MiGs over Kargil: How the Fulcrum buzzed the Falcons

[SQ8]

That wasn't my question. Read post number 71 yet again. The question is not about western v/s soviet or white v/s Asian, as you are desperately trying to make it to be. It is about taking your statement to its logical conclusion. I will ask it for the last time, and if you still try to shift the discussion away to some flame bait about god's race or America, I won't respond.

Here it is again:

You said that only brave people would dare to face F-16s in mig 29s. And yet the topic of the thread is about how pilots in F-16s had to flee from mig 29s. Logically, assuming your premise is true, what conclusion can we draw about the pilots in the F-16s?

what are you trying to accuse them of .. please.. Im expecting some creative anti-pakistani BS..

 

[janon]

what are you trying to accuse them of .. please.. Im expecting some creative anti-pakistani BS..

If you are expecting anti Pakistani BS from me, you weren't paying attention to the context under which I asked him that question.

I'm not accusing them of anything at all. I was asking that poster to follow through with his line of reasoning. I don't agree with his premise, so I wouldn't agree with the conclusion. That is why I wanted HIM to say it, instead of me saying it. He refused to follow his premise to the logical conclusion, and brought in BS about god's race and such BS, to escape responsibility for his statement.

If anybody is accusing the Pakistani pilots, it was that poster. He didn't mean to, because he wasn't thinking when he posted that BS.

 

[sancho]

Ok, simple. Soviet and Russian aircraft have on average done poorly against American aircraft...simple enough? Don't feel like putting in the effort...but provide a chart of kills if you think otherwise.

To be more precise, older versions of Russian aircrafts have done poorly against latest American and NATO aircrafts, with AWACS cover and way superior numbers.
Except of the AWACS part, we had the same situation during Kargil war, but the other way around, since our Russian fighters were numerically and technologically superior, which is why the kill probability were against the F16s.

 

[SQ8]

If you are expecting anti Pakistani BS from me, you weren't paying attention to the context under which I asked him that question.

I'm not accusing them of anything at all. I was asking that poster to follow through with his line of reasoning. I don't agree with his premise, so I wouldn't agree with the conclusion. That is why I wanted HIM to say it, instead of me saying it. He refused to follow his premise to the logical conclusion, and brought in BS about god's race and such BS, to escape responsibility for his statement.

If anybody is accusing the Pakistani pilots, it was that poster. He didn't mean to, because he wasn't thinking when he posted that BS.

On the contrary, you were the one suggesting that the F-16's "fled like fleas" .. if that is not an insult to PAF pilots .. I wonder what is. Since I have laid out the incident quite bare , it seems you are only flaming.

To be more precise, older versions of Russian aircrafts have done poorly against latest American and NATO aircrafts, with AWACS cover and way superior numbers.
Except of the AWACS part, we had the same situation during Kargil war, but the other way around, since our Russian fighters were numerically and technologically superior, which is why the kill probability were against the F16s.

Agreed, apart from the F-16's.. there was nothing in the PAF to match the IAF's capability to mount CAPs in the reigon.And the F-16's were then a very precious reso

 

[dbc]

To be more precise, older versions of Russian aircrafts have done poorly against latest American and NATO aircrafts, with AWACS cover and way superior numbers.
Except of the AWACS part, we had the same situation during Kargil war, but the other way around, since our Russian fighters were numerically and technologically superior, which is why the kill probability were against the F16s.

Since the topic of discussion is Mig-29 and the F-16 I am interested to why many here believe the Indian Mig-29 was technically superior in 1999.

 

[sancho]

Agreed, apart from the F-16's.. there was nothing in the PAF to match the IAF's capability to mount CAPs in the reigon.And the F-16's were then a very precious reso

Of course, just wanted to show that the US tech is not always superior as some of our American friends believe and that that it depends on the opponent how good or bad the kill rate is, that they always boast.

Since the topic of discussion is Mig-29 and the F-16 I am interested to why many here believe the Indian Mig-29 was technically superior in 1999.

BVR capable, HMS + highly agile R73, IRST to name some.

 

[janon]

Since the topic of discussion is Mig-29 and the F-16 I am interested to why many here believe the Indian Mig-29 was technically superior in 1999.

Because we had BVR missiles, and they didn't. That's not a technical capability of the aircraft itself of course, but you know the advantage.

 

[SQ8]

Since the topic of discussion is Mig-29 and the F-16 I am interested to why many here believe the Indian Mig-29 was technically superior in 1999.

Has to do more with availability of BVR weaponry to it , along with unrestricted spares.

 

[Shadow_Hunter]

To be more precise, older versions of Russian aircrafts have done poorly against latest American and NATO aircrafts, with AWACS cover and way superior numbers.
Except of the AWACS part, we had the same situation during Kargil war, but the other way around, since our Russian fighters were numerically and technologically superior, which is why the kill probability were against the F16s.

Please tell it to people like @ aeromerix, I was trying to explain the same thing to them on another thread when talking about kill probabilities of Russian BVR missiles, but it seems that all pakistanis here believe that AIM120 is better than R77 just because it has secured more kills in combat and it is a fire and forget missile which will just eat away our flankers once it is fired, irrespective of the ECM that the flanker takes.

 

[acetophenol]

Mig 29s alone flew 300+ sorties during operation safed sagar,providing air cover to ground forces and other fighters and also undertaking recce ops.

 

[janon]

On the contrary, you were the one suggesting that the F-16's "fled like fleas" .. if that is not an insult to PAF pilots .. I wonder what is. Since I have laid out the incident quite bare , it seems you are only flaming.
\

"Fled like fleas" was just a colorful expression, and not intended to flaimbait. Turning away was the wise thing to do when the enemy has BVR missiles and has locked on to you, and your RWR is blaring. Nothing wrong in that. Discretion is the better part of valor.

Anyway I made it clear quite a few times in this very thread that I don't think the individual pilots on either side were cowards. I also expressed respect for the PAF for their modernization. If you want to know whether somebody is intending to flaimbait, then look at the context under which statements are made. This particular poster's one liner about mig 29s being inferior was framed in a way that was clearly a flaimbait, and it was his first post on the thread, and we are all aware of similar statements from him in the past, and it was in a discussion with him that I used that expression. If you noted all my other statements similarly, I have made it clear that I don't disrespect either side's pilots, and from that I think you can give me a bit of a leeway in using a phrase without assuming that my intention is to flaimbait. I would request you to assume good faith unless there is a history of disparaging statements. When people respond to a disparaging statement, the responder's tone may be less than civil, that is only to be expected. That shows in every response I make on this forum.

Further note: I said F-16s fled like flees from Mig 29s, not that PAF pilots fled from IAF ones. The discussion was about the worth of the machines, not the pilots. At best it was an insult to F-16s, not PAF pilots, whom I did not even have in mind when I wrote it.

 

[acetophenol]

In every threat lies an opportunity: IAF was pounding on live targets instead of usual practice scenarios and learned the need for counter measures in the hardway.

We also successfully learned and applied Use of precision guided munitions and inter operations of IN,IAF and IA.

 

[DARKY]

There were instances Jags attacked the other side of the LoC supply chains and F-16s where sent to intercept. Both the interceptors where locked on by a single Mig-29. They were forced to go back.
For more details @DARKY @sandy_3126

Here's that incident from the mouth of one of the officers in PAF.

I have been out of the PAF for a few years now- and in some respects have as much access to sources now as some civvie aviation fanatics- but still do retain contacts which give me the inside scoop sometimes. Here's my unbiased opinion on what happened in this incident. First some disclaimers- the IAF NEVER gave Chibber a big gallantry award- this was a routine award for a job well done- like an Air Medal in the USAF- not an award in the league of a Medal of Honor or DFC! Secondly, in this particular occasion, the PAF was bested- there, I said it- there's no shame in it- there have been many occasions in the past conflicts of 1965 and 1971 when it was the other way around- any professional pilot will tell you that success and failure are two sides of the same coin- anyone who claims to be invincible is lying or an adolescent amatuer masquerading as a professional. To lay this story to rest- and though the PAF is understandably not keen to trumpet it around town- those in the know know- lets keep it at that, so I'm not exactly revealing any state secrets.

The PAF in Kargil was NEVER tasked to aggressively counter the IAF (forget the crap about them being scared)- it was very much an Army (read Musharraf) show- with even the civilian leadership in the dark about some aspects. Our friendly neighborhood tinpot dictator (Musharraf) then looked for scrapegoats- so he got rid of Nawaz and then turned on the PAF for not doing its job (bullshit!!!) by firing much of its top brass recently. Forgive me for digressing, but as someone who dedicated his life to the service of Pakistan, I hate to see it falling back into dictatorship. But the key message is- the PAF was never under orders to engage the IAF, unless they crossed the LOC. On this occasion, I gather the Indian MiG-27s did cross the LOC briefly and the local NLI commander who was having the crap bombed out of him called in desparately for support- the PAF, which had been frustrated at having to sit it out till now, saw an opportunity to bloody the IAF nose as they were reported to have crossed the LOC. Two Falcons on alert were vectored into the MiGs, but received the jolt of their lives when an IAF MiG-29 locked onto BOTH of them. They tried to break lock- but the MiG persisted, and while I do agree they could have pressed home- there were some controlling factors:
1) strict orders not to cross the LOC
2) Hell, they thought they were about to get a salvo of R-27s up their noses...as an aside, one of the Falcon pilots was a greenhorn and was pretty shaken by this experience- got razzed to death for weeks afterwards.

What would have happened if the Falcons had pressed home- who knows???? The MiG had a definite BVR edge and in close combat with the R-73/HMS, all bets are off. Plus, if the Falcons did cross the LOC, they would have been fair game to any other MiG-29s lurking about as they would no longer be over friendly terriotory- sometimes discretion is the better part of valour, n'est c'est pas?

Perhaps that would help.

 

[janon]

Here's that incident from the mouth of one of the officers in PAF.

Perhaps that would help.

Could you post a link to that?

 

[GURU DUTT]

Since the topic of discussion is Mig-29 and the F-16 I am interested to why many here believe the Indian Mig-29 was technically superior in 1999.

with all deu respects i think americans will never ever aknowledge that there machinese are inferior to any one well i know patriotism and PR stuff but aside from that here its not who was superior the fact is MIG's despite all there shortcomings were able to keep F16's at bay had Pakistani pilots have had better and larger no. of Planes they would have not hesitated to cross the line cause in pakistan F16 pilots are considered devine and deu to there tendency (they did the same in 1965 when they had better planes and M60 Patton tanks)

so the fact is we indians even with owr poorli maintained MIGs were able to carry owt all the bombing sorties and PAF even after watching there PA comrades bieng killed like rats in a closed hole count do anything ...cheer mate