The biggest surprise was to not shoot their jets we had a lock on.
They will never be able to figure that one out.
And some times we need to accept our flawed execution instead of dancing over it all the time.
Not only creating a question mark on our own claims, but to allow them to regroup and figure out the gaps and fill them and come prepared the next time around.
It's not about escalation (even I was in favor of not escalating initially) but it's about using your advantage while you can to its fullest. Did we?
What's the point of dominating the air for one day when it's going to help with nothing in a war in the future?
There are strategists, and then there are day battle winners.
Should we focus on conquering one peak and losing the whole war?
We jammed their Mirage 2000's? Good, next time they will carry stuff that won't allow us.
We evaded lock on? Next time they will come armed with stuff that not only locks us but is able to shoot us from a greater distance than we can.
I believe whether we shot 2 of them or 10 of them, only two possible outcomes ever existed and Pakistani planners knew this - either: the current course of events would have still panned out, or there would have been total war.
Consider both possible outcomes.
In the event of total war, knocking out 10 of them or even more than 5 would have been a brilliant start to the war and would have given us a great advantage - so I think you're right in that scenario.
However, it was always more likely that things would deescalate. In this scenario, which actually panned out, whether we downed 2 or 10 would make no difference.
India would replace the lost aircraft over time, even upgrading vigorously to Rafales. India would still pursue S400s. India would still carry out its geopolitical sequence of actions as planned.
In this latter scenario, which is the one that played out,there is a school of thought that suggests it was justifiable to NOT display our full capacity and capability against a powerful enemy.
In short, if our planners intended escalation to total war, we should have downed as many of the bstards as possible. However, if we predicted a deescalation, playing our precious cards close to our chest is justifiable - I'm not saying it was necessarily correct - but at least, justifiable and reasoned.
We all now have the benefit of hindsight. It's a wonderful thing.
By hiding our maximum potential, the enemy still doesn't quite know our maximum capability, hence this creates uncertainty in their plans.