India Indian Military ORBAT and Wargaming

[Nilgiri]

I have combined Wargaming into the thread's subject material, after considering opening it separately as well (members involved can still elect for this by telling me and I will do so if they prefer).

This way it saves the amount of clicking involved (to navigate the two threads) and the subjects are intertwined with a lot in their intermediary process (i.e looking into asset force levels in the steps between orbat --> wargaming etc).

I have also changed the title to "military" (though retaining it in army section, since I expect most of it will be army-focused at large).

The thread has been pinned. Enjoy folks.

I will pitch in (past observing) when time permits.

@Joe Shearer @meghdut @Milspec @suryakiran @Paro @Jackdaws @Peace Lover @crixus @Gessler et al.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Now, that we are discussing this in detail, give me time till Sunday.

Be aware that Oscar may start earlier, on the 15th.

 

[suryakiran]

@suryakiran
@Milspec
Do you have WhatsApp numbers that can be used?

yes. sandy has my number. you can ping me.

 

[suryakiran]

ok

We've been overtaken a bit. As of now, everyone other than you has suggested an alternative e-mail id, they have been registered in the GoogleGroup under this e-mail, and we are all ready for action.

If you could just take that extra bit of trouble designing a made-to-order e-mail id, we can put you on and we can start in earnest tomorrow (not the morning, India time, but the afternoon onwards).

read this now. cool.

 

[Joe Shearer]

ok

read this now. cool.

I hope you are in; no responses from you to the circular messages. We are hours away from commencement, and there are some significant tweaks needed because of the clear constraints declared by PanzerKiel.

As of now, we have one person for all coordinated actions on the planned actions, from Poonch down to Bharuch, we have another cooperating on air force matters, and a third looking at the navy.

 

[Nilgiri]

Moved the conversation here from coffee thread. I am working on acquiring some useful information hopefully in time for the next iteration of the wargaming that is currently taking shape.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Gentlemen,

Just a quick update and a reminder.

THIS thread is for the future, when simulation exercises are offered as fun options on DH. The present exercise needs your participation in the GoogleGroup constituted for the purpose. Those who do not respond by 18:00 IST today will be considered to be wishful of observer status only. That is fine, but we must know.

 

[Joe Shearer]

yes. sandy has my number. you can ping me.

Who is Sandy?

 

[Nilgiri]

US Army reference:

1. Mech Infantry ("heavy"):

2. (There is also mech infantry which is "penetration" which I will post later maybe)




3. Infantry division ("light"):

 

[Joe Shearer]

These are excellent examples of US/Russian/Chinese formations divided into Heavy and Light formations (in the Chinese case, into Heavy, Medium and Light) .

The Indian Army is different from these.

The Pakistan Army is also (slightly) different from Indian Army formations. They don't have RAPIDs; they do have LATs and HATs. Those are add-on formations to either Brigades or to Divisions, and have light anti-tank and heavy-anti tank detachments; the HAT units are attached directly to the division, and Panzerkiel will be able to define constitution very easily.

 

[Nilgiri]

These are excellent examples of US/Russian/Chinese formations divided into Heavy and Light formations (in the Chinese case, into Heavy, Medium and Light) .

The Indian Army is different from these.

The Pakistan Army is also (slightly) different from Indian Army formations. They don't have RAPIDs; they do have LATs and HATs. Those are add-on formations to either Brigades or to Divisions, and have light anti-tank and heavy-anti tank detachments; the HAT units are attached directly to the division, and Panzerkiel will be able to define constitution very easily.

Yes but the overall concept is similar in that we have approx 3 (combat oriented) brigades for each division.

Rest of the brigades and battalions are support and CnC elements effectively.

We can adopt this for our wargaming (calculating asset availability etc)....i.e IA division has the 3 combat brigades (of whichever mix....RAPID would be different to INF etc)....and rest of the elements are support (be it artillery, air defence etc) attached as battalions/regiments....either alongside or underneath the main 3.

 

[Nilgiri]

IA total division layout reference:

 

[Joe Shearer]

Yes but the overall concept is similar in that we have approx 3 (combat oriented) brigades for each division.

Rest of the brigades and battalions are support and CnC elements effectively.

We can adopt this for our wargaming (calculating asset availability etc)....i.e IA division has the 3 combat brigades (of whichever mix....RAPID would be different to INF etc)....and rest of the elements are support (be it artillery, air defence etc) attached as battalions/regiments....either alongside or underneath the main 3.

I am not sure that is true.

My impression, subject to being corrected by reference, is that there is a sprinkling of light formations serving as back-up for reconnaissance and surveillance troops, and able to move in and out of situations very quickly, moving in to exploit a weakness, moving out the moment faced with unreasonable odds. Behind, or clustered for a specific attack of movement, meaning, asked to take a target that has to be taken, and being equipped for sustained fighting, are medium formations.
Finally, for the difficult obstacles, those that cannot be circumvented and must be captured, are the heavy formations.
These are not formed up sequentially, but are moved around by battle commanders, who have to decide, given a battlefield situation, where to explore and gauge enemy strength, where to try and break through, and where to put up everything to break through.

Different higher level formations would also have different combinations to play around with; it might be decided that a brigade needs a greater number of lights, because it is on a flank and constantly exploring, or that same brigade might be assigned a greater mix of medium and heavy, because that is precisely the chosen line of attack forward.

 

[Joe Shearer]

IA total division layout reference:

View attachment 42621

Yes.

Apparently the entire exercise of re-assigning these, thus yielding the new format, took place before you joined up.

This is exactly the standard, current ORBAT (with a few tiny mistakes - the naval unit is not shown) that we had in 2022.

 

[Nilgiri]

I am not sure that is true.

My impression, subject to being corrected by reference, is that there is a sprinkling of light formations serving as back-up for reconnaissance and surveillance troops, and able to move in and out of situations very quickly, moving in to exploit a weakness, moving out the moment faced with unreasonable odds. Behind, or clustered for a specific attack of movement, meaning, asked to take a target that has to be taken, and being equipped for sustained fighting, are medium formations.
Finally, for the difficult obstacles, those that cannot be circumvented and must be captured, are the heavy formations.
These are not formed up sequentially, but are moved around by battle commanders, who have to decide, given a battlefield situation, where to explore and gauge enemy strength, where to try and break through, and where to put up everything to break through.

Different higher level formations would also have different combinations to play around with; it might be decided that a brigade needs a greater number of lights, because it is on a flank and constantly exploring, or that same brigade might be assigned a greater mix of medium and heavy, because that is precisely the chosen line of attack forward.

Yup now I understand the issue more clearly. This was very useful for me so far in that regard as I do not know Indian Army details sufficiently, it is learning process for me.

India definitely has long way to catching up on combined arms application to its formations.

Just look at how the US has a helicopter brigade fully inserted in each division type...though of course this needed/needs India to grow its economy and thus budget a great degree more as well.

But even with what we have available, we could have used a lot more sundarjis to follow up and keep refining after the original.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Yup now I understand the issue more clearly. This was very useful for me so far in that regard as I do not know Indian Army details sufficiently, it is learning process for me.

India definitely has long way to catching up on combined arms application to its formations.

Just look at how the US has a helicopter brigade fully inserted in each division type...though of course this needed/needs India to grow its economy and thus budget a great degree more as well.

But even with what we have available, we could have used a lot more sundarjis to follow up and keep refining after the original.

As an interim measure, we can insert an artillery brigade as well as a helicopter battalion of infantry into every hovercraft task force, also into every division in general -

• Infantry division -
  [Defensive] Infantry brigade x 2 + Artillery Brigade + Armoured brigade OR
  [Offensive]Infantry brigade + [Infantry battalion x 2 + Heliborne Infantry battalion] + Artillery Brigade + Armoured Brigade + Reconnaissance and Scouting Battalion
• Mechanised infantry division -
  Mechanised infantry brigade +[Mechanised Infantry battalion x 2 + Heliborne Infantry battalion] + Artillery Brigade + Armoured Brigade
• Armoured division -
  Armoured brigade x 2 + [Mechanised Infantry battalion x 2 + Heliborne Infantry battalion]
• MOST INTERESTING AND TOPICAL
  Desert division -
  Mechanised Infantry brigade (1) + Mechanised Infantry battalion + Heliborne Infantry battalion + Hovercraft Infantry battalion.

Scrapped everything.

Rather than make minor changes, better to re-think functionally.

An example of two units specifically equipped and trained for the high mountains (Gilgit and Baltistan).
In the high mountain sector - Batalik to Dras, excluding Siachen -

• Defensive: Need 24 x 7 vigil, throughout all weathers and all seasons.
  Batalik to Dras - 115 kms; span of control 5 kms; no. of units 23 + 2 reserve
  • Mountain Regiment (Infantry battalion + UAV Squadron (missile-ready, with laser guided missiles) + Light Utility Helicopter Squadron (20, carrying 5 to 8 riflemen, one company, four or five platoons))
  • Mountain Brigade (Mountain Regiment x 5) 25 kms span of control x 5
    + Air Defence SAM Battery
    + Artillery Regiment (155 mm howitzers x 18)
    + Armoured Detachment (10 Light Tanks)
  • Designated Mountain Division (Mountain Brigade x 5) 125 kms span of control
    + Light Tank Regiment (55 Tanks)
• Offensive: Need quick concentration of forces at very short notice, all weather, all seasons.
  • Mountain Regiment Light Infantry (Infantry battalion + UAV Squadron (missile-ready, with laser guided missiles) + Heavy Lift Helicopter Squadron (CH47 Chinook x 12, carrying one platoon - 30 riflemen - x 12, 4 companies with equipment ) )
  • Mountain Brigade (Mountain Regiment Light Infantry x 2)
    + Mountain Regiment Guards Infantry
    • Assault Rifle Platoon
    • Medium Machine Gun Company - 50 MMGs
    • Medium Mortar - 80 mm - Company - 50 MM
    • 40 mm Automatic Grenade Launcher Platoon - 30 GL
    • MANPADs Aerial Defence Company - 100
    • Heavy Machine Gun Company - 50 HMGs
    • Heavy Mortar - 120 mm - Company - 50 HMs
    • MANPADs Anti-Tank Defence Karl Gustave Company - 50
    • Anti-materiel rifle Platoon
      
      Six companies + three platoons
  • + Artillery Regiment (M777 155 mm Howitzer x 18)
    + Air Defence Regiment Schilka x 18

I do not know the capacity of our amphibious vessels, and have not tried to detail those infantry components.

 

[Milspec]

Who is Sandy?

me

 

[Joe Shearer]

me

Ah, so!

 

[Nilgiri]

He brings up several good points:

Taking a slightly different tack on this debate. There has been much focus in recent years on the ability of various systems like drones and sensor-fuzed artillery to destroy tanks. Some have observed that the tank has been declared 'dead' several times, going back as far as 1919. In this video, I attempt to explain why the tank still has a place on the modern battlefield, even if it takes more work and money to keep them alive.

- "Unanswerable superweapons" demonstrably not being a rational concept
- What a tank precisely brings to the table (that nothing else does) that remains extremely relevant
- Combined warfare relevancy for addressing its weaknesses (just like any other component of combined arms)
- Continued RnD iteration that brings these elements together.

and much more

 

[Joe Shearer]

Well, yes, he presents an elegant set of reasons why the tank should not be written off yet.

In very abbreviated form, tanks can be stopped, and they can be stopped in several ways at once - through shaped charges delivered by tank destroyers, through man-portable guided missiles, through air-borne missiles, even through 20th century RPGs, in certain urban warfare cases.

Effectively, the author's argument is - what if an infantry force has neither tank destroyers, nor portable guided missiles, nor attack helicopters or missile-carrying UAVs, nor close air support from fixed wing aircraft and is faced by an oncoming armoured column? Trouble! No ifs, buts, maybes; just trouble.