Mechanization can only occur with a commensurate increase in logistics and repair units. Indian Army has around 345 Light or Mountain Infantry Battalions. Their strength lies in the fact that they are less dependent on logistics and less of a logistic strain. How protected their mobility will need to be depends as a case by case basis on their tasking. The mechanization you speak of can be carried out to following levels based on threat perception and tasking:-
| Level | Capability | Upgrade | Vehicle solution |
|---|
| 1 | Complete movement ability restricted strictly to the rear areas | Full upgrade with unarmoured mobility | Stallion Mk IV and Gypsy |
| 2 | +
Perform limited recce in Tactical Battle Area (TBA) for much larger formation of troops
+
Provide longer range small scale reinforcement and communications in TBA
+
Provide ability to quickly respond to peacetime skirmishes (Very Important) | Partial upgrade with Protected Infantry Mobility Platforms | Mahindra ALSV, Kalyani M4 and TATA QRFV, IPMV (WhAP) in addition to Stallion Mk IV and Gypsy |
| 3 | +
Provide long range large scale reinforcement and communication in TBA
+
Perform limited maneuver in TBA
+
Hold much longer frontline | Full upgrade with Protected Infantry Mobility Platforms | Mahindra ALSV, Kalyani M4 and TATA QRFV, IPMV (WhAP) |
| 4 | +
Perform almost full scale maneuver in TBA
+
Limited ability to penetrate thin enemy defences and invade enemy rear areas when enemy reserves have already been committed elsewhere | Full upgrade with Wheeled APCs (similar to Stryker BCT of US Army) | WhAP family derivatives in configurations of APC, ICV, Mounted Gun, Mortar carrier, etc. (except IPMV) |
| 5 | +
Perform full scale maneuver in TBA in concert with armour
+
Penetration and maneuver in enemy rear areas | Full upgrade with tracked ICV | FICV or BMP-2 |
^REMEMBER each level adds significantly to additional logistic and maintenance burden along with requiring higher CAPEX and OPEX
Almost all of Indian Army's Light and Mountain Infantry Battalions have already achieved Level 1. Recently Army has started deploying Level 2 at least at the Chinese front. The piecemeal acquisition of Kalyani M4, TATA QRFV and IPMV that has us folks on DFI so irritated is just a precursor to a larger order of Protected Infantry Mobility Platforms (we already know about the large order of 1300 Mahindra ALSV vehicles).
Current acquisitions are being used to create company-sized Quick Reaction Forces for Div sized formations. This is basically limited rollout of level 2. This helps provide good recce and skirmish rapid response capability. Long range small scale reinforcement means reserves can be placed further away from the TBA, enhancing their security while also increasing coverage of the reserves. And the same can be used to provide gradual large-scale reinforcement in TBA by moving one company at a time, piecemeal.
So now we know that IA is looking to go at least level 2. What remains to be seen is how large the orders for these Protected Infantry Mobility Platforms will get and based on that we will know if IA plans to go:-
- Level 2 across China front
- Level 2 across China and Pak front
- Level 3
Level 4 seems unlikely for now, but maybe they could go Level 4 for some units against Pak in the plains and deserts while going Level 3 against China?
In applying lessons from the Ukraine war, we must first realize the differences between those battlefields and the battlefields our Army is going to face. For one, we have a much higher troop concentration (both Indian and enemy) on our fronts than those in the Russo-Ukrainian war. Then there are differences in terrain. And a lot more, but these are all topics for the Russo-Ukrainian war thread. So let us first form conclusions there and then bring those lessons here, instead of derailing this thread with OT posts about Russo-Ukrainian war.
(Oh the irony, I am posting about infantry mechanization in Arty thread). Obligatory comment about arty mechanization: IA should order more ATAGS MGS and less ATAGS towed. I mean they have already modified the original Field Arty Rationalization Plan (FARP) by asking for Kalyani's 105mm MGS. Why stop there? When FARP was formulated, India had no indigenous artillery industry offerings, now we have virtually every single type of Arty developed in India. FARP should no longer limit IA's plans.
I remember IA and IAF did do that in Kargil, didn't it? Limited effect on target.
