PAF can counter India’s new war doctrine, says air chief

[Secur]

PAF doesn't have Heavy Fighters, IAF has

PAF doesn't have heavy AWACS, IAF has

PAF doesn't have Strategic Bombers, IAF has

F16 BlK 52

What are those ? ... What advantage does Phalcon offer against the Erieye in Pak-India scenario ?

PAF doesn't need strategic bombers and i would love to know what Indian aircraft do you refer as such ?

 

[Secur]

getting connected to every asset to Awacs is one thing........ then making doctrine according to it is another one.........and finally practicing it is the final one......love way to go for the same.

We got the Awacs years back, and practicing now, you can see lots of yudh abhyas these days mainly with IAF in co ordination with IA & IN

Ok heard something about High Mark exercise ? Do you think that PAF hasn't done any exercises lately to test its operational capabilities and doctrine ? We bought the AWACS almost at the same time So ? Would you mind changing your statement now ?

 

[Ammyy]

F16 BlK 52

What are those ? ... What advantage does Phalcon offer against the Erieye in Pak-India scenario ?

PAF doesn't need strategic bombers and i would love to know what Indian aircraft do you refer as such ?

Not IAF but IN have Tu-142 that can be used as bomber

 

[Jungibaaz]

Not IAF but IN have Tu-142 that can be used as bomber

unless you're the united states and you have bombers such as the F-117 and B-2, no amount of escorts will save a big bomber from being picked off by a SAM or even another aircraft.

 

[deckingraj]

unless you're the united states and you have bombers such as the F-117 and B-2, no amount of escorts will save a big bomber from being picked off by a SAM or even another aircraft.

As far as detection is concerned then even fighters will be detected....however bombers will have their escorts accompany them....SAM is and always be the threat...but it's war and such risks are part of the game...

 

[Jungibaaz]

As far as detection is concerned then even fighters will be detected....however bombers will have their escorts accompany them....SAM is and always be the threat...but it's war and such risks are part of the game...

fighters are much harder to detect, they aren't sitting (flying) ducks.
LR SAM are a threat for bombers...

there's simply no need to have bombers unless you're the US and can afford the B-2.
You as an airforce make do with smaller aircraft optimized for A2G role, you don't need to take the risk of sending a vulnerable bomber to do the job.

In our theater of war, bombers wouldn't survive over enemy territory, they can be spotted and killed at long ranges.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

for bolded part> i disagree

PAF doesn't have Heavy Fighters, IAF has

PAF doesn't have heavy AWACS, IAF has

PAF doesn't have Strategic Bombers, IAF has

You are yet another Indian who has failed to see the follow up posts after the post you quoted and you decided to give your verdict. Since you wont go back what is said already by not only Pakistanis but also by some Indians like Sandy so I will respond for your benefit.

for bolded part> i disagree

PAF doesn't have Heavy Fighters, IAF has

doesn’t apply given its role and strategy. Our Multi role fighters are specially adapted & chosen to counter IAF doctrine

PAF doesn't have heavy AWACS, IAF has

again doesn’t apply because the object is not to copy IAF. But to counter its objectives. Read my sentence again if the penny hasn’t dropped yet.

PAF doesn't have Strategic Bombers, IAF has

Again, doesn’t apply. We are not copying you. PA just intends to break the front teeth of the IAF that are within the reach of our planes and that will mean IAF wont be able to smile without exposing the gapping hole. Rest is covered by our ground hugging cruise missiles.




Our air and ground assets that make up the air defence command are more than adequate for our offensive defence strategy and to counter whatever IAF is cooking behind the scene. Remember we are not planning any deep strikes with planes. Your forward air force bases are within our range of our planes and if needed the rest is covered by our cruise missiles. don’t be too one dimensional in your thinking.

When it comes to defence of our airspace don’t forget our SAMs and all other ground based hardware that compliments our airborne units to thwart IAF assault.

By the time I will post this. Someone would have quoted the same post from nabil yet again without bothering to go through the rest of the pages.

---------- Post added at 10:35 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:33 PM ----------

How do you guys see the role of Farkhor Air Base in Tajikistan under Indian control - it is said to have stationed a squadron of MIG 29s (12 to 24 stationed?)
Pakistan Northern Air Command counters that.

Nabil, Windjammer, Sapper? do you guys have any info on that?

thats news for me

 

[Shinigami]

Pakistan has quitely build up a sizeable amout of stand off weapons including the H series glide bombs, Raad and Babur and further research is well underway on them.

Yes, they can be countered...but has India ever tested that before?

Lots of questions and lots of assumptions for this particular discussion.

One important thing you missed out is that after pakistan launches a pre emptive strike, it is declaring a state of war and the entire indian war machine will be galvanized, and having far greater resources, manpower and strategic depth is bound to win in a to the death brawl.

for eg: In this video, notice how the indian carrier was loitering around until PAF did the pre emptive strike in 1971. Immediately after which it sprung to action causing a grave problem to pakistan.

Indian Navy at war 1971 east - YouTube

The term pre-emptive strike here is a bit of misnomer, and one naturally assumes it in the same context of the Israeli pre-emptive raids which universally became known as the six day war. The PAF attacks on forward IAF bases on 3rd December followed air battles between the two airforces, which had already taken place in the Eastern sector during the last week of November, hence the war in earnest had already started before the PAF raids.

the only war before the PAF pre emtive strike were the proxy wars. please refer or give reference

 

[Nitin Goyal]

IAf can afford to have a gapping hole can PAF afford it ???

 

[deckingraj]

fighters are much harder to detect, they aren't sitting (flying) ducks.
LR SAM are a threat for bombers...

there's simply no need to have bombers unless you're the US and can afford the B-2.
You as an airforce make do with smaller aircraft optimized for A2G role, you don't need to take the risk of sending a vulnerable bomber to do the job.

In our theater of war, bombers wouldn't survive over enemy territory, they can be spotted and killed at long ranges.

No one is challenging that Bombers are easier to detect as compared with Fighters...but since we both lack stealth fighters and are backed up with Awacs, fighters will be detected even before crossing over...So it doesn't make an iota of difference if fighters are harder to detect or not...Now as far as LR SAM is concerned then it is as much a threat to bomber as it is to a fighter....Having said that bombers are escorted with fighters whose sole job is to protect them..... Dedicated bombers are surely as asset and can cause havoc in the enemy territory, so don't undermine their role...

 

[deckingraj]

Nabil, Windjammer, Sapper? do you guys have any info on that?

thats news for me

That base is not operational from a combat perspective...Secondly a Squadron of Mig-29's is a big myth....Thirdly it would be foolish on Tajikistan part to get involved into an India-Pak conflict and expose it to the wrath of a nuclear power...so chill!!!

 

[sputnik]

Tajikistan base is for northern alliance in afganistan after Kandahar episode. There is no fighter planes there. It still used to keep an eye on Pakistan and china by spying. India is not alone there Some NATo presence also there.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

IAf can afford to have a gapping hole can PAF afford it ???

wrong circular argument lol

when the gapping hole is created, the Indian doctrine is defeated already. and even if India is forced to prevent PAF from countering India's original design that indirectly serves the purpose of PAF.. which was to stop the IAF from executing its mission in its original form in the first place.

... hence the PAF chiefs claim



read again what I am saying, if you still dont get it then dont worry about it

 

[illusion8]

One question arises is if it is a slightly long drawn out war can India achieve complete air superiority over Pakistani air space taking into consideration all aspects including all wings of the forces / Help in terms of hardware which PK will receive from outside sources/ all air defense ground forces??

Presently don't think so, but if India invests in the right hardware and plans it precisely it maybe could.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Tajikistan base is for northern alliance in afganistan after Kandahar episode. There is no fighter planes there. It still used to keep an eye on Pakistan and china by spying. India is not alone there Some NATo presence also there.

interesting


thanks for the information .
but I must confess that I didnt see a single news where IAF provided air support to Northern Alliance army in the initial phase of the NATO invasion.