What's new

30 LCA-Tejas Single Seater handed over to IAF: HAL

Huffal

SENIOR MEMBER
Dec 27, 2020
3,074
0
4,006
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United Kingdom
Yes you are right that India lost more planes in 1965 war than Pakistan, Let's see why and how?

Air force battles can be classified as:

Air to air combats: when you are in direct dog fight with the enemy where your skills are directly challenged by his. In 1965 Pakistan had far far better planes than us but even then in this aspect India gave them a tough fight and numbers are even. So the fights which show real skill of pilots India came on top as we had poor quality planes vis-à-vis Pakistan.
Ground attacks : this is the attack where a pilot targets enemy radar stations, oil reserves and other important installation and these are defended by state of art missile system. So logic behind me saying this is the more number of sorties flown by pilots for ground attacks the more is the chance that it will be shot down by enemy air defense.
If you clearly check the records India flew 5 times more sorties than Pakistan so the more losses.Pakistan made an air show of it's fleet after the war was completed to show that it had just lost 10–15 aircraft but the reality is many of them were borrowed planes from Saudi and other gulf nations to hide the beating in front of Pakistani people.
Sir.... Your logic is flawed.

The PAF and IAF air to air combat clearly showed the PAF had better pilots. Not aircraft.

Point 1 - F86 F25 sabres were aircraft built in 1949. They were fast and agile for its time. The IAF was mostly fielding the Hawker Hunted F1 which took its first flight in 1951 and formally introduced into service in 1954. The hunter had a more powerful engine making it much faster than the Sabre, it had much better weaponry in the form of 4x30mm guns and was agile. The next jet you had was the Dassault Mystere IV, a jet from 1953. Do i need to say more? Other than the sabre, Pakistan used the F104 starfighter. A fast, but terrible dog fighter. It could not turn, unlike your mach 2 capable mig21 which you had. You had the newer jets, not us. You had the technological advanatge. Not us.

Point 2 - kills in air to air combat. India had approx 15-17 aerial victories (acc to india), Pakistan had over 30 aerial victories. Total losses for both sides

PAF - 19-20
IAF - 79-104

Combat sorties, India claimed 4100 sorties whereas Pakistan claimed 2300 sorties. Why did this happen? Because India had 750+ combat jets whereas Pakistan had 200 combat jets. Logic
 

Windjammer

ELITE MEMBER
Nov 9, 2009
39,719
176
145,468
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom




Sir raptor of East have been integrated with BrahMos ALCM and Astra BVR missiles to make your life miserable again 🤪



Sir raptor of East have been integrated with BrahMos ALCM and Astra BVR missiles to make your life miserable again 🤪
For your sake, let's hope IAF has acquired the ability to take off in formation.
This is not the only incident.

 

avenuepark57

BANNED
Jun 6, 2022
218
-3
323
Country
India
Location
India
Keep dreaming like your forefathers to conquer Pakistan. That dream is best solution of your nation's mental condition.good bye
Remember the word "Converted" 😄

Sir.... Your logic is flawed.

The PAF and IAF air to air combat clearly showed the PAF had better pilots. Not aircraft.

Point 1 - F86 F25 sabres were aircraft built in 1949. They were fast and agile for its time. The IAF was mostly fielding the Hawker Hunted F1 which took its first flight in 1951 and formally introduced into service in 1954. The hunter had a more powerful engine making it much faster than the Sabre, it had much better weaponry in the form of 4x30mm guns and was agile. The next jet you had was the Dassault Mystere IV, a jet from 1953. Do i need to say more? Other than the sabre, Pakistan used the F104 starfighter. A fast, but terrible dog fighter. It could not turn, unlike your mach 2 capable mig21 which you had. You had the newer jets, not us. You had the technological advanatge. Not us.

Point 2 - kills in air to air combat. India had approx 15-17 aerial victories (acc to india), Pakistan had over 30 aerial victories. Total losses for both sides

PAF - 19-20
IAF - 79-104

Combat sorties, India claimed 4100 sorties whereas Pakistan claimed 2300 sorties. Why did this happen? Because India had 750+ combat jets whereas Pakistan had 200 combat jets. Logic
IAF lost 59 out of its inventory of 460 aircraft, while PAF lost 43 of its 186 aircraft during the war. IAF grappled with first-generation subsonic fighters like Vampire and Dassault Toofani as well as second-generation transonic ones like Mystere, Hawker Hunter and Gnats, apart from the bomber-interdictor Canberra. It had just a handful of third-generation supersonic MiG-21s, which were then being acquired from Russia and would remain its mainstay for decades to come.
But Pakistan, which had cosied up to the US by the mid-1950s, was equipped with F-86 Sabre jets, F-104 Starfighters and B-57 Martin Canberras, along with much-better better weapons and radars. Moreover, 13 of IAF’s 28 squadrons had been deployed in the eastern and central sectors to tackle the Chinese threat. There is no doubt that Indian losses in aircraft were higher and Pakistan has tried to use just this figure alone to proclaim its victory…Nothing could be farther from the truth. In the final analysis, despite initial reverses, India was able to successfully thwart Pakistan’s grand design through Operation Gibraltar and Operation Grand Slam to wrest Kashmir in the official 22-day war.
abysmal lack of coordination between IAF and the Army, a controversy that lingers to this day, we admit that “mistakes were made”, as they are made in all wars. There was, for instance, a huge delay in providing air support on September 1 when Pakistan launched Operation Grand Slam to capture Akhnoor to cut off the Kashmir Valley from the rest of India. The Indian Army began demanding air support at 11 am but IAF fighters reached the battle area only at 5.30 pm after “political clearance” was granted.
Absence of joint IAF-Army planning and tardy intelligence as well as poor communication links and radar coverage, scarce resources and the wide theatre of operations, all led to the disjointed conduct of operations by India, which was still recovering from the 1962 debacle with China. But the lessons were learnt, as was witnessed during Pakistan’s crushing defeat in the 1971 war.
 
Last edited:

Huffal

SENIOR MEMBER
Dec 27, 2020
3,074
0
4,006
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United Kingdom
Last edited:

Solidify

FULL MEMBER
Jan 22, 2021
932
0
692
Country
Pakistan
Location
Canada


Sir raptor of East have been integrated with BrahMos ALCM and Astra BVR missiles to make your life miserable again. As for network centric warfare,HAL has already integrated the Software Defined Radios (SDR) supplied by Israeli Rafael company successfully 🤪

Reports news stories from google are origin based from Indian source.
Didn't you here about the Mass Indian Stories leak
Fake news of India mega network busted by EU union

Just google or search on Youtube "Fake news of India mega network busted"


ANI Boosted Huge Global Network of Fake Media Websites​

 

Enigma SIG

BANNED
Feb 20, 2009
6,305
-2
9,263
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Pawain 1000 F-22 le ao, kuch nahi hone wala jani. The only shot you Indians got is buying up Pakistans Parliament wholesale. I'm amazed that you're still talking planes and bombs and soldiers lol.
 

avenuepark57

BANNED
Jun 6, 2022
218
-3
323
Country
India
Location
India
Sir.... Your logic is flawed.

The PAF and IAF air to air combat clearly showed the PAF had better pilots. Not aircraft.

Point 1 - F86 F25 sabres were aircraft built in 1949. They were fast and agile for its time. The IAF was mostly fielding the Hawker Hunted F1 which took its first flight in 1951 and formally introduced into service in 1954. The hunter had a more powerful engine making it much faster than the Sabre, it had much better weaponry in the form of 4x30mm guns and was agile. The next jet you had was the Dassault Mystere IV, a jet from 1953. Do i need to say more? Other than the sabre, Pakistan used the F104 starfighter. A fast, but terrible dog fighter. It could not turn, unlike your mach 2 capable mig21 which you had. You had the newer jets, not us. You had the technological advanatge. Not us.

Point 2 - kills in air to air combat. India had approx 15-17 aerial victories (acc to india), Pakistan had over 30 aerial victories. Total losses for both sides

PAF - 19-20
IAF - 79-104

Combat sorties, India claimed 4100 sorties whereas Pakistan claimed 2300 sorties. Why did this happen? Because India had 750+ combat jets whereas Pakistan had 200 combat jets. Logic
According to the Stockholm Peace Research Institute, between 1954 and 1964, Pakistan received $1.5 billion – an enormous amount in those years – in military assistance from the US. A lot of it comprised high-octane hardware. The Pakistan Army received 460 M-47 and M-48 tanks; the Navy received coastal minesweepers, two CH class destroyers, and a Tench-class submarine, a first of its acquisition by a South Asian country.This was because Pakistan had received a windfall in terms of military assistance for joining US-led pacts – the South East Asian Treaty Organisation and Central Treaty Organisation – aimed at containing Russia.
The first encounter in history between Mach 2 fighters took place on September 11, 1965. A single PAF F-104 encountered two IAF MiG-21s from Halwara in Punjab. The F-104 managed to escape by exiting the combat at tree-top height.

But MiG pilots didn’t spend the rest of the conflict twiddling thumbs. The IAF gained valuable experience while operating the MiG-21 for defensive sorties during the war. The positive feedback from IAF pilots during the war prompted India to place more orders for the fighter jet and also invest heavily in building the MiG-21’s maintenance infrastructure and pilot training programmes.However, unlike most nations who conduct a reality check once the fog of war drifts off, Pakistan continues to stick to its wild claims.

Pakistan says the PAF defeated the IAF. But Pakistani claims are based solely on the number of aircraft lost, which was clearly higher on the Indian side. But war is not just about aircraft destroyed. War is about achieving objectives and air power is one of the several elements of strategy that help a country achieve those objectives.

But the reality is Pakistan’s chief war objective – the capture of Kashmir – failed utterly and it lost the majority of its armour, including 250 American made tanks. In In the air, Pakistan was on the verge of disaster when the cease-fire was called. B.C. Chakravorty writes in 'History of Indo-Pakistan War – 1965' that the IAF lost 61 aircraft versus 43 PAF planes destroyed. But Indian losses were overwhelmingly on the ground. Owing to the inexperience of its base commanders, the IAF lost 36 aircraft – including two of its latest MiG-21s – on the ground. “These aircraft were destroyed because they were not sufficiently dispersed and camouflaged,” writes Air-Vice Marshal Arun Kumar Tiwary in ‘Indian Air Force in Wars’. “Some of them had just landed back after operational sorties and were being refuelled.” (This has a parallel to the opening days of Operation Barbarossa in 1941 when hundreds of Russian aircraft were shot up by the Germans on the ground.On the other hand, in aerial dogfights, the IAF lost just 14 aircraft while shooting down 18 Pakistani jet fighters. According to former Air Commodore Jasjit Singh, Pakistan ended the war having depleted 17 per cent of its front line strength, while India's losses amounted to less than 10 per cent. Moreover, the loss rate had begun to even out, and it has been estimated that another three week's fighting would have seen the Pakistani losses rising to 33 per cent and India's losses totalling 15 per cent.

Retired PAF chief Noor Khan agrees the PAF adopted a defensive strategy because it could not counter the asymmetry with the IAF. At that time, India produced the Ajeet, aka Gnat, the most successful fighter of the war, while Pakistan was totally dependent on imports.Former Air Marshal Govind Chandra Singh Rajwar who was a young officer posted in Kalaikunda, West Bengal, during the war says the PAF lacked the numbers or the will for a war of attrition. He recounts that on September 7, the Sabres made a surprise attack on his base, shooting up two IAF Camberra bombers on the ground. Because the Sabres had missed a large number of aircraft, the IAF correctly guessed they would be back.

Greed clearly won over better judgement and the Sabres returned 30 minutes later, after refuelling. But this time the Indians were airborne and shot down several Sabres. “This second attack was such a disaster for the PAF Sabres they never ventured to attack Kalaikunda again for the remainder of the 1965 war,” says Rajwar.To be sure, the IAF wasn’t exactly doing great in offensive mode. Says Tiwary: “On the Indian side MiG-21s had recently been inducted and were not yet night capable for interception. Night flying of Gnat aircraft was limited due to poor cockpit lighting. The night fighter Vampires were already obsolete.”

Former Indian Army chief K.V. Krishna Rao writes in ‘Prepare or Perish: A Study of National Security’ that poor intelligence led to Indian warplanes attacking 16 Pakistani air bases that did not have any PAF aircraft.

Western bias

“Pakistan Victorious” screamed the headline in The Australian, dated September 14, 1965, followed by this intro: “Pakistani forces have repulsed a massive Indian armoured assault in the greatest tank battle since the African desert campaign of World War II.”The Australians media were, at worse, liars or, at best, parroting a lie. In fact, everything about the report was false. Firstly, the greatest tank battle since World War II was the Battle of Asal Uttar where the Indian Army destroyed Pakistani 70 tanks. India also captured 25 tanks which were abandoned by panic stricken Pakistani soldiers in the face of withering Indian fire.

Secondly, the greatest tank battle of World War II was not in Africa, but in Kursk, Russia, where the Red Army hammered the Germans. This is an instance of the Anglo-American media not wanting to acknowledge Russian military superiority.

The point is that in the West there is a great desire to see Indians – and Russians – fail. It was like that during the Cold War when Pakistan was a loyal ally and India a hated ally of Moscow. Nothing's changed.Lying to fame in 30 seconds

One of the biggest lies peddled by the PAF was the “30 seconds over Sargodha” incident. Mohammed Alam, a PAF squadron leader, claimed he had shot down as many as five IAF Hunter aircraft in only 23 seconds on September 7.

British writer John Fricker was commissioned by the PAF to write a book, in which Fricker eulogised the Pakistanis. His ‘Battle for Pakistan – The Air War of 1965’ made it to the stores only in 1979 because he couldn’t find a publisher. But because he couldn’t narrate his tales soon enough, Fricker wrote an article titled “30 Seconds Over Sargodha” which was published in ‘Aeroplane’ magazine.

Fricker’s article popularised Alam’s claim in the West, where they gleefully accepted such fiction as truth. There was a huge sense of satisfaction in the West at India’s apparent failure.However, highly credible research done by military historian Pushpinder Singh and others has shown that Alam was exaggerating. In an article titled ‘Laying the Sargodha Ghost to Rest’ Singh writes why the PAF backed Alam’s claims: “The people of Pakistan had to be re-assured their air force's super image carefully cultivated over the years, was restored by examples of daring-do and glory.”

Not all Pakistanis, however, are delusional. PAF Air Commodore S. Sajad Haider has demolished Alam’s claims in his exhaustive book ‘Flight of the Falcon: Demolishing Myths of the 1965 War’. Referring to Alam as a "very unprofessional" pilot, Haider says: “It is tactically and mathematically very difficult to resurrect the incident in which all five Hunters in a hard turn were claimed to have been shot down in a 270-degree turn in 23 seconds.”

Alam had said he had blown away all five aircraft and that none of the pilots were able to eject. On this Haider adds: “Logically, since the five were claimed to have been shot down in 23 seconds, then they should all have crashed in close proximity. The conjecture that all the rest could have crashed after 8-9 minutes of flying is superfluous and unworthy of the official PAF history.”

Even the PAF is having trouble swallowing such a blatant lie. According to Bharat Rakshak, “While the PAF’s 1982 history accepts Alam’s story as told by Fricker, the PAF’s 1988 history is surprisingly silent about the names. In fact, the PAF 1988 history does not even list the names of the five IAF pilots.”

This is not to say the Pakistanis were chumps. On the contrary, they were excellent flyers and gunners. However, PAF pilots seemed to have underestimated Indian resolve, and also believed their President Ayub Khan’s claim that one Pakistani was equal to three Indians.Religious fanaticism was also seen rearing its ugly head in the PAF, with many pilots believing they were under divine protection. Alam, for instance, became an Islamic fundamentalist and berated his fellow officers and seniors who consumed alcohol. Not surprisingly, he was sidelined on the amusing allegation that he could not read or write. Post retirement, he lives like a mullah, a virtual recluse. Had he been a real war hero, he would not be treated in so humiliating a manner.
 

Huffal

SENIOR MEMBER
Dec 27, 2020
3,074
0
4,006
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United Kingdom
According to the Stockholm Peace Research Institute, between 1954 and 1964, Pakistan received $1.5 billion – an enormous amount in those years – in military assistance from the US. A lot of it comprised high-octane hardware. The Pakistan Army received 460 M-47 and M-48 tanks; the Navy received coastal minesweepers, two CH class destroyers, and a Tench-class submarine, a first of its acquisition by a South Asian country.This was because Pakistan had received a windfall in terms of military assistance for joining US-led pacts – the South East Asian Treaty Organisation and Central Treaty Organisation – aimed at containing Russia.
The first encounter in history between Mach 2 fighters took place on September 11, 1965. A single PAF F-104 encountered two IAF MiG-21s from Halwara in Punjab. The F-104 managed to escape by exiting the combat at tree-top height.

But MiG pilots didn’t spend the rest of the conflict twiddling thumbs. The IAF gained valuable experience while operating the MiG-21 for defensive sorties during the war. The positive feedback from IAF pilots during the war prompted India to place more orders for the fighter jet and also invest heavily in building the MiG-21’s maintenance infrastructure and pilot training programmes.However, unlike most nations who conduct a reality check once the fog of war drifts off, Pakistan continues to stick to its wild claims.

Pakistan says the PAF defeated the IAF. But Pakistani claims are based solely on the number of aircraft lost, which was clearly higher on the Indian side. But war is not just about aircraft destroyed. War is about achieving objectives and air power is one of the several elements of strategy that help a country achieve those objectives.

But the reality is Pakistan’s chief war objective – the capture of Kashmir – failed utterly and it lost the majority of its armour, including 250 American made tanks. In In the air, Pakistan was on the verge of disaster when the cease-fire was called. B.C. Chakravorty writes in 'History of Indo-Pakistan War – 1965' that the IAF lost 61 aircraft versus 43 PAF planes destroyed. But Indian losses were overwhelmingly on the ground. Owing to the inexperience of its base commanders, the IAF lost 36 aircraft – including two of its latest MiG-21s – on the ground. “These aircraft were destroyed because they were not sufficiently dispersed and camouflaged,” writes Air-Vice Marshal Arun Kumar Tiwary in ‘Indian Air Force in Wars’. “Some of them had just landed back after operational sorties and were being refuelled.” (This has a parallel to the opening days of Operation Barbarossa in 1941 when hundreds of Russian aircraft were shot up by the Germans on the ground.On the other hand, in aerial dogfights, the IAF lost just 14 aircraft while shooting down 18 Pakistani jet fighters. According to former Air Commodore Jasjit Singh, Pakistan ended the war having depleted 17 per cent of its front line strength, while India's losses amounted to less than 10 per cent. Moreover, the loss rate had begun to even out, and it has been estimated that another three week's fighting would have seen the Pakistani losses rising to 33 per cent and India's losses totalling 15 per cent.

Retired PAF chief Noor Khan agrees the PAF adopted a defensive strategy because it could not counter the asymmetry with the IAF. At that time, India produced the Ajeet, aka Gnat, the most successful fighter of the war, while Pakistan was totally dependent on imports.Former Air Marshal Govind Chandra Singh Rajwar who was a young officer posted in Kalaikunda, West Bengal, during the war says the PAF lacked the numbers or the will for a war of attrition. He recounts that on September 7, the Sabres made a surprise attack on his base, shooting up two IAF Camberra bombers on the ground. Because the Sabres had missed a large number of aircraft, the IAF correctly guessed they would be back.

Greed clearly won over better judgement and the Sabres returned 30 minutes later, after refuelling. But this time the Indians were airborne and shot down several Sabres. “This second attack was such a disaster for the PAF Sabres they never ventured to attack Kalaikunda again for the remainder of the 1965 war,” says Rajwar.To be sure, the IAF wasn’t exactly doing great in offensive mode. Says Tiwary: “On the Indian side MiG-21s had recently been inducted and were not yet night capable for interception. Night flying of Gnat aircraft was limited due to poor cockpit lighting. The night fighter Vampires were already obsolete.”

Former Indian Army chief K.V. Krishna Rao writes in ‘Prepare or Perish: A Study of National Security’ that poor intelligence led to Indian warplanes attacking 16 Pakistani air bases that did not have any PAF aircraft.

Western bias

“Pakistan Victorious” screamed the headline in The Australian, dated September 14, 1965, followed by this intro: “Pakistani forces have repulsed a massive Indian armoured assault in the greatest tank battle since the African desert campaign of World War II.”The Australians media were, at worse, liars or, at best, parroting a lie. In fact, everything about the report was false. Firstly, the greatest tank battle since World War II was the Battle of Asal Uttar where the Indian Army destroyed Pakistani 70 tanks. India also captured 25 tanks which were abandoned by panic stricken Pakistani soldiers in the face of withering Indian fire.

Secondly, the greatest tank battle of World War II was not in Africa, but in Kursk, Russia, where the Red Army hammered the Germans. This is an instance of the Anglo-American media not wanting to acknowledge Russian military superiority.

The point is that in the West there is a great desire to see Indians – and Russians – fail. It was like that during the Cold War when Pakistan was a loyal ally and India a hated ally of Moscow. Nothing's changed.Lying to fame in 30 seconds

One of the biggest lies peddled by the PAF was the “30 seconds over Sargodha” incident. Mohammed Alam, a PAF squadron leader, claimed he had shot down as many as five IAF Hunter aircraft in only 23 seconds on September 7.

British writer John Fricker was commissioned by the PAF to write a book, in which Fricker eulogised the Pakistanis. His ‘Battle for Pakistan – The Air War of 1965’ made it to the stores only in 1979 because he couldn’t find a publisher. But because he couldn’t narrate his tales soon enough, Fricker wrote an article titled “30 Seconds Over Sargodha” which was published in ‘Aeroplane’ magazine.

Fricker’s article popularised Alam’s claim in the West, where they gleefully accepted such fiction as truth. There was a huge sense of satisfaction in the West at India’s apparent failure.However, highly credible research done by military historian Pushpinder Singh and others has shown that Alam was exaggerating. In an article titled ‘Laying the Sargodha Ghost to Rest’ Singh writes why the PAF backed Alam’s claims: “The people of Pakistan had to be re-assured their air force's super image carefully cultivated over the years, was restored by examples of daring-do and glory.”

Not all Pakistanis, however, are delusional. PAF Air Commodore S. Sajad Haider has demolished Alam’s claims in his exhaustive book ‘Flight of the Falcon: Demolishing Myths of the 1965 War’. Referring to Alam as a "very unprofessional" pilot, Haider says: “It is tactically and mathematically very difficult to resurrect the incident in which all five Hunters in a hard turn were claimed to have been shot down in a 270-degree turn in 23 seconds.”

Alam had said he had blown away all five aircraft and that none of the pilots were able to eject. On this Haider adds: “Logically, since the five were claimed to have been shot down in 23 seconds, then they should all have crashed in close proximity. The conjecture that all the rest could have crashed after 8-9 minutes of flying is superfluous and unworthy of the official PAF history.”

Even the PAF is having trouble swallowing such a blatant lie. According to Bharat Rakshak, “While the PAF’s 1982 history accepts Alam’s story as told by Fricker, the PAF’s 1988 history is surprisingly silent about the names. In fact, the PAF 1988 history does not even list the names of the five IAF pilots.”

This is not to say the Pakistanis were chumps. On the contrary, they were excellent flyers and gunners. However, PAF pilots seemed to have underestimated Indian resolve, and also believed their President Ayub Khan’s claim that one Pakistani was equal to three Indians.Religious fanaticism was also seen rearing its ugly head in the PAF, with many pilots believing they were under divine protection. Alam, for instance, became an Islamic fundamentalist and berated his fellow officers and seniors who consumed alcohol. Not surprisingly, he was sidelined on the amusing allegation that he could not read or write. Post retirement, he lives like a mullah, a virtual recluse. Had he been a real war hero, he would not be treated in so humiliating a manner.
Another indian article with little to no proof of its claims, only using indian claims to try and make out Pakistan is weaker. Lol


CIA says otherwise mate
 

avenuepark57

BANNED
Jun 6, 2022
218
-3
323
Country
India
Location
India
Another indian article with little to no proof of its claims, only using indian claims to try and make out Pakistan is weaker. Lol


CIA says otherwise mate
Retired American diplomat Dennis Kux: "Although both sides lost heavily in men and material, and neither gained a decisive military advantage, India had the better of the war. Delhi achieved its basic goal of thwarting Pakistan's attempt to seize Kashmir by force. Pakistan gained nothing from a conflict which it had instigated."

English historian John Keay: "The war lasted barely a month. Pakistan main push against India's Jammu-Srinagar road link was repulsed and Indian tanks advanced to within a sight of Lahore. Both sides claimed victory but India had most to celebrate."

American author Stanley Wolpert: "The war ended in what appeared to be a draw when the embargo placed by Washington on US ammunition and replacements for both armies forced cessation of conflict before either side won a clear victory. India, however, was in a position to inflict grave damage to, if not capture, Pakistan's capital of the Punjab when the ceasefire was called, and controlled Kashmir's strategic Uri-Poonch bulge, much to [Pakistani president] Ayub's chagrin."
 

Olympus81

FULL MEMBER
Apr 18, 2022
1,020
2
1,494
Country
Thailand
Location
Thailand
To be honest, the aircraft acquisition by India should not worry PAF.

Operation Swift Retort did a few wonderful things. One least of which was for IAF to go on a spending spree.

IAF has been making smart acquisitions lately and taking steps to cover the gap in network centric warfare.
 

Huffal

SENIOR MEMBER
Dec 27, 2020
3,074
0
4,006
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United Kingdom
Retired American diplomat Dennis Kux: "Although both sides lost heavily in men and material, and neither gained a decisive military advantage, India had the better of the war. Delhi achieved its basic goal of thwarting Pakistan's attempt to seize Kashmir by force. Pakistan gained nothing from a conflict which it had instigated."

English historian John Keay: "The war lasted barely a month. Pakistan main push against India's Jammu-Srinagar road link was repulsed and Indian tanks advanced to within a sight of Lahore. Both sides claimed victory but India had most to celebrate."

American author Stanley Wolpert: "The war ended in what appeared to be a draw when the embargo placed by Washington on US ammunition and replacements for both armies forced cessation of conflict before either side won a clear victory. India, however, was in a position to inflict grave damage to, if not capture, Pakistan's capital of the Punjab when the ceasefire was called, and controlled Kashmir's strategic Uri-Poonch bulge, much to [Pakistani president] Ayub's chagrin."
They are 'historians' that supported Pakistan and India, claiming one side won that war. We have The Australian claim a pak victory, John Fricker claim a pak victory and so on.

I mean what they say means nothing, considering how the CIA gave probably the most unbiased reporting on the war.
Screenshot_20220124_155720.jpg


Also please tell me you understand what finitie military terms mean. Im literally begging you, because if you bring that point up, then you are dumber than i thought you were
 

KaiserX

FULL MEMBER
Apr 6, 2019
1,964
-3
3,538
Country
United States
Location
United States
Yep, in a much better position.

Yes hopefully next time your own air defences dont shoot down your own aircrafts :D

IAF biggest victims have been your poor pilots, your poor officers, and biggest casualty so far for the IAF was your very own first CDS


Other than that in every single war since 1947 IAF has lost 3-4x more jets to the PAF. In the last 2 conflicts (Kargil and 2019) IAF lost 2-3 in each and PAF lost 000 :D

Here are the pics of your poor mig pilots



:D
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom