Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Armed Forces of the World Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: If China attacks India
coolboyjay    1/24/2005 8:37:46 AM
What do u think? Would the Indian army be able to hold off the chinese in a conventional war? Who do u think would be on the Chinese and indian "sides"?
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
mithradates       1/5/2007 5:31:33 PM
Replace Brigade with Regiment....PLA regiment level and up.
 
Quote    Reply

Herc the Merc    Mithradates   1/5/2007 5:45:55 PM
  The level of communications  is still largely with analog radios.
Come on now Mithradate- India bought 500million $s worth of radio equipment from Israel(Tadiran I think)--very top notch stuff the Islamic militants could not pick up. It has all the computers and communications needed. China has no chance of winning.
Say it attempted to take Arunachal Pradesh even the civilians there do not like Chinese-u needn't worry about the army only when every man woman and child attacks u.
 
Quote    Reply

Herc the Merc    Read this to Mith   1/5/2007 5:51:25 PM
>>
 
U can be assured IAF will knock out any Chinese ground targets with precision.
 
Quote    Reply

mithradates       1/5/2007 5:57:31 PM
I don't think you clearly understand what I mean by system level integration.  My comments on the radios illustrate a very fundemental difference in the way the PLA and the IA conducts warfare nowadays.

For the IA in training and in real warfare, the coordination between say an infantry unit and an artillery unit essentially involves an infantrymen physically telling an artillery crew an enemy position to shell.  So effectively the arty crew is blind to the actions of the unit that they are a part of, except when told by radio in a very manual and error-prone way.

For the PLA, the arty crew "sees" what the rest of their entire organic unit sees via the C4I backbone.  Meaning, there usually isn't some person telling an arty crew which positions to shell, the target positions are automatically relayed and prioritized automatically to the arty crew by the sensors on vehicles like Tanks, APCs, Combat Helicoptors, UAVs, Laser Designators...and prioritized along with way by battle field command and control nodes.


This is just a very simple example of these C4I and organizational differences between the 2 armies.
 
Quote    Reply

Herc the Merc       1/5/2007 5:59:55 PM

I don't think you clearly understand what I mean by system level integration.  My comments on the radios illustrate a very fundemental difference in the way the PLA and the IA conducts warfare nowadays.

For the IA in training and in real warfare, the coordination between say an infantry unit and an artillery unit essentially involves an infantrymen physically telling an artillery crew an enemy position to shell.  So effectively the arty crew is blind to the actions of the unit that they are a part of, except when told by radio in a very manual and error-prone way.

For the PLA, the arty crew "sees" what the rest of their entire organic unit sees via the C4I backbone.  Meaning, there usually isn't some person telling an arty crew which positions to shell, the target positions are automatically relayed and prioritized automatically to the arty crew by the sensors on vehicles like Tanks, APCs, Combat Helicoptors, UAVs, Laser Designators...and prioritized along with way by battle field command and control nodes.


This is just a very simple example of these C4I and organizational differences between the 2 armies.




I think in the Himalayas I wouldn't want a computer running the war. Prefer Human interface.
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14



 Latest
 News 		  Most
 Read 		  Most
 Commented		  Hot
 Topics