PAF 1965 air war explained (John Fricker)

[ice_man]

Losses were relatively heavy--on the Pakistani side, twenty aircraft, 200 tanks, and 3,800 troops. Pakistan's army had been able to withstand Indian pressure, but a continuation of the fighting would only have led to further losses and ultimate defeat for Pakistan.

COULD HAVE IS NO ANSWER!!! NO ONE KNOWS THE FUTURE!!! & IF NUMBERS ARE SOMETHING TO GO BY THEN IN WWII SOVIET UNION LOST 2 TIMES THE NUMBER OF ALL ALLIED FORCES COMBINED & YET WON THE WAR!!!

so please boys before u wet your pants about lines like india "could have" won the war predictions are nothing to go by!!!!

 

[TaimiKhan]

and also:

....
Pakistan Air Force was born on 14th of August 1947, with the independence of Pakistan. The growth of PAF is a story of unusual sacrifice. A tiny auxiliary Service, with a small number of personnel and insignificant equipment, emerging as a powerful weapon of the country’s defence, was a thrilling phenomenon. The dedication of its pioneers shaped the future of a force, destined to gain respect, after proving its worth in the wars of 1965 and 1971, where it was unfortunately vanquished by a much more powerful enemy, India. The story of PAF is a tale of development, despite heavy odds and limitations....


from: Pakistan Air Force

Global Security as your source ?????

 

[Windjammer]

@Growler,

Buddy, try and find the Air Pictorial February 1966 issue,
It contains a whole article on PAF's war effort, more over there are several gun camera images showing lethal PAF action in the air and on the ground.

 

[Wingman]

Just a Little Addition, check the link below

PAKISTAN AIR FORCE - Official website

 

[Myth_buster_1]

@Growler,

Buddy, try and find the Air Pictorial February 1966 issue,
It contains a whole article on PAF's war effort, more over there are several gun camera images showing lethal PAF action in the air and on the ground.

Bro tell me is it from flightglobal magazine?

 

[Windjammer]

Bro tell me is it from flightglobal magazine?

Air Pictorial, at one time was a front runner along with the likes of Flight International, now a days it's more focused on vintage planes.

 

[skyisthelimit]

its always an accomplishment to have a good air force....no wonder pakistan also have one of the worlds best pilots....

everyone has their own story to say blah blah.....but in history its the final result that matters......whether you win or lose??

with due respect to pakistan airforce and pilots.....same to indian air force and pilots....not bias.

 

[Kompromat]

BB are u a admirer of AC K/Tufail or r u related to him?

Yes sir , He is a man who truly deserves a great deal of Respect & i have used this picture as my Avatar by his Permission

 

[notsuperstitious]

Hi,

When Chuck Yeager spoke, people stood quiet and listened. I doubt you have any clue about the integrity of that man---he was the most recognized man on the face of the planet EARTH in the world of aviation---he didnot have to favour anyone or mince any words to make one look good or bad.

The right stuff in the wrong place - Chuck Yeager's crash landing in Pakistan | Washington Monthly | Find Articles at BNET

Chuck was anything but neutral in his politics, he actively participated in the war on pakistan's behalf. Indeed a great pilot though.

 

[TechLahore]

True, he was one of the most recognised person in history of military aviation. But does it imply we have to take all his words as undisputable? Was not he the same person who made an insane remark at the starting of 1971 war (It was not 65

Wonderful. Instead of debating the issue on its merits, or disputing the relevant data regarding aircraft kills, you have gone off on a rant about why Yeager was biased. It's true. Historically, the American leadership has generally hated India's guts* (references below), but that still doesn't change the numbers or take away from the fact that the PAF has emerged victorious in every engagement with the IAF.

*: In a previous thread I had posted many examples of American leaders from Dulles (Eisenhower Presidency) to Kennedy, Nixon, Kissinger etc. all abusing India, Indians and Indian leaders in extreme terms. I don't want to do that again, but the point, hopefully, is made.

 

[sergente rehan]

It's seem like everytime we try to discuss on the PAF 1965 war history, the indians have always to point out that they were the winners or (when they try there best to act like serious persons) it was a tie according to them.....or there was no winner etc. But i think the facts clearly shows the truth so no need to discuss on this topic, let them write there meanless comments bcz they will never change the history!

just look at the losses for IAF and PAF. If M.M. Alam got more chances IAF had to face a big tragedy!

 

[ptldM3]

war and flew up and down the region collecting wreckage of IAF aircraft shot down by the PAF. Here is what he says, the Pakistanis scored a three-to-one kill ratio knocking out 102 Indian jets and losing 34 of their own

I find this hard to beleive, for the simple fact that many aircraft that crash take years to discover or are never discovered, take for instance congressman Boggs and representative Beigich their plane crashed in Alaska and the wreckage was never found dispite 39 days of searching by Coast Guards, Navy, and Airforce they even used the SR-71. The general location were the plane went down was know but nevertheless it was never found. Also the wreckage of the F-18 that was shot down in Iraq was discovered by chance almost three years later-again the general area where the aircraft was shot down was know but the US military never found the wreckage on their own, instead a tip led them to the location.

I highly doubt that Chuck hoped in a helicopter and tracked down 102 Indian aircraft, also did any indian aircraft get shot down over India? If so how did he fly around in Indian airspace looking for downed Indian aircraft? Now i don't doubt that Chuck flew over some aircraft but he certainly didn't track down 102 aircraft.

 

[Creder]

I find this hard to beleive, for the simple fact that many aircraft that crash take years to discover or are never discovered, take for instance congressman Boggs and representative Beigich their plane crashed in Alaska and the wreckage never found dispite 39 days of searching by Coast Guards, Navy, and Airforce they even used the SR-71. The general location were the plane went down was know but nevertheless it was never found. Also the wreckage of the F-18 that was shot down in Iraq was discovered by chance almost three years later-again the general area where the aircraft was shot down was know but the US military never found the wreckage on their own, instead a tip led them to the location.

I highly doubt that Chuck hoped in a helicopter and tracked down 102 Indian aircraft, also did any indian aircraft get shot down over India? If so how did he fly around in Indian airspace looking for downed Indian aircraft?

So chuck Yeager made this stuff up ? Your calling one of the best pilots of the WW2 era a liar just because of the examples you gave which don't have any relevance to this because The pak-India border isn't Alaska, he 'documented' these attacks .. Which means he confirmed they were Indian through serial numbers on different parts of the plane.. The F18 incident they didn't know where the wreckage was whereas in this case the exact coordinates were able

 

[Windjammer]

I find this hard to beleive, for the simple fact that many aircraft that crash take years to discover or are never discovered, take for instance congressman Boggs and representative Beigich their plane crashed in Alaska and the wreckage was never found dispite 39 days of searching by Coast Guards, Navy, and Airforce they even used the SR-71. The general location were the plane went down was know but nevertheless it was never found. Also the wreckage of the F-18 that was shot down in Iraq was discovered by chance almost three years later-again the general area where the aircraft was shot down was know but the US military never found the wreckage on their own, instead a tip led them to the location.

I highly doubt that Chuck hoped in a helicopter and tracked down 102 Indian aircraft, also did any indian aircraft get shot down over India? If so how did he fly around in Indian airspace looking for downed Indian aircraft? Now i don't doubt that Chuck flew over some aircraft but he certainly didn't track down 102 aircraft.

Chuck Yeagar spent most of his time in Sector Operations Sector(SOS) and had a grand stand view of the war. The war ended on 17th December, by next January, Yeagar and his team had located and serialised wreckages of some 35 IAF aircraft in what was West Pakistan alone. Keep in mind, India had admitted to the loss of only 40 in the Western sector alone, including those shot down over India.
Now you know where he's coming from.

 

[ptldM3]

So chuck Yeager made this stuff up ? Your calling one of the best pilots of the WW2 era a liar just because of the examples you gave which don't have any relevance to this because The pak-India border isn't Alaska,

He was far from the best WW2 pilot, and i do think he is bending the truth after all he was bias. Pak-Indian border doesn't need to be Alaska, aircrafts in desorts also go un-discovered.

he 'documented' these attacks .. Which means he confirmed they were Indian through serial numbers on different parts of the plane..

So he has pictures of the wreckage and serial numbers of those 102 aircraft? You have a link to all of those pictures and serial numbers?

The F18 incident they didn't know where the wreckage was whereas in this case the exact coordinated were able

That makes no sense. Can you explain how the US military wasn't able to find Scott Speicher's aircraft despite knowing the general area where it was shot down and somehow Chuck Yagar tracked down 102 Indian aircraft?...amazing, i wounder why Chuck didn't help search for Scott Speicers wreckage.