Worried about venturing into this discussion at the expense of getting slammed by either side of this emotional discussion. But let me venture nevertheless.
PAF/IsAF (Israeli) of the 60s and 70s are very different from the PAF/IAF of the current years.
There is one thing to puff with Indian Air Force. Israeli AirForce is another level altogether.
The daddy of PAF and IsAF is USAF. Yes PK has built and even enhanced its tactics but there is no shame in accepting that the reason why PAF is good is in large measure to do with the USAF having a large impact on our philosophy, training and tactics. The same and to a larger degree hold true for the IsAF.
Second, it is very difficult to ascertain battle scenarios because so much goes into it. In fact these sort of comparisons are pointless, because a battle of two airforces does not occur in a vacuum. In both scenarios air bases are likely to come under massive BM saturation attacks which are likely to erode each others capabilities. The Israelis having a far greater ability to replenish their resources. The entire manufacturing capacity of the US will work for them to assist in such a scenario. One can argue that China would do the same for PK.
Pakistan being a much larger country is perhaps in a better position to withstand such BM and AirBase attacks and could disperse its assets. Israel on the other hand has a much stronger AD integration system which will allow them decent protection against air and BMs. So I would call it a stalemate in the larger scheme.
So then come air assets: Here IsAF has a leg up. Their frontline fighters are far more advanced than ours with stronger first attack options than PAF. Yes tactics will come into play and Pakistan will give them a bloody nose, but will not sustain over time. Again IsAF is a different ball game to IAF.
BTW people should not be surprised that this very scenario has been war gamed by Air CMD and Joint CMD. In all those scenarios ISAF came out on top, to significant loses. This was war gamed in the 80s and since then goes through revisions and updates. No serious PK Mil strategy person will tell you that PAF will reign supreme.
It is this significant pain (of losses) that keeps IsAF at bay, and PK/PAF are comfortable in maintaining a strategy that is in line with this. The belief is that in the case of a full blown out war, PK will not allow for its air force to be totally ground out, without the battle converting first to broader ballistic missile exchange and then potentially Nuclear in the case of a ground invasion. So the losses for any party thinking of doing this to Pakistan is not bearable.
People need to understand the nuclear option has given Pakistan a lot of space. Were it not for this, Pakistan would have already had a hot war by now. And this is where the attack will come. If Pakistan clearly establishes red lines, maintains a secretive program, have strong generals/officers corp non-disruptive chain of custody/decisions, and finally make the enemy realize that there is a strong will to take the final decision, then we are safe. If we lose any of the above and give the enemy a belief that they can interdict this process, then we'll face an attack. This is exactly what the other side is war gaming, and something PK (SPD) is counter war gaming against. That detail is for another day.
