Sino-India conflict
- Thread starter President
- Start date
- Status
Image courtesy : bharatrakshak.com .
Neither India nor China has released an official record of this border skirmish but much can be known from news papers and quotes from ex soldiers .
Its interesting to note that both India and China had similar no of casualities though PLA in those areas was much more stronger and had better logistics !!!
As far as I know , PLA fought like a 'people's army' !! They preffered 'wave style' attacks , which in turn caused many casualities .
Neither India nor China has released an official record of this border skirmish but much can be known from news papers and quotes from ex soldiers .
Its interesting to note that both India and China had similar no of casualities though PLA in those areas was much more stronger and had better logistics !!!
As far as I know , PLA fought like a 'people's army' !! They preffered 'wave style' attacks , which in turn caused many casualities .
chinawhite
Banned Idiot
@ Arjun
**-Neither India nor China has released an official record of this border skirmish but much can be known from news papers and quotes from ex soldiers . -**
China did release the number of casulties
**-Its interesting to note that both India and China had similar no of casualities though PLA in those areas was much more stronger and had better logistics !!!-**
A attacking force needs a 3:1 advantage to lauch a attack (the soviets use 6:1). china didn't have three times as much troops on the attack.
**-They carried WW2 vintage Enfield .303 single shot bolt action rifles. While Chinese carried Ak47 and SKS rifles !!!-**
The Enfield is a excellent weapon. better than the AK or SKS in that type of terrain.
The AK is inaccurate at the ranges the Enfield could fire at.
Dont let the age of the weapon fool you.
Regards,
Chinawhite
**-Neither India nor China has released an official record of this border skirmish but much can be known from news papers and quotes from ex soldiers . -**
China did release the number of casulties
**-Its interesting to note that both India and China had similar no of casualities though PLA in those areas was much more stronger and had better logistics !!!-**
A attacking force needs a 3:1 advantage to lauch a attack (the soviets use 6:1). china didn't have three times as much troops on the attack.
**-They carried WW2 vintage Enfield .303 single shot bolt action rifles. While Chinese carried Ak47 and SKS rifles !!!-**
The Enfield is a excellent weapon. better than the AK or SKS in that type of terrain.
The AK is inaccurate at the ranges the Enfield could fire at.
Dont let the age of the weapon fool you.
Regards,
Chinawhite
President
Junior Member
ArjunMk1 said:
i think both government selectively avoid and ignored this unhappy past record. i have to say that was the only conflict between india and china in thousands years neighbourhood history. i hope it wont happen any more in oncoming thousand years. let's enjoy our country construction and economy development in next thousand years.
Though older and of bolt-action design, the Lee Enfield rifles has twice the effective range to AK-47's.
The simple reason why the PRC won the skrimish is that, the PLA was prepared, and the Indian army wasn't. But they were ordered to go fight anyway. Kinda like Rumsfield telling the troops "you go to war with what you have". x_X
"There is also the myth that it was a tactic that was employed widely and successfully by the North Korean and Chinese armies during the Korean War, because to the UN troops, the enemy seemed to be everywhere. However, what the communist forces actually used is more aptly described as inflitration assault, since it is necessary to sneak past the enemy and complete the encirclement before heavy fighting begins."
The simple reason why the PRC won the skrimish is that, the PLA was prepared, and the Indian army wasn't. But they were ordered to go fight anyway. Kinda like Rumsfield telling the troops "you go to war with what you have". x_X
ArjunMk1 said:
"There is also the myth that it was a tactic that was employed widely and successfully by the North Korean and Chinese armies during the Korean War, because to the UN troops, the enemy seemed to be everywhere. However, what the communist forces actually used is more aptly described as inflitration assault, since it is necessary to sneak past the enemy and complete the encirclement before heavy fighting begins."
Last edited:
Indeed Enfield 303 is better than any modern assault rifle in terms of range and accuracy . But a single shot weapon is no match to an automatic weapon with in a few hundred metres !!! Its known that most infantry soldiers combat with in the range of 300 m , the longer distance shootings are done by Snipers and MMG crews !! So in close combat 303 had little chance against AKs !!!
Yes, but Indian troops were dispersed through out the northern border and there were no means of easy transport. You know that supply was air dropped to the Indian troops !!!
(which was scarce and inaccurate). China didn't attack the whole border but it chose several pockets for attacking . As they had better communiation system so they could move troops easily. So at the attacking points they easily massed the troops !!! According to Indians China had more than 1:10 adantage at the attacking points only in manpower. The advantage of artillery and mortar was even greater !!!!
By wave style Indians mean the tactic of attacking an enemy post with a large number of men after initial bombardment ( if you look it from a distange , you feel that a large wave of men is going to engulf you )!!! Its an old WW1 tactic. The soviets utilised it very effectively against the Germans .
Chinese used this against the Japanese and forces loyal to Chian Kaishek .
If you see the movie 'Enemy at gates' wou can see a cruel form of it !!
Two soldiers with just one rifle and a single clip !!!
- Status