe, 70% of the casualties were American. During the Western Invasion of Germany, Most units deployed were American.


Regarding the Nazis, they were a professional army, and they were a peer to peer adversary for allied armies in Western Europe. After Operation Overlord, in which American forces did meet resistance, the only major counterattack was the Battle of the Bulge. After that the wehrmacht was constantly on the defensive. They did beat Soviets 1 to 1 though. Britian topped the Americans in the African theatre where British troops were mainly behind the rapid successes of the Allies in Africa.



Sometimes I wonder why I took history in school. Now I know why.

Yeah even there some book starting with wellington
It's written there that some American general even suggested IA to look up at quality of officers being trained as in Iraq the Indian trained officers didn't perform well
That what I read through some open source