What's new

Opinionated - Pak mil always ahead of its adversary in weapon acquisitions and inductions

.
Pakistan used Motorways for PAF emergency ops. After almost a decade Indian airforce did that.
Pakistan did it first time in 1999 I believe. Correct me If I am wrong. I think it is much later after 10 years they even tried
 
.
So india is buying weapons from nations that are 100× smaller than it?.........:disagree:............so why can't OVER 1.4 billion indians invent or indigenously produce high tech weapons systems themselves like other nations do? Proves the immeasurable inferiority of indians..........:azn:

By giving China’s example to defend his points was interesting. China and India has no match. China is a real super global power and facing super power like U.S and the entire west where as India is nowhere in the league.

Good for women. But has no added value tactically or strategically.

IAF inducted Mirage 2000, and MiG-29 in 80s itself. While IAF got BVR capability in 90s, PAF failed to get BVR missile until 2010.

French offered same MESMA AIP to India for Scorpenes but India rejected it as they and other Sterling cell based AIP are unsuitable for tropical warm waters of IOR as they significantly increase noise output in such waters thus destroying stealthiness of the submarine

Indian doctrine sees present lightly armed UAV as useless for combined air ground war. India believes loitiering munitions are far more effective in conventional war. Which is why India has acquired hundreds of loitiering munitions from Israel.
Nonetheless India sees value of UCAV in certain scenario which is why MQ-9B are being acquired.

Pakistan has failed to acquire AH-1Z and T-129 and has ZERO modern attack heli in inventory, it's Ah-1F/F fleet too old and obsolete. India has 22 of the most advanced attack helicopters built by mankind. Another 06 on the way along with LCH.

BrahMos was test fired in 2001 long before first Babur was tested. Induction was earlier too.

India has no need of tactical WMD just like China

Once again India has no need of battlefield or tactical nukes , just like China does not have them. Because we believe in massive second strike and thus only have strategic nukes.

India has already developed and even inducted multiple AESA radars.
- Two ground based AESA radars.
- One AEW&C based AESA radars
both inducted
- Fighter aircraft AESA radar now advanced enough so it is undergoing flight tests.

Ababeel was test fired only once. No proof if MIRV package was tested in that teta. There has been not a single test of Ababeel in 5 years. It was not even displayed at 23rd March parade even once.
India has already demonstrated multi warhead capability through multi satellite launch.

India has successfully exported cruise missiles BrahMos . Pakistan has not managed to do that. As per SIPRI data India is now among top 25 arms exporters. Pakistan is not.

India has Elta E2090U Ultra radars which are more powerful. They were recently spotted in sat pics.

India has corner shot guns from Israel since 2010. A very niche weapon useful in very few scenarios such as hostage rescue, very little use in conventional wars. So not required in large no.

Good for women. But has no added value tactically or strategically.
- So why IAF inducted if there was no value tactically and strategically (my point wasnt in the context and I agreed there is no tactical advantage though its just for optics).

French offered same MESMA AIP to India for Scorpenes but India rejected it as they and other Sterling cell based AIP are unsuitable for tropical warm waters of IOR as they significantly increase noise output in such waters thus destroying stealthiness of the submarine
- Most lame justification I have ever heard quite frankly.

Pakistan has failed to acquire AH-1Z and T-129 and has ZERO modern attack heli in inventory, it's Ah-1F/F fleet too old and obsolete. India has 22 of the most advanced attack helicopters built by mankind. Another 06 on the way along with LCH.
- Pakistan failed to get AH1z and T-129 because of the US not because Pakistan Army was sitting duck or didn’t go for attack helis. We tried to acquire on time (check the timeline of both deals) esp Ah1z along with its full package. You have never faced that problem like some initially agreed to sell, you paid for the weapon systems and later the source refused to hand over or failed to develop for you because of third party components.

PS: You have just 22 attack heli and in kinetic and that figure can’t do much if US and Turkey both full fill their commitments to Pakistan … your opponents fleet could be at this moment :

51 Cobra’s, 30 T129, 15 AH1Z Viper, 4 MI35 4, Z-10 vs? lol a country who possibly face two fronts?

India has corner shot guns from Israel since 2010. A very niche weapon useful in very few scenarios such as hostage rescue, very little use in conventional wars. So not required in large no.
- Even then POF presented before you have. By the way my post was specific to your DRDO news about the same gun yesterday.

India has already demonstrated multi warhead capability through multi satellite launch.
- lol there is a huge difference btw launching a multi sat station and MIRV tech.

Besides all that, naming China to defend and making a counterargument was pretty much childish. There is no match between India and China from tech to advancement; goals and objectives. China is a superpower and has powerful opponents aka global powers where as you are nowhere in the league. Never been involved in any global conflict since partition even Pakistan was and remain more active in global conflicts from regional to middle east than you. You have zero involvement and input except for merely a tool for US for the containment of China.

The most interesting part of your post was, actually that's what a vibe came from your post. A 4th largest military might is technically highly dependent on US, Russia and France for its own defense for all of its frontline weapon systems. like Ukraine conflict indirectly hit your spares. This is your "self-reliance" ? Have you successfully built anything indigenously A-Z? except few guns or modifications to Yakhont? Check your front-line fighters (Russian and French), Logistic from Chinook, C17 to Mi (Russian and American), for CAS ops (US and Russian) I mean where are your 1.5 BN super techie people? unable to produce single credible mil hardware while telling the world that you're top 25 arm exporter? you can export underwear to 190 countries. What exactly your export checklist? Selling niche weapons like handguns, some ammunition, and just recently after 70 years you managed to sell a single cruise missile to just 1 country, is this is your total mil development achievement? Selling a fighter to any foreign country is far more remarkable achievement as compared to any other thing esp for a small country like Pakistan with budget constraints, economic and stability issues whereas a so-called power with much potential just able to sell a cruise missile recently. Amazing I would say..
 
Last edited:
. .
By giving China’s example to defend his points was interesting though China and India has no match from military to advancement



Good for women. But has no added value tactically or strategically.
- So why IAF inducted if there was no value tactically and strategically (my point wasnt in the context and I agreed there is no tactical advantage though its just for optics).

French offered same MESMA AIP to India for Scorpenes but India rejected it as they and other Sterling cell based AIP are unsuitable for tropical warm waters of IOR as they significantly increase noise output in such waters thus destroying stealthiness of the submarine
- Most lame justification I have ever heard quite frankly.

Pakistan has failed to acquire AH-1Z and T-129 and has ZERO modern attack heli in inventory, it's Ah-1F/F fleet too old and obsolete. India has 22 of the most advanced attack helicopters built by mankind. Another 06 on the way along with LCH.
- Pakistan DIDN'T get AH1z and T-129 because of the US not because the PA was not interested or didn't pursue. We tried to acquire on time (check the timeline of both deals) esp Ah1z along with its full package. You never faced that problem like made a deal, paid for that and later source refused to hand over or failed to develop for you because of third country).

India has corner shot guns from Israel since 2010. A very niche weapon useful in very few scenarios such as hostage rescue, very little use in conventional wars. So not required in large no.
- Even then POF presented before you have. By the way my post was specific to your DRDO news about the same gun yesterday.

India has already demonstrated multi warhead capability through multi satellite launch.
- lol there is a huge difference btw launching a multi sat station and MIRV tech.

Besides all that, naming China to defend and making a counterargument was pretty much childish. There is no match between India and China from tech to advancement; goals and objectives. China is a superpower and has powerful opponents aka global powers where as you are nowhere in the league. Never been involved in any global conflict since partition even Pakistan was and remain more active in global conflicts from regional to middle east than you. You have zero involvement and input except for merely a tool for US for the containment of China.

The most interesting part of your post was, actually that's what a vibe came from your post. A 4th largest military might is technically highly dependent on US, Russia and France for its own defense for all of its frontline weapon systems. like Ukraine conflict indirectly hit your spares. This is your "self-reliance" ? You bought this you bought that. Have you successfully built anything in the house except few guns or modifications of Yakhont? Check your front-line fighters (Russian and French). Logistic from Chinook to Mi (Russian and American), for CAS ops (US and Russian) I mean where are your 1.5 BN super techie people? unable to produce single credible mil hardware while telling the world that you're top 25 arm exporter? you can export underwear to 190 countries. What do you exactly export checklist? Selling niche weapons like handguns, some ammunition, and just recently after 70 years you managed to sell a single cruise missile to 1 country, is this is your total mil achievement? Selling a fighter to any foreign country is a far more remarkable achievement as compared to any other thing esp for a small country like Pakistan which always has budget constraints, economic and stability issues whereas a so-called regional power with much potential was just able to sell a cruise missile recently. Amazing I would say..


China now invents and pioneers advanced sciences and technologies. OVER 1.4 billion indians NEVER have.
 
.
Question is, who's gonna take screenshots of this Topic next door.

I find hard to believe that they are just lurking 'round as Guests in the background. Some are [playing] on both sides of the wall 🤪 .
 
.
The whole point of thread was that Pakistani armed forces are more forward thinking or innovative with weapon purchase or developments. It is not a comparison between what India has and what Pakistan has. But rather highlight how Pakistani armed forces seems to be rather more 'agile' on adopting to new systems.

Good for women. But has no added value tactically or strategically.
May not have any value or may have it. But we agree that PAF did it first in the region

IAF inducted Mirage 2000, and MiG-29 in 80s itself. While IAF got BVR capability in 90s, PAF failed to get BVR missile until 2010.
I think Mirage 2000 or Mig-29 was a reaction to F-16. Yes, BVR is something that India got first. PAF was late in this game.
French offered same MESMA AIP to India for Scorpenes but India rejected it as they and other Sterling cell based AIP are unsuitable for tropical warm waters of IOR as they significantly increase noise output in such waters thus destroying stealthiness of the submarine
Of course French offered MESMA for Scorpenes, but that is AFTER Pakistan Navy Agosta deal. India thinks it doesn't suit their Navy, it fine but PN was ok with it and historically, in the region, it was the first one to operate AIP Subs.
Indian doctrine sees present lightly armed UAV as useless for combined air ground war. India believes loitiering munitions are far more effective in conventional war. Which is why India has acquired hundreds of loitiering munitions from Israel.
Nonetheless India sees value of UCAV in certain scenario which is why MQ-9B are being acquired.
OK

Pakistan has failed to acquire AH-1Z and T-129 and has ZERO modern attack heli in inventory, it's Ah-1F/F fleet too old and obsolete. India has 22 of the most advanced attack helicopters built by mankind. Another 06 on the way along with LCH.
Again that is not the point here. Point is how one army sees the value of gunship a decade before the other one. So there is no denying that PA started using Gunships before IA.

BrahMos was test fired in 2001 long before first Babur was tested. Induction was earlier too.
Not sure about the dates, but if India did it first, congrats. Plus points for having a supersonic cruise missile.
India has no need of tactical WMD just like China
Once again India has no need of battlefield or tactical nukes , just like China does not have them. Because we believe in massive second strike and thus only have strategic nukes.

OK, if India has no use for tactical nukes, then i guess we will not discuss it further.

India has already developed and even inducted multiple AESA radars.
- Two ground based AESA radars.
- One AEW&C based AESA radars
both inducted
- Fighter aircraft AESA radar now advanced enough so it is undergoing flight tests.
Can't comment because my AESA knowledge is very limited. Some posters are mentioning words like GaNs or GaAs. I leave it to forum experts.
Ababeel was test fired only once. No proof if MIRV package was tested in that teta. There has been not a single test of Ababeel in 5 years. It was not even displayed at 23rd March parade even once.
India has already demonstrated multi warhead capability through multi satellite launch.
Multiwarhead capability through multi satellite launch? Doesn't add up. So i think MIRV initiative we can give to Pakistani Armed forces. Although in space technology and satellite launches, Indian Space program has achieved many firsts.
India has successfully exported cruise missiles BrahMos . Pakistan has not managed to do that. As per SIPRI data India is now among top 25 arms exporters. Pakistan is not.
I think the original post was about fighter aircraft (JF-17) and now that JF-17 is already exported to 2 countries, PAC has achieved this milestone. But you can have the first supersonic cruise missile export distinction.
India has Elta E2090U Ultra radars which are more powerful. They were recently spotted in sat pics.
They might be more powerful, but again, the theme here is who inducted VHF radar first.
India has corner shot guns from Israel since 2010. A very niche weapon useful in very few scenarios such as hostage rescue, very little use in conventional wars. So not required in large no.
Who got it first? India has corner shot guns from Israel since 2010. POF developed POF Eye (aka camera gun) almost 12 years ago (which also means ~2010). Can we call it a Tie??

Some more I can guess,


1: Submarine warfare - PN was using submarines since the very beginning and used it extensively in wars. Did India used any subs in 65 or 71 ?
2: Missile boats: This one should go to IN for obvious reasons. we were late in that game i guess.
3: Fire detection radar: Rumors were that it was very effective during Kargil conflict (for detecting artillery fire and re-directing counter artillery fire). I think later on, India also purchased/developed the same.
4: PAF Combat Commanders Schools for advanced pilot training. think it was established a long time ago. Do India have something equivalent?
5: I also remember reading about PAF central command and how all radars are linked to present a single picture. This was in the 90s. Not sure if India also had it first or PAF initiated it. Can some forum member please comment.
 
.
I wonder if even a single person reading your post understood what you were driving at.

What’s the Difference Between GaN and GaAs?​

July 7, 2016
GaN has emerged as the leading semiconductor material for high-power microwave switches and amplifiers, although GaAs is still the material of choice for low noise.
Jack Browne
Related To: Microwaves & RF


Download this article in .PDF format
Gallium arsenide (GaAs) was once the automatic choice of semiconductor material for high-frequency solid-state devices, components, and integrated circuits (ICs), from amplifiers to switches.
As GaAs devices grew in popularity for RF/microwave applications, they rapidly replaced legacy silicon-based semiconductors, such as bipolar transistors and metal-oxide-semiconductor field-effect transistors (MOSFETs), which were limited in frequency compared to GaAs field-effect transistors (FETs), heterojunction bipolar transistors (HBTs), and high electron mobility transistors (HEMTs).
During the last decade, however, gallium nitride (GaN) has become the favorite high-frequency semiconductor compound, steadily replacing GaAs in many RF/microwave applications, especially where higher-frequency, higher-power semiconductors are required. But why the steady shift to GaN and just how different in performance are GaAs and GaN?

GaN and GaAs are both compound semiconductor materials, each composed of two elements. The materials are grown in the form of ingots, which are cut into thin wafers (see figure) upon which semiconductor devices, including passive circuit elements, are fabricated. GaAs is the more mature material and is commercially available in the form of wafers as large as 6 in. in diameter while GaN, which has been used to fabricate light-emitting diodes (LEDs) since the 1990s, is typically available in wafers as large as 2 in. in diameter.â

Mwrf Com Sites Mwrf com Files Uploads 2016 07 08 Pullquote Test 1
GaAs is well established as a substrate of choice for high-frequency, small-signal semiconductor devices, especially where low noise figure is needed, as in receiver front ends. GaAs monolithic microwave integrated circuits (MMICs) are widely used in portable wireless products, such as smartphones, tablets, and Wi-Fi devices. Components such as switches and amplifiers are typically incorporated into these GaAs MMICs, which are designed for operation at low voltages and currents typically available from a battery.
GaN, on the other hand, has come to be known as a power process, capable of fabricating active devices for amplifiers that can operate at voltages of +48 V dc and higher. With the higher-voltage capabilities of GaN devices and MMICs, they have become the active components of choice for such applications as power amplifiers in wireless base stations and have been steadily replacing high-frequency electron vacuum tubes in military radar and even in commercial and industrial microwave ovens. For a comparable output-power rating, GaAs amplifiers tend to be more linear, with less distortion, than GaN amplifiers, although GaN devices have been used with digital predistortion (DPD) to achieve enhanced linearity at higher frequencies.

Before attempting to compare differences in devices fabricated on the two high-frequency semiconductor materials, however, it is only necessary to assess the differences in characteristics of the two III-V compound semiconductors. These key material characteristics include relative dielectric constant (relative to the dielectric constant of a vacuum), breakdown voltage, electron mobility, saturation velocity, and thermal conductivity.

Mwrf Com Sites Mwrf com Files Uploads 2015 02 32 Jfig1 Web
GaN and GaAs are two of the semiconductor substrate materials used for high-frequency solid-state devices, fabricated on thin wafers. (Graphic courtesy of Xiamen Powerway Advanced Material Co., Ltd.)


GaN is considered a wide-bandgap material compared to GaAs, with a bandgap of about 3.4 eV for GaN compared to 1.4 eV for GaAs. A material’s bandgap related to the amount of energy required to shift an electron from the top of the valence band to the bottom of the conduction band within a semiconductor formed on that material. A wide bandgap typically refers to a material with bandgap of greater than 1 or 2 eV.
GaN typically exceeds GaAs in material parameters relating to higher energy and power, and in the speed of achieving higher-energy states. For example, the saturation velocity of GaN, at 2.7 × 107 cm/s, is somewhat higher than the 2.0 × 107 cm/s of GaAs. The critical breakdown voltage field determines the highest voltage that can be safely applied to a solid-state device, and the breakdown electric field of GaN, at 4 × 106 V/cm, is much higher than the 5 × 105 V/cm of GaAs.

GaN has certain traits that support smaller circuits for a given frequency and power level, allowing the higher power densities and efficiencies much sought after by designers of power-efficient wireless base stations and microcells. For one thing, the higher-voltage capacities of GaN allow the fabrication of much smaller devices for a given power level than on GaAs materials. For example, the defect density of any semiconductor wafer will limit the practical size of circuits that can be manufactured repeatably and reliably on that wafer, implying that device area be minimized for best production yields.
Because the power density of GaN materials is much higher than GaAs or even silicon semiconductor materials, thermal conductivity is an important material parameter for characterizing how well a device will dissipate heat due to dielectric and conductor losses as well as basic device inefficiencies. The thermal conductivity of GaN, at 1.7 W/cm-K, is more than three times the thermal conductivity of GaAs, at 0.46 W/cm-K. High thermal conductivity translates into the lowest temperature rise at conduction, a characteristic that enables GaN devices to handle higher power levels than GaAs devices using the same device structure, such as a field-effect transistor (FET).
GaN devices are currently fabricated on different substrate materials, such as GaN on silicon (Si) and GaN on silicon carbide (SiC) wafers, with some debate about which process offers the best performance. Some larger companies, such as Raytheon Co., maintain both GaAs and GaN foundries as part of their in-house capabilities in support of military applications. Many commercial foundries will offer details on the benefits of each process with some foundries, including WIN Semiconductors Corp., Global Communication Semiconductors LLC, and Qorvo, offering different forms of GaN processes along with GaAs fabrication services as well.

For those wishing a finer-grained comparison of GaN and GaAs materials, MACOM, with products based on more than a half-dozen semiconductor processes, offers a detailed comparison of the different semiconductor materials on their website.
Looking for parts? Go to SourceESB.
Download this article in .PDF format
 
.
True. But it's seriously lacking in other areas, especially the economy.

I appreciate this type of honesty and weirdly enough the Indians have been growing on me lately and I couldn't believe this to happen months ago but I am warming towards the Indians. I am geninuely feeling like we could have a great relations and ties based on trade and what not. Aside from the hysteria by some ultra-righters the Indians aren't technically bad people and have plenty of stand up people
 
. .
- Pakistan inducted state of the art fighter (F-16) into its inventory in 80s way before IAF hands-on latest variant of migs.

this is incomplete.

IAF negogiated and contracted the mirage 2000 in late 1970s - 1980s, it was just General Dynamics was a very efficient manufacturer plus F-16 was ordered all over the world hence delivery was quick. Plus F-16 training program was very large for all US customers thus training and induction was quicker

PAF F-16s were are a reaction to IAF purchase of mirage 2000 jets.
 
. .
Sniper rifles and their use in LOC, but india caught up in a few years and not 10 years.

 
.
French offered same MESMA AIP to India for Scorpenes but India rejected it as they and other Sterling cell based AIP are unsuitable for tropical warm waters of IOR as they significantly increase noise output in such waters thus destroying stealthiness of the submarine
- Most lame justification I have ever heard quite frankly.
Shows you do not know the limitations of MESMA and Sterling AIP which are both closed cycle AIP, which is why no Scorpene operator decided to buy MESMA, they are too noisy in warm waters. Now the world is moving to fuel cell AIP.

Pakistan has failed to acquire AH-1Z and T-129 and has ZERO modern attack heli in inventory, it's Ah-1F/F fleet too old and obsolete. India has 22 of the most advanced attack helicopters built by mankind. Another 06 on the way along with LCH.
- Pakistan failed to get AH1z and T-129 because of the US not because Pakistan Army was sitting duck or didn’t go for attack helis. We tried to acquire on time (check the timeline of both deals) esp Ah1z along with its full package. You have never faced that problem like some initially agreed to sell, you paid for the weapon systems and later the source refused to hand over or failed to develop for you because of third party components.

PS: You have just 22 attack heli and in kinetic and that figure can’t do much if US and Turkey both full fill their commitments to Pakistan … your opponents fleet could be at this moment :

51 Cobra’s, 30 T129, 15 AH1Z Viper, 4 MI35 4, Z-10 vs? lol a country who possibly face two front
30 T129 and 15 AH1Z are never coming. Pak Army failed to acquire them because of poor foriegn policy making unlike superior Indian foriegn policy.
Only thing Pak has now are obsolete AH-1F/S
India has corner shot guns from Israel since 2010. A very niche weapon useful in very few scenarios such as hostage rescue, very little use in conventional wars. So not required in large no.
- Even then POF presented before you have. By the way my post was specific to your DRDO news about the same gun yesterday.
Zen Tech of India as already developed a far superior corner shot that has already been Inducted into Indian Army

India has already demonstrated multi warhead capability through multi satellite launch.
- lol there is a huge difference btw launching a multi sat station and MIRV
MRV and multi satellite has the exact same bus (launching system) Only difference between MRV and MIRV is MIRV has independent guidance on each warhead.
Nonetheless Pakistan has no given any proof of MIRV capability.
Even Ababeel itself was tested only once in Feb 2017 (Zero tests in 5 years).
 
.
That was distasteful.
Perhaps.

Maybe I did deserve a Negative Rating by a well-reputed and highly respectable Indian Member (on PDF) like @Joe Shearer

I'm actually not surprised that my post was Deleted - by a Mod.

But what is the true definition of 'distasteful'?

Prior to B. Rawat untimely demise, were his words not distasteful towards Pakistan when he was Chief of Army Staff & later Chief of Defence Staff? Mind you, he was the head of those divisions & spat venom where our COAS never made any such direct or indirect statements.

What about the Indian Media & their 24/7 disrespect towards us - when our Media doesn't even bring up India unless there is a Missile accidently landing in our territory...

Their Forums, Social Media and even celebrities/sportsman.

I'm sure you & the Mods must be like..., "We need to rise above all that & be the bigger & better person".

I'm like, "Screw that!"

If they can celebrate the death of our Jawans - the way they do, then I don't need to be apologetic towards my earlier post & stand by my views - even if it was distasteful to some.

I got what I wanted out of that post - Mission Accomplished
please refrain from such posts.
I don't make these type of posts (usually). I think most are familiar with my views, however, I make no such promise that I won't go down the same path - some day.

-T23
 
.

Latest posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom