အနာဂါတ္ တပ္မေတာ္ဆိုင္ရာ မိမိတို႔အျမင္ေလးမ်ား.. ၁

ေဆြးေႏြးမႈ အပိုင္း (၁)

Zeus said...

There is more important thing than artillery. We don't have guided anti tank missle system yet. It would be better to get a hand on one, so army can have better anti armor or anti bunker capabilities. Pherhaps Russian 9M131 Metis-M or 9M133 Kornet or Israeli spike missile systems will be good.

November 19, 2011 4:21 AM

Smiley said...

Yes, I strongly agree with you. Our current anti armor or anti bunker capabilities in infantry is limited to MA-10 (RPG-7). This is clearly inadequate. I wish we could have MA-14 (Carl Gustav 84mm) at rifle company level and ATGM at battalion heavy weapons company. If this is still impossible due to finicial constraints, ATGM at Tatical Operation Command level would be fine. MA-10 is good for COIN operations, but what if we have to face a heavily armored foe such as PLA or USArmy. (MA-14 would be effective aganist Thailand's M-60 or Bangladash's Type -59)

November 20, 2011 3:56 AM

Zeus said...

Carl Guldstav is an legendary weapon and is adopted by major armed forces, except M1 and M2 versions are a bit heavy to react swiftly. I agree that we should deploy ATGM to TOC levels. But. not only we have to consider defence budget allocations, but also we need to watchout for the technical knowledge and education of our individual soldiers. There is one Russian LAW similar to M-72 which is known as RPG 29. It is compact, relatively lighter and could be assigned down to platoon level.

November 20, 2011 4:22 AM

Smiley said...

This would be a very long comment. So I would like to pre-apologize to blogger ko MM and all other readers especially as my Myanmar typing is so painfully slow that I've to type in English. I am no professional and please view my opinions as an ameatur but a patriotic Myanmar's good-intentioned but may be idiotic ideas.

There are so many defecienies in our current Myanmar Armed Forces. We, as Myanmar , would like to view our forces as the best in the whole big world. But alas we have to find a compromise between the most we can afford and the least we need to defend Myanmar.
Currently , our Tatmadaw is engaged in a series of bitter counter insurgency operations. But if we take a closer look, it's easy to know that it's not (NOT) what our Tatmadaw is for. It must be able to defend Myanmar aganist all possible future aggressors. Who could be that aggressor is a political question rather than a military one. So, I would not discuss it here.
To be able to involve in a nation vs nation conflict , we need substantial changes in our current force structure.
Our current structure is based around RMC (regional military command တိုင္းစစ္ဌာနခ်ဳပ္) with LIDs (light infantry divisions ေျချမန္တပ္မ) as strategic reserve which is especially suited for our current COIN operations but not if we have to face a foreign aggression.
To that mission we have to use a flexible force structure ready for 'defense' as well as 'strike' operations. So , my idea is to use Corps-Division-Brigade structure instead of current BSO-RMC-LID/Armored Operations/ Artillery Operations Command/ Regional Operations Command ( ေဒသကြပ္ကဲေရးႏွင့္ စစ္ဆင္ေရး) / Military Operations Command ( စစ္ဆင္ေရး ကြပ္ကဲမွဳ ဌာနခ်ဳပ္) - Tactical Operations Command structure. (You can see the simplicity the reform will bring)

November 20, 2011 4:37 AM

Smiley said...

Corps (တပ္မၾကီး)
Corps will be the largest field units of Myanmar Army. They will be headquarters units to which divisions or brigades can be attached. There will be six corps as follows--
I Corps (Upper Myanmar - Kachin, Sagaing, Mandalay, Magway, Chin)
II Corps (Lower Myanmar - Yagon, Ayerwaddy, Rakhine, Bago)
III Corps (Eastern Myanmar - Shan and Kayar)
IV Corps (South eastern Myanmar - Mon, Kayin and Thanintharyi)
V Corps (Armored/ Heavy Reserve)
VI Corps (Airborne/ Light Reserve)
The corps HQ can be form from current Bureau of Operations စစ္ဆင္ေရးအထူးအဖြဲ႔ with a Lt Gen as commander as now. The corps HQ will but need a larger staff. Like BSOs , the corps will be a deployable headquarters but moreover unlike the BSOs, the corps will be responsible for its own training with organic training brigade.
N.B I do think Yangon and Naypyidaw , current area of responsibility of BSO 5 and 6 respectable need special attention but I don't think it should be corps size.

November 20, 2011 4:38 AM

Smiley said...

Divisions (တပ္မ)
ိ္ိိDivision will also be deployable headquarters units. Each division will have
1.a main division headquarters at its base town
2.a field headquarters which would be deployed as needed
3.two to three tactical operation commands to oversee attached brigades
4.liaison units
5.division band
There will be 11 division headquarters
8 x infantry division (two each for I-IV corps)
2 x armored division (for V corps)
1 x airborne division (for VI corps) [ I think it is impractical to train two airborne division and impossible to obtain sufficient number of transport aircrafts ]
We could transform current RMC into division headquarters with but a little difficulties. There would be Maj Gen as division commander. The remaining two RMC will be rerolled as capital defense brigade for Yangon and Naypyidaw ( Yagon RMC and Naypyidaw RMC of course!)

November 20, 2011 4:50 AM