Indian Army for better frontline infrastructure

pkroyal

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2013
Messages
545
Likes
721
Not quite the Maginot Line ( French border? ), which was considered to be impregnable (WW -II)
but was turned by the Germans during their Blitzkrieg (lightning attack). Our situation is a combination of static & mobile troops. Bunkers well forward, mobile troops held centrally as reserve to thwart a massed attack. Bunkers are for guarding the borders & first line of defence.
 

Blood+

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2011
Messages
2,775
Likes
4,334
Country flag
Not quite the Maginot Line ( French border? ), which was considered to be impregnable (WW -II)
but was turned by the Germans during their Blitzkrieg (lightning attack). Our situation is a combination of static & mobile troops. Bunkers well forward, mobile troops held centrally as reserve to thwart a massed attack. Bunkers are for guarding the borders & first line of defence.
Do you mean the ditch cum bund line?Isn't it possible to set up a similar obstackle in the NE along the LAC?

By the way,do you guys have any contingency plan to cross the Ichogil canals in Paki punjab during any future hostilities with Pak or is it out of question?
 

pkroyal

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2013
Messages
545
Likes
721
Do you mean the ditch cum bund line?Isn't it possible to set up a similar obstackle in the NE along the LAC?

By the way,do you guys have any contingency plan to cross the Ichogil canals in Paki punjab during any future hostilities with Pak or is it out of question?
No maginot line was not ditch cum bund (DCB) line,

The Maginot Line (French: Ligne Maginot, IPA: [liɲ maʒino]), named after the French Minister of War André Maginot, was a line of concrete fortifications, obstacles, and weapons installations that France constructed along its borders with Germany during the 1930s. The line was a response to France's experience in World War I and was constructed during the run-up to World War II. A similar line of defenses, called the Alpine Line, faced Italy.
The French established the fortification to provide time for their army to mobilize in the event of attack, allowing French forces to move into Belgium for a decisive confrontation with Germany. The success of static, defensive combat in World War I was a key influence on French thinking. Military experts extolled the Maginot Line as a work of genius, believing it would prevent any further invasions from the east.
While the fortification system did prevent a direct attack, it was strategically ineffective, as the Germans invaded through Belgium, outflanking the Maginot Line. The German army ran through the Ardennes forest and the Low Countries, completely sweeping by the line, defeating the French army and conquering France in about six weeks.[1] As such, reference to the Maginot Line is used to recall a strategy or object that people hope will prove effective but instead fails miserably. It is also the best known symbol of the adage that "generals always fight the last war, especially if they have won it".[2]
The Maginot Line was impervious to most forms of attack, and had state-of-the-art living conditions for garrisoned troops, air conditioning,[3] comfortable eating areas and underground railways. However, it proved costly to maintain and subsequently led to other parts of the French Armed Forces being underfunded.

We' guys' have plans not only to cross the Icchogil canal but any canal that comes our way during an attack .

DCB is not required in NE as there are hardly any areas where tanks can operate because of the terrain, DCB is required in an armoured battle to hold the enemy so that he does not have a clean run up to our vulnerable areas / vulnerable points. Battle in NE will mainly be Infantry predominant, a DCB cannot hold an advancing Infantry as it will get through any how !

Hope this explains your query.
 
Last edited:

Kunal Biswas

Member of the Year 2011
Ambassador
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
31,122
Likes
41,042
My Idea ( Call fantasy you like :) ) is to have fortified outpost consist of its own fire support mortars, Mini UAVs and multiple bunkers with RCWS surrounding one underground bunker with a bullet proof tower Couple of such installations along borders with gap of 5-8kms, In this way they can cover each other in crises ..
 

arnabmit

Homo Communis Indus
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2012
Messages
6,242
Likes
7,522
Country flag
Not fantasy sir! Countries whose govt take national security seriously have done this in the past and are still doing it. Too much to expect from our govt. :tsk:









My Idea ( Call fantasy you like :) ) is to have fortified outpost consist of its own fire support mortars, Mini UAVs and multiple bunkers with RCWS surrounding one underground bunker with a bullet proof tower Couple of such installations along borders with gap of 5-8kms, In this way they can cover each other in crises ..
 
Last edited:

Blood+

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2011
Messages
2,775
Likes
4,334
Country flag
No maginot line was not ditch cum bund (DCB) line,

The Maginot Line (French: Ligne Maginot, IPA: [liɲ maʒino]), named after the French Minister of War André Maginot, was a line of concrete fortifications, obstacles, and weapons installations that France constructed along its borders with Germany during the 1930s. The line was a response to France's experience in World War I and was constructed during the run-up to World War II. A similar line of defenses, called the Alpine Line, faced Italy.
The French established the fortification to provide time for their army to mobilize in the event of attack, allowing French forces to move into Belgium for a decisive confrontation with Germany. The success of static, defensive combat in World War I was a key influence on French thinking. Military experts extolled the Maginot Line as a work of genius, believing it would prevent any further invasions from the east.
While the fortification system did prevent a direct attack, it was strategically ineffective, as the Germans invaded through Belgium, outflanking the Maginot Line. The German army ran through the Ardennes forest and the Low Countries, completely sweeping by the line, defeating the French army and conquering France in about six weeks.[1] As such, reference to the Maginot Line is used to recall a strategy or object that people hope will prove effective but instead fails miserably. It is also the best known symbol of the adage that "generals always fight the last war, especially if they have won it".[2]
The Maginot Line was impervious to most forms of attack, and had state-of-the-art living conditions for garrisoned troops, air conditioning,[3] comfortable eating areas and underground railways. However, it proved costly to maintain and subsequently led to other parts of the French Armed Forces being underfunded.

We' guys' have plans not only to cross the Icchogil canal but any canal that comes our way during an attack .

DCB is not required in NE as there are hardly any areas where tanks can operate because of the terrain, DCB is required in an armoured battle to hold the enemy so that he does not have a clean run up to our vulnerable areas / vulnerable points. Battle in NE will mainly be Infantry predominant, a DCB cannot hold an advancing Infantry as it will get through any how !

Hope this explains your query.
I was not referring to the Maginot line as DCB but this following sentences of yours
"Our situation is a combination of static & mobile troops. Bunkers well forward, mobile troops held centrally as reserve to thwart a massed attack. Bunkers are for guarding the borders & first line of defence."

By the way way,I'm delighted to know that IA has such bold offensive plans,because as far as I know,Indian Army never crossed (or planned to cross) the Ichogil canal in any previous war with Pakis.Correct me if I'm wrong.

And sorry if you felt offended by 'guys' remark,it was unintentional on my part.
 

sayareakd

Mod
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
17,734
Likes
18,952
Country flag
My Idea ( Call fantasy you like :) ) is to have fortified outpost consist of its own fire support mortars, Mini UAVs and multiple bunkers with RCWS surrounding one underground bunker with a bullet proof tower Couple of such installations along borders with gap of 5-8kms, In this way they can cover each other in crises ..
Sir this can be done and with network centric operation we can fill the gaps and make sure area can be secured properly with support from Mortars, artillery and other weapons just in case things become bad.

elevated systems like LOROS system is already in use with IA.

[PDF]http://www.iai.co.il/Sip_Storage//FILES/7/34577.pdf[/PDF]
 

pkroyal

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2013
Messages
545
Likes
721
Not fantasy sir! Countries whose govt take national security seriously have done this in the past and are still doing it. Too much to expect from our govt. :tsk:







Your's & Kunal's concerns are very genuine & ideas new for our nation,
this kind of imaginative deployment with full protection will do wonders for troop morale for a limited time frame.

Personally I am of the view , huge investment in static defences is not going to win us battles.

Fight should be always be carried to the enemy, better in his own territory ( beard the Lion in his own den)

Notwithstanding this line of thinking, some kind of defences are required, but please bear in mind best of defences can be run over or turned.

What we need is a doctrine which clarifies the broad concept of how we will fight in different scenarios/ terrains, with local commanders on the spot exercising initiative and the last soldier to the highest commander function effectively , motivated to fight even in the absence of orders to achieve the national objective / aim elucidated in our war fighting doctrine.

A lean , mean & hungry to fight force which is well equipped & ready for deployment.
Level of punishment to any misguided provocation by the enemy of such intensity which will make any calculation by the enemy worthless.
An Intelligence set up( incl Humanint) which is the envy of the world.
Breakthrough tech in defence sector achieved by our scientists.
A nation totally in sync ( incl the political apparatus) with the need to support the defence forces first ,always & every time.
 

Blood+

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2011
Messages
2,775
Likes
4,334
Country flag
@pkroyal sir,a nice post indeed.It would be a great thing to have such an Army that could attack the enemy territory at will,does the IA have such kind of mechanisation to swiftly move through enemy defences??
Whether the political elite has such a resolve (we have already seen their resolve or the utter lack of it in Kargil;so many good men died due to that)??
The unofficial motto of 'not loosing an inch to enemy even for a brief period of time'!
Our present lack of mobile tube arty necessary for fighting a manuevering war.

Don't you think sir that unless and untill this issues are solved,it's absolutely necessary to set up lines of heavily fortified static defences with overlapping field of fire?Especially when the Pakis have shorter reaction time owing to their garrisons being closer to border??

And what kind of static defences are in place along the China border-concrete pillboxes or stone sanghars or log foxholes??
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DivineHeretic

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
1,153
Likes
1,897
Country flag
@pkroyal,

I truly admire this idea you put forward in the previous post about the local commanders. Most people seem to brush this aside in their obsessive focus on the larger picture, the overall strategy.

What we need today is a Thinking Man's Army, where the soldier right from the jawan to the subedar to the lieutenant to the captain to the major, and right all the way to the theatre commander knows how to think. People might chide me here for saying "how to think", but this is indeed a very critical point, a point people rarely realize until it hits them in the face.

Just thinking is not enough, you must think correctly. As the famous saying goes, practice never made anyone perfect, perfect practice made people perfect. A mind taught only to look at things from the "regular/normal/conventional" line of thinking wont realize this. It is only when the mind is looking, searching, analyzing the data from an alternate perspective can it identify alternate and hopefully better solutions.

We have Gen. Sunderjee as an example, the best example. Most of the conventional tactics of the IA armored groups now are traced back to him, directly or indirectly. His capability to think alternatively is what gave us the new conventional.

And this is why I really appreciate when people bring out alternate ideas, no matter how outrageous they may be, coz one very rarely solves any issue by going through the book in military.

Sorry for going offtopic
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Kunal Biswas

Member of the Year 2011
Ambassador
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
31,122
Likes
41,042
The main objective of these defense is a permanent outpost for observation and guard so does providing fire support to any unit close by ..

Such theoretical outpost also provide replenishment to LRP and shelter, These outpost are effective multi purpose weapon against terrorism ..

this kind of imaginative deployment with full protection will do wonders for troop morale for a limited time frame.

Personally I am of the view , huge investment in static defences is not going to win us battles.

Fight should be always be carried to the enemy, better in his own territory ( beard the Lion in his own den)

Notwithstanding this line of thinking, some kind of defences are required, but please bear in mind best of defences can be run over or turned.[/B]
 

Blood+

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2011
Messages
2,775
Likes
4,334
Country flag
A war maxim

Anything static for a long time in the war zone will be annihilated/ destroyed.
Movement / Maneuver/ Fluidity will always be the hallmark of a Victor.
More so ,fluid ( non predictable) thinking!
Indeed sir,especially in today's battlefield where shoulder fired ATGMs and smart munitions have been widely proliferated.
But my question remains the same to you sir-do you think IA is yet ready (or will be ready in forseeble future) to fight such a moving/maneuvering/fluid war??If my limited knowlege serves me right,uptill now in almost every major conflict India fought,the tactics and strategies of IA have been more reactive rather than being proactive.
Just look at our past wars,IA perfomed extremely well while fighting defencive battles-take for examples battle of Longewalla,Assal uttar,Burki.But during an offensive operation the performance was not what we would expect from such well trained army like the IA,for examle the battle at the Sialkot sector in '65.So i the IA evidently excells in defensive wars,then why not fight the same from well prepared heavily fortified defensive structures rather than facing the enemy in the open?
 

pkroyal

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2013
Messages
545
Likes
721
Indeed sir,especially in today's battlefield where shoulder fired ATGMs and smart munitions have been widely proliferated.
But my question remains the same to you sir-do you think IA is yet ready (or will be ready in forseeble future) to fight such a moving/maneuvering/fluid war??If my limited knowlege serves me right,uptill now in almost every major conflict India fought,the tactics and strategies of IA have been more reactive rather than being proactive.
Just look at our past wars,IA perfomed extremely well while fighting defencive battles-take for examples battle of Longewalla,Assal uttar,Burki.But during an offensive operation the performance was not what we would expect from such well trained army like the IA,for examle the battle at the Sialkot sector in '65.So i the IA evidently excells in defensive wars,then why not fight the same from well prepared heavily fortified defensive structures rather than facing the enemy in the open?
I couldn't agree more, but that was in the past
Old templates yield predictable results
We live in different times,
The next war will not be from fortified defences only
As of now a paradigm shift in thinking is required at all levels
I am sure our senior commanders are besieged with this issue
For a war of Movement / Maneuver /Fluidity we are not fully prepared as yet
We will fight with our enemies at a place ,time & ground of our choosing in the foreseeable future .
Jai Hind!
 

t_co

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2012
Messages
2,538
Likes
709
I couldn't agree more, but that was in the past
Old templates yield predictable results
We live in different times,
The next war will not be from fortified defences only
As of now a paradigm shift in thinking is required at all levels
I am sure our senior commanders are besieged with this issue
For a war of Movement / Maneuver /Fluidity we are not fully prepared as yet
We will fight with our enemies at a place ,time & ground of our choosing in the foreseeable future .
Jai Hind!
India's political system is not exactly oriented towards fighting offensive wars. There is very, very little incentive for any PM to expend political capital on trying to launch a 'surprise attack'. What's more, given how noisy India's politics are, the chances of India doing what, say, Israel has done is minimal.
 

pkroyal

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2013
Messages
545
Likes
721
India's political system is not exactly oriented towards fighting offensive wars. There is very, very little incentive for any PM to expend political capital on trying to launch a 'surprise attack'. What's more, given how noisy India's politics are, the chances of India doing what, say, Israel has done is minimal.
Good point !
Valid for the present dispensation, future bids good tidings, as India expands its military power & flexes her muscles there will be requirement of one point military advice and need to project our military power in the region to put rogues in their place. Day is not far when distracting flies ( small military incidents by enemy) shall be put down with a fly swatter ( small efficient force) no need to mobilize sledge hammers ( OP- Prakram)
 

Blood+

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2011
Messages
2,775
Likes
4,334
Country flag
@pkroyal sir @Ray sir @Kunal bhai,I just want to ask whatckind of static defensive structures are presently set in place along the LAC??
I'm not asking for any detailed plans,just the kind of defensive structures-a.concrete pill boxes
or
b.sanghars made of stone and mud??

THANX.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

sayareakd

Mod
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
17,734
Likes
18,952
Country flag
I was also thinking of having same kind of structure made out of anti blast proof metals.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top