Search results

The only part missing from your strategy-driven account is that the other side also comes to play. It's not just the Indians who are training to go against PAF. We spent 20 years listening to this one-sided, one system vs the other debate, and when the day came - the other side had no idea what...

If I were to take your words literally, so as to suggest that IAF has taken PAF out on day one. Then one of the red lines stated by Pakistan in its strategic doctrine already spells it out in black and white; if a significant portion of its military has been taken out, Pakistan will go nuclear...

The point was to compare both PL-15 and Meteor with the previous generations of AAMs.

No one is suggesting that the battle won't change shape, with the presence of S400s. But you're referring to it as a silver bullet screening solution, that'd exist b/w IAF and PAF. That it will not be. As for the rest, I am not sure you have any idea about real-world scenarios. Sorry that I...

I am not sure what makes you believe that PAF will not be breaking the target acquisition chain of S400s, and what makes you believe they'd even let the Indians operate the S400s closer to the border, without being threatened? Why do you think Army has been testing their guided missile systems...

145 KM in itself is a fantastic range for an AAM, but It’s not just about the range. It is about the missile to meet those ranges with more probability. What you want is a missile with a higher probability of kill, not just an extended range because the previous generation of missiles too had...

Both sides can play the SOW game, till kingdom come.

IMO, US and China will never go to war, both economies and countries will grind against each other, and come to a settlement 10-15 years down the lane. China doesn’t want to pick up the mantle of being the world’s policeman either. Both countries seem sensible enough to not enter into conflict.

They have not. =)

I cannot go into details of the level of integration there is between both arms, at the same time, I can be appreciative of Army's concerns with end-level integration but it's nothing that cannot be overcome and at the end of the day has more to do with who leads the command than anything else...

Nope, this is Army's own version of Vision. It's very much their own dairh eent ki masjid, has nothing to do with PAF. There's some data sharing that was already happening at various levels. But joining Vision would have meant real C2 level integration, which this is not.

An integrated Air Def command, without the Air Force in it. Just not sure what keeps Army from simply joining Vision. There is no PAF integration here. No pun intended.

At least wait for someone remotely official to comment on it. The above accounts do not even get regular news right.

Lol! You are entirely wrong about PL10! And have no idea what you’re talking about. Twin rack capability had been tested on Block 2 JF-17s.

Please just go to F-16.net and check the no. of ejections done in the 90s and their success rate. You do not need some 'source' to get to the bottom of this entirely untrue claim.

Entirely not true. The seats were functioning just fine. 5/6 pilots who ejected in the 90s were recovered safely.

PAF wants to build weapons under the Azm banner; that's common knowledge by now. Let's see if it bears any fruit. The post I have quoted suggested that we 'tested' a domestic AAM, which I clarified was not the case.

All I can tell you is that we have no active domestic BVR-AAM right now. The entire thing under Azm’s banner was to work on new weapons. I’ll wait until that happens. PS. PAF had tested SD-10 and PL-5EII at the new real time weapons tracking range at Sonmiani. It wasn’t a domestic AAM.

Was not an AAM. But sure, if you say there's a surprise in the waiting, there must be, I guess. =)

Pakistan's next attempt was to be under the Azm banner. Let's see if it produces anything.