Air Force Question Thread

[arsalan shafique]

according to the data i have the mirage 3 & F 7 are faster in speed than F 16 but turning rate of F 16 & its light weigth body gives it high muneuvers & PAF also mirages are old fighters without having any war experiences during the wars between IAF & PAF, as PAF only used its F 16s.

 

[tamir]

according to the data i have the mirage 3 & F 7 are faster in speed than F 16 but turning rate of F 16 & its light weigth body gives it high muneuvers & PAF also mirages are old fighters without having any war experiences during the wars between IAF & PAF, as PAF only used its F 16s.

F-16s have not been used against the Indians. It is those "old" fighters that you are talking about that have seen action with India.

 

[syedmobeenali]

syedmobeenali;sir
i am not a concerned person on the issue!
but i guss, Mirage rose III plus F-7 PGS were the best for me, i guss its not just a plane, when we are talking about PAF!
but its more about combinations, maybe many commrades dissagree with me , & there answer goes to F-16s, but Mirage & F-7s are the most flyed combo , of PAF.
SPECIALLY Mirage rose III ,plus 5 were the most oldest airwarriors , defending pakistan's aerospace!

according to your opinion Mirages & f-7 are best in Paf.We haven't got any information about our mirage that what's the avionics are installed in it,The radar (grifo M) range & specs.Are they bvr capable if it so which bvr we have for it.Is it from france or from others.

 

[shehbazi2001]

Independent Power Supply for Air Defence Command and Air Bases

Attack on power generation units or power stations or even dams or grid stations is a very likely scenario in a war. It has happened in almost all wars from the famous RAF "DAM BUSTER" raids on Germany of WW2 to attack on Iraqi power stations in first Gulf war.

The question that comes to mind in this scenario is "Are our air defence command centers dependent on external (WAPDA) electric power supply?" or they have their own power supply units or they have backup generators only.

The same applies to vital components of air bases like power supplies to aircraft shelters and technical/repair units of air base. Do they have independent/backup electric power generation system?

If there is no redundant/backup power supply system, our operations may come to a virtual halt in the event of power disconnection.

 

[BATMAN]

Independent Power Supply for Air Defence Command and Air Bases

Attack on power generation units or power stations or even damns or grid stations is a very likely scenario in a war. It has happened in almost all wars from the famous RAF "DAM BUSTER" raids on Germany of WW2 to attack on Iraqi power stations in first Gulf war.

The question that comes to mind in this scenario is "Are our air defence command centers dependent on external (WAPDA) electric power supply?" or they have their own power supply units or they have backup generators only.

The same applies to vital components of air bases like power supplies to aircraft shelters and technical/repair units of air base. Do they have independent/backup electric power generation system?

If there is no redundant/backup power supply system, our operations may come to a virtual halt in the event of power disconnection.

Well if that's the case than all defence forces of Pakistan, especially AF should switch to instruments, communications systems and auxilaries operated by DC supply and buy UPS for those devices which cannot be converted to DC.
Backup generators should be used to supply the battries of DC supply system.
This not only offer redundancy in supply system but also ensure uninterupted supply in simplified and reliable form.
In this way solar pannels can also be integrated in such system.

 

[PAFAce]

In this way solar pannels can also be integrated in such system.

Solar panels are very inefficient in the conversion of solar energy into electrical. Also, solar energy is available for fixed durations in a day, if at all, depending on the season, location, altitute, weather etc. The best option in these cases is uninterruptible power supply (UPS) and backup generators. In nuclear power plants, UPS are used for the most valuable resources, and devices connected to UPS are usually Level I failure devices (required for complete core shutdown). Also, when most power plants fail, the plant becomes a consumer of electricity from the grid, which is being supplied by other generating stations.

In the long run, a distributed generation grid throughout the country is our best bet. The enemy will not be able to attack every single power generating station (throughout the country) as they are classified as Vurlerable Points and, therefore, are defended by the forces. The more distribution we have, the more energy we will be able to produce and the less vulnerable our forces will be to complete power shutdown. The development of more generating stations will also help the country in peace time, as we are currently facing an energy crisis.

Lastly, I don't see why converting to DC will make a difference. If anything, it is more difficult to transfer DC over larger distances. However, if necessary, that DC conversion can be accomplished indigenously using simple rectifier circuits or off the shelf converters, so modification of the equipment isn't really necessary. Maybe I midunderstood your point, so please forgive me if I have gone off topic.

 

[shehbazi2001]

In the Indo-Pak wars, I dont know if any side attacked the power generation units but this scenario cant be discounted in future especially that now we have nuclear power stations too.

These nuclear power stations, if attacked in operational or hot conditions, may cause immense damage to population and thus one must think many times before embarking on such a mission because even Israel attacked the Iraqi nuclear plant before its getting hot.

But hydroelectric/thermal Power stations have no such problems and then we never know the intentions of aggressor or enemy. Allies wanted to completely cripple down the Iraqi military machine and thus they bombed the power stations.

Although we follow an Indo-reactive and Indo-centric defence policy, our defence mechanism should be optimised for countering just any aggressor.

Thus we may induct weapon systems optimised for countering Indian aggression but our defence infrastructure should be shaped to counter any aggressor coming from anywhere and ensuring uninterrupted power supply to air defence centres, command and control centres and vital components of air bases is part of this.

 

[IceCold]

In the Indo-Pak wars, I dont know if any side attacked the power generation units but this scenario cant be discounted in future especially that now we have nuclear power stations too.

These nuclear power stations, if attacked in operational or hot conditions, may cause immense damage to population and thus one must think many times before embarking on such a mission because even Israel attacked the Iraqi nuclear plant before its getting hot.

But hydroelectric/thermal Power stations have no such problems and then we never know the intentions of aggressor or enemy. Allies wanted to completely cripple down the Iraqi military machine and thus they bombed the power stations.

Although we follow an Indo-reactive and Indo-centric defence policy, our defence mechanism should be optimised for countering just any aggressor.

Thus we may induct weapon systems optimised for countering Indian aggression but our defence infrastructure should be shaped to counter any aggressor coming from anywhere and ensuring uninterrupted power supply to air defence centres, command and control centres and vital components of air bases is part of this.

So one cannot predict what enemy might strike on, however for the highlighted part, if a nuclear power plant that is hot is attacked if i understand your post correctly means will be something like a nuclear bomb because of the nuclear radiation and the amount of harm that it will bring about to almost anything population, plants, water atmosphere, so what will be our response?
Will it be a nuclear response or perhaps something on the same lines meaning attacking Indian nuclear installations?

 

[shehbazi2001]

So one cannot predict what enemy might strike on, however for the highlighted part, if a nuclear power plant that is hot is attacked if i understand your post correctly means will be something like a nuclear bomb because of the nuclear radiation and the amount of harm that it will bring about to almost anything population, plants, water atmosphere, so what will be our response?
Will it be a nuclear response or perhaps something on the same lines meaning attacking Indian nuclear installations?

The attack on a hot nuclear power plant may resemble a nuclear strike at the maxima and may resemble a nuclear accident at the minima.

The nuclear accidents like Chernobyl in Soviet Union and Three Mile Island in USA caused tremendous release of radioactivity, which has severe long lasting health problems like cancer etc. If the attack causes a massive explosion, then we can expect greater instantaneous losses of life.

For response, I think a tit for tat response shall fit in.

 

[Patriot]

As far as i know Pakistan and India signed treaty to not attack their nuclear reactors during war time and also shared the locations of their nuclear reactors!

 

[PAFAce]

But hydroelectric/thermal Power stations have no such problems and then we never know the intentions of aggressor or enemy.

In case of war, nuclear powerplants will be used for minimum energy and we will be able to initiate critical shutdown immediately upon news of an enemy raid. If an attack takes place after proper shutdown, the effects may be quite minimum.

Hydroelectric plants are just as dangerous when they are not running because a damaged dam will almost cerainly break immediately, giving little time to those downstream to evacuate. Many lives will be lost. I was born in Wah Cantt, and my father always told me that one of the biggest threats facing the town in war was the dam not too far awar.

Therefore, once again I conclude that the answer to Pakistan's peacetime and wartime energy issues lies in a distributed and well planned energy grid making use of as many natural/sustainable resources as possible. These include hydro, nuclear, and even geothermal (vast coastline of Sindh and Balochistan). I have been planning to write a paper onthis very subject, but have not found the time.

 

[zavis2003]

Durin war all should prepare themselves for the bad things and nothing gonna prevent from NUKES uses, coz nuclear strikes would be cariied out on the basis of intellegence
and if india or pak got rong intelligence that we r under attack of nukes in min than u knows what would the authoritatives decide. Simply atomic war
It is much easily to convert a conventional war btween the two
coz no one trust on other
both found each other first enemy
there are nosoft corner in our heart for indians atleast not in my heart
and same is the case with indians

 

[mean_bird]

As far as i know Pakistan and India signed treaty to not attack their nuclear reactors during war time and also shared the locations of their nuclear reactors!

Yes, but when the going gets tough little can be said about any such agreement. If there is always a possibility of nuking the other country, what makes you think the reactors would be spared.

Such treaty will only hold in a "light combat" where no major loss is suffered by either opponent. Also remember, list of nuclear reactors shared are 'civilian'.

 

[BATMAN]

Solar panels are very inefficient in the conversion of solar energy into electrical.

So by not making use of solar energy we are not improving any efficiency.
I said they can be incorporated to increase independence.

Also, solar energy is available for fixed durations in a day, if at all, depending on the season, location, altitute, weather etc.

I'm sorry that I used the word solar panels, I should have said solar electric system, which includes battery banks which continue to supply electricity during night as well. In Pakistan we always have enough light during the day to keep the battries fully charged.

The best option in these cases is uninterruptible power supply (UPS) and backup generators.

No, better option is to use backup generators and large battery banks as a source of DC Supply instead of using AC supply UPS.
There are lot of complications associated with DC to AC conversion.
One is that you not only need to oversize ur generators because of harmonics but insulation also tends to fail more rapidly. Complications increase as you increase power.
DC systems will be 10 times more reliable. There are more practical, technical and ecnomical reasons.

In nuclear power plants, UPS are used for the most valuable resources, and devices connected to UPS are usually Level I failure devices (required for complete core shutdown).

Battery systems will also be Uninterupted Power Supply source.
Why they use UPS is because they have AC machines but I said convert your machines to DC or buy DC operated machines. DC lights (LED) consume 10 times less energy than present day energy saver lights.
In my house 2 watt DC LED light give me same as 11 watt energy saver.

Also, when most power plants fail, the plant becomes a consumer of electricity from the grid, which is being supplied by other generating stations.

Load of auxilaries depend on type of power plant.
Normally power plants have blackout generators to run their auxilaries.
When main generators fail they are disconnected from grid in no time.

In the long run, a distributed generation grid throughout the country is our best bet.

The enemy will not be able to attack every single power generating station (throughout the country) as they are classified as Vurlerable Points and, therefore, are defended by the forces. The more distribution we have, the more energy we will be able to produce and the less vulnerable our forces will be to complete power shutdown. The development of more generating stations will also help the country in peace time, as we are currently facing an energy crisis.

Are you reffering to ring type distribution network system?
But we need to have power plants distributed across the state, hydal power plants transmit energy to longer distances and hence any damge can result in major blackout.
We definately need more power generation but I'm deadly agaist oil fired power plants where as we have natural dams and water flowing in rivers.
Than comes coal and oil should be the last solution.

Lastly, I don't see why converting to DC will make a difference. If anything, it is more difficult to transfer DC over larger distances.

It depends how long you need to transmitt. If you are talking of couple of hundred than it is no problem infect the size of conductor is reduced.
But we are talking here for Airbase as an island situation whose radius will be within 50 km.

However, if necessary, that DC conversion can be accomplished indigenously using simple rectifier circuits or off the shelf converters, so modification of the equipment isn't really necessary. Maybe I midunderstood your point, so please forgive me if I have gone off topic.

This is exactly my point the DC conversion is much simpler and more reliable solution for the instruments and auxilaries of military bases.
UPS should be used where DC operated equipment isnot available.

 

[PAFAce]

So by not making use of solar energy we are not improving any efficiency.
I said they can be incorporated to increase independence.

I'm sorry that I used the word solar panels, I should have said solar electric system, which includes battery banks which continue to supply electricity during night as well. In Pakistan we always have enough light during the day to keep the battries fully charged.

No, better option is to use backup generators and large battery banks as a source of DC Supply instead of using AC supply UPS.
There are lot of complications associated with DC to AC conversion.
One is that you not only need to oversize ur generators because of harmonics but insulation also tends to fail more rapidly. Complications increase as you increase power.
DC systems will be 10 times more reliable. There are more practical, technical and ecnomical reasons.

Battery systems will also be Uninterupted Power Supply source.
Why they use UPS is because they have AC machines but I said convert your machines to DC or buy DC operated machines. DC lights (LED) consume 10 times less energy than present day energy saver lights.
In my house 2 watt DC LED light give me same as 11 watt energy saver.
Load of auxilaries depend on type of power plant.
Normally power plants have blackout generators to run their auxilaries.
When main generators fail they are disconnected from grid in no time.

Are you reffering to ring type distribution network system?
But we need to have power plants distributed across the state, hydal power plants transmit energy to longer distances and hence any damge can result in major blackout.
We definately need more power generation but I'm deadly agaist oil fired power plants where as we have natural dams and water flowing in rivers.
Than comes coal and oil should be the last solution.

It depends how long you need to transmitt. If you are talking of couple of hundred than it is no problem infect the size of conductor is reduced.
But we are talking here for Airbase as an island situation whose radius will be within 50 km.

This is exactly my point the DC conversion is much simpler and more reliable solution for the instruments and auxilaries of military bases.
UPS should be used where DC operated equipment isnot available.

Thanks for the detailed explanation. I had misunderstood your original point. I, too, am against coal-fired or oil-fired power plants, mainly because they are the cause of our current energy crisis and because we will never be completely self-sufficient until we stop buyng oil and coal. Pakistan has vast resources in hydro, and we have a long coastline off Sindh and Balochistan which can be used to harness geothermal energy. The mountainous regions can also be home to large-scale wind-power plants. Also, if we distribute generation over a larger area and produce more energy than we consume, we could not only avoid large-scale blackouts in case of an attack but could also store some of that energy for critical use. However, as you may know, there is no efficient way of storing lots of excess energy today and every type of power generation has its drawbacks. Hydro distrupts the flow of water and damages local ecosystems, geothermal is expensive to build and also has other issues etc.