The presentation says that the ratio of 1:1.7 is likely to progressively dip to 1:1.2 by the end of 2012. It describes this as a "historic low". It also says that the traditional hi-tech advantage is almost equal now with 9.5:11 squadron ratio.
So what does it really mean?
1) IAF squad numbers are shrinking, caused by phasing out of several Mig types and the delays of LCA development.
Nothing new, we all know this and even the defense minister said that the numbers will fall in the next few years, but will increase again with the induction of LCA and MMRCA till the end of the decade.
2) PAF is catching up at the tech level, which is also nothing new and caused not by (at least big mistakes) of IAF, but by PAF itself, which are modernising as well. The whole world is only looking at India and IAF in this regard, because we make the big deals, that get the attention of all big manufacturers, their governments and medias of course, but that doesn't mean PAF is just watching the show!
- BVR capabilities for all F16 and the new JF 17, closes the large gap that they had to IAF in the air superiority field
- Saab 2000 and Y8 AWACS will be available earlier and in higher numbers, to add in countering our fighters, but also in offensive roles
- New PGMs and A2G missiles will pose a bigger threat to our ground forces than before
- The mid air refuellers will add more range, but only in the long term, because they can refuel only very few fighters so far (F16s can't be refuelled with them, JF 17 only in later batches)
So if you compare the technological field, PAF is very capable and comparable to IAF, with the geografical advantage (only 1 border to cover for AWACS) even in front in some areas, which means the article is right on these points.
BUT, it sounds more worse than it really is!
Yes, PAF is catching up in BVR, but only has a few fighters with this capability so far, while IAF has nearly 300 of them and has a clear experience edge over PAF in this field IAF pilots are training with BVR radars, missiles and even with IRST systems for decades, while PAF will induct them now only. Not to forget that we are upgrading and inducting fighters with latest AESA and passive detection features in high numbers as well, which will increase the technological gap again (at least to anything below J10Bs).
Yes, PAF will have an numerical advantange in the AWACS field, but that will be countered by the lack of capabilities of the aircrafts again. Saab 2000 and Y8 can't be refuelled in air, which means they need at least 2 x aircrafts for the same range and endurance that IAF has with 1 x A50 Phalcon. Especially when you take to account that the A50 can carry a 2nd crew for long endurance missions as well.
Yes, the strike capability of their fighters will increase. Especially the new F16 B52s with CFTs will have offer good weapons, avionics and range for such roles. However, the numbers are less and so far the western standoff weapons are restricted (France denial of weapon sales was an important point here, because AASM and Scalp could have been big problems).
To sum it up, PAF is modernising just as IAF and with similar techs, or weapons and we can't deny that they are doing the best with their limited resources.
However, IAF will remain with a clear numerical and experience edge, as well an technological advantage with the addition of 4.5 gen techs in the mid term and could be even increased in the long term with 5th aircrafts like FGFA, AMCA, or AURA UCAVs. PAF will have problems to counter these, be it with their fighters, or AWACS and the procurement of such expensive fighters would only be possible in even lower numbers.
IAF of course won't underestimate PAF and especially offensive actions against PAF will be difficult now, but the real opponent IAF is looking at is in the east and way more capable!
