IAF strike into Pakistan - A simulation of sorts

[ShoutB]

It would be useless to do air strike. Better is , keep few unis in Pak under watch and if any indian institution is targeted, retaliate the same within hours.

The message will be loud and clear to people of Pakistan that their army and military establishment is culprit and causing problems in the neighbourhood and its after-effect is seen inside their home.

How are they gonna engage a IAF jet in case of a surprise attack????

They cannot, because the strike will happen within hours , multiple places. They cannot guard all entry points.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

It would be useless to do air strike. Better is , keep few unis in Pak under watch and if any indian institution is targeted, retaliate the same within hours.

The message will be loud and clear to people of Pakistan that their army and military establishment is culprit and causing problems in the neighbourhood and its after-effect is seen inside their home.



They cannot, because the strike will happen within hours , multiple places. They cannot guard all entry points.

That's why we have 8 AWACS and a lot of EW/ELIENT aircrafts..

 

[ShoutB]

That's why we have 8 AWACS and a lot of EW/ELIENT aircrafts..

When I say, you cannot guard the all entry points, this means, you cannot reach there on time. Because, now days military jets are installed with technologies for spoofing the signal reflected back and confusing the radar on terrain. More over bellow the line of spectrum ,terrain hugging flight is another way to avoid detection. There are other lot's of ways to avoid detection or spoof the radar which will delay the defensive operation. Hence giving ample of time for the offensive strike to happen.

Your reaction will come as a counter strike on our airbases. This will happen , that's all.

This is why I say, why to waste fuel of IAF and unnecessary warmongering. A loud and flash full message in one of the pak unis will give the message.

 

[fatman17]

remember in a military operation, nothing ever goes according to plan. consider the intangibles.

 

[Stephen Cohen]

IAF will not attack in a piecemeal manner

All three Forces will attack together

Cold start is about JOINTNESS

A single isolated attack can be defeated ; But an attack on Multiple Axes and multiple fronts
cannot be defeated

 

[Khafee]

As mentioned before, I have purposely disadvantaged the PAF. This is the PAF performing at unrealistic disadvantage.

Then exactly what is the point of an unrealistic simulation?

IAF will not attack in a piecemeal manner

All three Forces will attack together

Cold start is about JOINTNESS

A single isolated attack can be defeated ; But an attack on Multiple Axes and multiple fronts
cannot be defeated

Too many variables - no concrete answer, except a disaster for sure.

 

[randomradio]

there were cases where the PAF took out the entire M2K squadron

@Picdelamirand-oil
What do you think?

 

[randomradio]

India would be willing to launch a weapon with a CeP of 15-20M into a highly populated area and have civilian casualties?

That is the requirement for the old Brahmos Block II. Hitting targets in densely populated urban centers. Achieved in 2014.

15-20m for Brahmos? Does that mean you have underestimated most of IAF's other capabilities as well?

Brahmos has achieved low single digit accuracy without using its seeker.
http://www.newindianexpress.com/nat...en-Land-Targets/2014/07/08/article2320848.ece
"The missile system integrated with multiple navigation satellites powered by new software algorithm, without homing device, achieved high level of accuracy and further enhancing the precision capability against hidden land targets including mountainous regions," he said.

 

[Mitro]

They may go and attack Pakistani target but they be able to land back to their base coz it won't be there for them lol

 

[SQ8]

Then exactly what is the point of an unrealistic simulation?

That even at a disadvantage and not with real life tactics; the equipment that the PAF has still gives a good account of itself.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

@Picdelamirand-oil
What do you think?

It depends on the tactics and strategy. Such a result proves wrong tactics in the simulation.

 

[randomradio]

That even at a disadvantage and not with real life tactics; the equipment that the PAF has still gives a good account of itself.

You just gave IAF more numbers with inferior and underestimated equipment. How is that an advantage to the IAF?

 

[untitled]

Nice effort @Oscar

Thanks

 

[SQ8]

You just gave IAF more numbers with inferior and underestimated equipment. How is that an advantage to the IAF?

ARe you daft? Or are you suggesting that having the MKI, UPG, M2K is inferior?
EACH of these jets has BETTER equipment simulated. The MKI has TWICE the radar power and range simulated as compared to the F-16.
F-16:
[DetectSystem]
RadarName=AN/APG-68(V)9
RadarFamilyName=F-16
RadarType=AIR_INTERCEPT
RangeUnit=NM
RadarAzimuthLimit=60
RadarElevationLimit=60
RadarSearchTime=1.0
RadarSearchRange=112
RadarSearchStrength=110
RadarTrackTime=2.0
RadarTrackRange=89
RadarTrackStrength=110
RadarSearchFreq=9.8
RadarTrackFreq=9.8
RadarMissileGuidanceFreq=6.0
RadarSearchCW=FALSE
RadarTrackCW=FALSE
RadarMissileGuidanceCW=TRUE
DopplerLookdown=TRUE
VisualBlindArc=
VisualRestrictedArc=6
MaxVisibleDistance=6600.0
HasRWR=TRUE
RWRMinFreq=0.5
RWRMaxFreq=20.0
RWRCanDetectCW=TRUE
DataLink=TRUE
NetworkType=LINK17

MKI:
[DetectSystem]
RadarName=Pero N011-1-01M
RadarFamilyName=Bars
RadarType=AIR_INTERCEPT
RangeUnit=KM
RadarAzimuthLimit=70
RadarElevationLimit=60
RadarSearchTime=1.0
RadarSearchRange=210
RadarSearchStrength=180
RadarTrackTime=2.0
RadarTrackRange=165
RadarTrackStrength=180
RadarSearchFreq=10.5
RadarTrackFreq=10.5
RadarMissileGuidanceFreq=10.5
RadarSearchCW=FALSE
RadarTrackCW=FALSE
RadarMissileGuidanceCW=TRUE
DopplerLookdown=TRUE
VisualBlindArc=5,6,7
VisualRestrictedArc=4L,8L
MaxVisibleDistance=9600.0
RCSModifier=0.6
HasRWR=TRUE
RWRMinFreq=0.5
RWRMaxFreq=20.0
RWRCanDetectCW=TRUE
DataLink=TRUE
NetworkType=AFNET


Please stop being the whiny internet Indian for once in your life; its difficult and in genetics.. but spare us from commenting if you cannot.

 

[ghazi768]

Very nice work, you have mentioned radar values etc for F-16 and Su030, have you also set parameters for AAMs? NEZ values and PKs based on speeds of aircraft at encounters, also strategies such as approach in frontal quarter or side along engagement, if you have please post them as well. Are AWACs simulated in this scenario.

I think strategy-wise, it would have been better for IAF to just send 4 M2Ks in a lo-lo bombing run as target will be near to border this will result in less chances of detection if AWACs are not involved. Using GPS base PGMs is better than LGBs for faster turn around and more accuracy unless jammers are indicated in the area.

Also PAF response is simulated as very mediocre, with 4 Su-30s approaching at high altitude and 6 other Su-30s probably at medium altitude, even if AWACs are not involved with heightened alert state many more assets will get scrambled. Unless you are simulating a strategic or tactical surprise by IAF or lower readiness or availability states for PAF, number of fighters on both sides should be almost equal in numbers.

I have no idea how you simulation calculated kills also you have not provided any information about altitudes of defending fighters. I am assuming F-16s and JF-17s approached in high altitude to medium altitude while F7s approached in low altitude. In this case, if simulation is not taking into account any special tactics by IAF than all of low to medium altitude IAF fighters will be at disadvantage in BVR fight. BVR ranges at lower altitudes is significantly lower than higher altitude also they will be further lower for fighters at lower altitude as they at best will be able to get near to supersonic speeds. This will give PAF fighters at higher altitude with good look down ranges a significant advantage in ranges.