That is more further from the truth than ANYTHING and is a myth propagated by the IAF and in part by the PAF as well.
At NO point did the PAF operate superior machines than the IAF except for a brief time in the 80s.
During the 65 war.. the PAF operated F-86 Sabres as its mainstay.. which first flew in 1947.. and were slowly being replaced by other types in first tier airforces.. the IAF operated the Hunter which was a superior aircraft in MANY aspects including armament ,speed and climb rate except perhaps matched closely by the F-86 in the transonic regime and at slow speed turning by the F-86-F with the slotted flaps. The main bomber was the Canberra which was the same platform as the B-57(except perhaps B-57 crews having greater survivability)... Their fighter bomber was the mystere which was an excellent platform as demonstrated by the Israelis two years later. Only the second tier IAF force(Vampires and Ourogans) were outmatched by the main PAF equipment and as such they were irrelevant for most of the war along with the then very new Mig-21F-13s.
The only standout in 65 was the F-104 which also had more to do with its mystique of Mach 2 than anything else. The aircraft was a good interceptor but quite useless in the prolonged turning fight. .. 12 of these hardly made much difference.
So what did??
Training and leadership.. not in the war as much as before it. the PAF had sent some of its best to the US for training in what were premier combat and leadership tactics and strategy.. .. lessons in pilots that were applied BRILLIANTLY through the leadership of Air Marshall Asghar Khan.. and I cannot stress enough how much his leadership mattered in shaping the PAF even to this day.
That being said, the performance the PAF gave in 65.. when in contrast to its actual plans.. was nothing short of dismal.
What the PAF plans were laid out to be, what they would have achieved if implemented to even 90%.. would have made Operation Moked(israeli operations to take out Arab air forces in 67) look like a copied echo.Yet, the dithering of leadership(c
hange of command to AM Nur Khan who never had the time to settle in)..and rather disjointed and sometimes timid actions by certain officers under him(
due to his inability to grasp operational and administrative functions fully at that time) led to a failure to follow a great war plan and essentially snatched defeat from the jaws of victory for the PAF(Yes folks.. DEFEAT).
What happened to the IAF in 65 was sheer lack of leadership and adequate training/conditioning due to it. The IAF also had fine pilots then.. many of them also having undergone training with the USAF... however, they were disorganized, uncoordinated.. and disconnected. Sometimes the IAF behaved so erratically that the PAF made folly trying to cope with it as an organized force and instead made mistakes because of it. The rest is history.. .. and it is a testament to Samir Chopra and Jagan Mohan to have captured it well balanced in the "Indo-Pak air war of 65".
The India-Pakistan Air War of 1965: P V S Jagan Mohan, Samir Chopra: 9788173046414: Amazon.com: Books
Lets go to 71.. The IAF learnt its lessons.. they also reequipped.. with the Mig-21FL. as its front line fighter., the Su-7..the Marut.. Hunters and Canberras.. by contrast the PAF still soldiered on with its F-86 as the mainstay.. the F-6(again inferior to the IAFs main and only a point defence fighter).. B-57s.. The only equipment with the PAF which was perhaps superior to anything the IAF had was the Mirage-III.
Additionally.. the IAF had many more of its fighters available.. and had learnt its lessons. It performed spectacularly when compared to 65 in its offensive and defensive actions. Its pilots displayed greater resolve, skill and will to put up a fight. Yet, the PAF actually held its own during the war(except the east where really it was just impossible odds).. and actually performed
better than in 65...by actually executing a lot of its wartime tasking accurately. Despite the notion that the IAF grounded the PAF and certain areas were left alone.. the many
historians and commentators seem to ignore that the PAF warplan was to hold back and save itself as much as possible for the planned counter offensive by Pakistan 1 corps under Tikka Khan(
that never came because the Pakistani leadership surrendered before that). At the same time, it had to still provide air defence in critical areas and still help keep Pakistani borders(in the west) safe from Indian offensives. That it did quite well as well. But then again, that came down to leadership at that level. AM Rahim Khan had been learning from his mentors.. and had been at this job for a while...he knew what to do. At the same time.. the PAF was tested much more with the IAF than just 6 years ago.. in 6years the IAF had learnt and improved enough to make PAF defence in many areas untenable. A combination of good intel(BD deserters), planning,numbers and execution was at the core of the IAFs achievements.
So that is these two wars.. in which really.. the IAF outclassed the PAF in equipment and numbers most of the time.. this myth of superior equipment has no footing. Superior training may hold true for 65 in favor of the PAF.. but in 71 the PAF was embargoed and the IAF training had improved by leaps and bounds.
Lets come to the ONLY other time the PAF had superior technology.. this was with the Arrival of the F-16s.. when they did arrive.. truly they were a spaceship when compared to anything the IAF had in the early 80s and they(the IAF) had good reason to fear them. However, the reason to fear them was twofold.. first.. the were deadly air to air fighters.. but second.. as demonstrated by Israel in 81 against Iraq(Osirak raid)..they were also very potent bombers and with their electronic defences could break past the IAFs interceptors and
A.D.G.E(Air Defence Ground Environment of SAMs ,AAA and Radars ) to attack critical facilities such as Trombay. This consternation is what caused the IAF to order M2Ks from France(
as the bombing asset to get past the F-16s) and the Mig-29(
the Interceptor to stop the F-16)...(
although in reality the roles were much more fluid). This was due to another understanding by IAF intelligence that the PAF intended to(as it did) purchase 100 F-16s and perhaps more. That however did not happen.. and when the M2Ks did arrive in the IAF.. the technology gap levelled and then increased as the IAF upgraded its Mig-21s..and had more high tech assets in M2Ks and Mig-29s than the PAF since the mid-90s. So that too is a myth.
The PAF trains.. but so does the IAF.. and to state that one is superior to the other requires intimate knowledge of training regimen and hence is simply conjecture and wishful thinking. Ive already laid out reasons why the IAF may have had lesser well experienced pilots due to the airline factor. But other than that.. today.. both air forces have world class training second only to perhaps the USAF(in terms of technology comprehensiveness).
@
jaibi @
Secur useful for reference perhaps??
.. publishing standards??
@
Armstrong
@
sandy_3126 @
Dillinger @
AUSTERLITZ @
sancho Need a clean-up and claim correction from the opposite side specifically on the Airline dilemma
