PAF Heroes Who Surprised India !

[TRNDSTTR]

Can't agree more.

 

[YeBeWarned]

@Hodor you are wasting time on that baba ..

 

[Humble Analyst]

I still think that ISPR, which represents the Armed Forces has been the best place for conveying information. Maybe the ISPR should have a regular rotation of military officers represented from all three services.

In a nut shell, no specialist is required as the ISPR will be giving controlled information (that they have received from all specialist in all three services). Here the ISPR gave good information based on the intelligence picture available then.

The narrative given by ISPR was professional and in full confidence - yes there were questions but really it had kept the vast majority of 'guessing' of what really happened. This made it harder for the enemies - they would always be in doubt of the real tactics employed by the PAF.

Also in India the IAF chief and others did their public expert statements - and still made an arse of themselves and their botched operations.

In regards to Inter-Services rivalries... These happen in all countries, such as the USA, NATO etc. However, they do manage to limit it due to overall National Security requirements. Hence the STATE has the paramount priority and all need to toe the line.

I believe in all arms having representation and not necessarily all releases should come from two star general. Sometimes it can be a colonel, Group Captain, Captain or lower rank also depending upon the type and news impact. It can be reviewed by the big boss or the big boss for ISPR. For smaller matters it should be lower than general rank. Also if it is related to airforce or Navy either combined conference or by the officer from the related Force.

 

[Raider 21]

Hi,

Listen to the video you fools---so many of them on this board---@ 00:17 seconds---" Gun Tau Khatam Ho Gai---"---right in the begining---that is what he says---the use of gun is finished ( talking about the gun on the aircraft )---.

Now that your DAD, Kaiser Tufail has spoken---maybe now you would understand what I have been saying for a decade---.

And look at this video of Gripen trying to position for a kill in a gun dogfight---.

You will see how vulnerable he is for a BVR shot from the enemy aircraft from 50 miles away----.

Yet. A2A training always has sorties with the cannon on almost every B-course syllabus around the world. Why have they not removed it from the training then...

On a side note, KT and his junior SS, were selected once to evaluate the Gripen in the 90s.

 

[MastanKhan]

Yet. A2A training always has sorties with the cannon on almost every B-course syllabus around the world. Why have they not removed it from the training then...

Hi,

Old habits die hard---.

There has been no air battle between two modern air forces except for pakistan & India---.

& it shows---one who will go for a gunfight---would die without knowing who killed him and when did he die---.

The video from Gripen showing a 'dogfight ' is a great video---. there is another one with Gripen D's---show camera perspective of the pilot---.

When you see that---you truly realize that all the pilot's attention is trying to get behind the 'enemy' aircraft---thus leaving himself open to a BVR shot---.

 

[GriffinsRule]

Hi,

Old habits die hard---.

There has been no air battle between two modern air forces except for pakistan & India---.

& it shows---one who will go for a gunfight---would die without knowing who killed him and when did he die---.

The video from Gripen showing a 'dogfight ' is a great video---. there is another one with Gripen D's---show camera perspective of the pilot---.

When you see that---you truly realize that all the pilot's attention is trying to get behind the 'enemy' aircraft---thus leaving himself open to a BVR shot---.

So you are saying the next gen fighters being developed in Korea, Turkey and China will not incorporate a gun. We already see the F-35 with a gun, an aircraft which will be in service for the next 40-50 years. When do you envision aircraft without guns timeframe wise?

 

[MastanKhan]

So you are saying the next gen fighters being developed in Korea, Turkey and China will not incorporate a gun. We already see the F-35 with a gun, an aircraft which will be in service for the next 40-50 years. When do you envision aircraft without guns timeframe wise?

Hi,

They may have a gun---which would be redundant---.

J20 does not have a gun---.

The best thing to do is---when talking abut war & weapons---please create a scenario where your 5th gen aircraft would use a gun---.

I have written about many a scenarios where usage of gun is out of question---and yet you and @Knuckles & others keep coming back with a gun---but you guys never put up a scenario how and where a gun would be used by a 5th gen aircraft---.

It is just like saying it---my dad used it---my grand pa and his grand pa used it---I used it---so it would not go away--.

What I have been saying here is that neither the dad or his grand dad ever used a $200 million aircraft---there was no pilot flying it who had $15-25 millions invested in him to fight air battles with discretion---a new fighting game plan where the battle is fought from a position of strength and not with EQUAL ODDS---.

When it comes to war---americans are the most devious people---you may think that they are training to fight in a certain manner---but it is all deceit and deception---. Their true motive and action will always be different than what you might think---.

So---you and @knucles create scenario for using guns---. @Knuckles---you don't need to hide behind " they do it " you are experienced enough to create a real time scenario for using guns on aircraft---.

 

[Raider 21]

Hi,

They may have a gun---which would be redundant---.

J20 does not have a gun---.

The best thing to do is---when talking abut war & weapons---please create a scenario where your 5th gen aircraft would use a gun---.

I have written about many a scenarios where usage of gun is out of question---and yet you and @Knuckles & others keep coming back with a gun---but you guys never put up a scenario how and where a gun would be used by a 5th gen aircraft---.

It is just like saying it---my dad used it---my grand pa and his grand pa used it---I used it---so it would not go away--.

What I have been saying here is that neither the dad or his grand dad ever used a $200 million aircraft---there was no pilot flying it who had $15-25 millions invested in him to fight air battles with discretion---a new fighting game plan where the battle is fought from a position of strength and not with EQUAL ODDS---.

When it comes to war---americans are the most devious people---you may think that they are training to fight in a certain manner---but it is all deceit and deception---. Their true motive and action will always be different than what you might think---.

So---you and @knucles create scenario for using guns---. @Knuckles---you don't need to hide behind " they do it " you are experienced enough to create a real time scenario for using guns on aircraft---.

Mastan. I don't need to hide behind "they do it" nonsense. Behave yourself.

 

[GriffinsRule]

Hi,

They may have a gun---which would be redundant---.

J20 does not have a gun---.

The best thing to do is---when talking abut war & weapons---please create a scenario where your 5th gen aircraft would use a gun---.

I have written about many a scenarios where usage of gun is out of question---and yet you and @Knuckles & others keep coming back with a gun---but you guys never put up a scenario how and where a gun would be used by a 5th gen aircraft---.

It is just like saying it---my dad used it---my grand pa and his grand pa used it---I used it---so it would not go away--.

What I have been saying here is that neither the dad or his grand dad ever used a $200 million aircraft---there was no pilot flying it who had $15-25 millions invested in him to fight air battles with discretion---a new fighting game plan where the battle is fought from a position of strength and not with EQUAL ODDS---.

When it comes to war---americans are the most devious people---you may think that they are training to fight in a certain manner---but it is all deceit and deception---. Their true motive and action will always be different than what you might think---.

So---you and @knucles create scenario for using guns---. @Knuckles---you don't need to hide behind " they do it " you are experienced enough to create a real time scenario for using guns on aircraft---.

I remember asking you for a scenario on a related thread that you did not care to oblige. As a very hypothetical scenario, lets say both sides only have 5th generation aircraft with equal amounts of ECCM etc where BVR missiles are redundant. You still need to shoot the enemy aircraft down and might even have to get within visual range to make sure there is no blue on blue incidents. In that case if you get into a turning fight and your IR missile misses, or you have spent them already, would you retreat or try to go in for a gun kill?

Heres another very simple scenario ... two PAF jets intercept an attack formation of 4 low flying jets and shoot them down with your missiles. Now you have to contend with the IAF jets that were providing top cover but you are out of BVR missiles. Turning tail will only get you shot in your behind ... you cant outrun a missile in this case as your choose to intercept a strike package. If the fight gets into close quarters and the IR missiles are spoofed for both sides, would they both then turn around and go back to the airbase to try to shoot the other side down using guns?

Anyways, these simplistic scenarios are not useful...what is useful is the fact that the latest and greatest fighter of USAF and NATO has a gun and will be in service long after we are dead. Even if it never used, the designed must have done a cost-benefit analysis and decided to incorporate it. They know better than anyone on here as to why hence where ever you stand on the issue, guns are here to stay in the foreseeable future. Im certain project AZM will have a gun as well, esp in the context of PAF.

 

[gambit]

...what do you make of the wreckage of the AMRAAM shown by the Indians? Can any conclusion be reached?

I would not make too much of that 'evidence'. However, weapons inventory is, or should be, controlled, so if Pakistan dispensed X amount of missiles in that event, Pakistan should be upfront about it. If no F-16 were in that event, then what India presented cannot be taken seriously.

 

[MastanKhan]

Mastan. I don't need to hide behind "they do it" nonsense. Behave yourself.

Hi,

Screw " the behave yourself---" . Your BS is getting old---.

You talk big---but put nothing on the paper.

Come out with a plausible scenario where a modern 5th gen aircraft would use its guns---.

And don't hide behind thia country os doing that and that country is doing that---give me a scenario how it will be done---.

 

[MastanKhan]

Heres another very simple scenario ... two PAF jets intercept an attack formation of 4 low flying jets and shoot them down with your missiles. Now you have to contend with the IAF jets that were providing top cover but you are out of BVR missiles. Turning tail will only get you shot in your behind ... you cant outrun a missile in this case as your choose to intercept a strike package. If the fight gets into close quarters and the IR missiles are spoofed for both sides, would they both then turn around and go back to the airbase to try to shoot the other side down using guns?.

Hi,

In this case---your two aircraft would launch their BVR's and then turn turkey---put their tails between their legs and be out of Dodge---before the enemy cover gets to them.

You are going to be out of fuel pretty soon---so going home is the best solution.

If the enemy has air cover---then you would also have air cover---if not then run.

There is a reason for fire and forget BVR missiles---you shoot and you scoot.

If the enemy has air cover---you don't want to merge into a dog fight against them---because enemy missile will pick you out and recognize you as a target even if you are close to the enemy aircraft---friend or foe---.

The battle between modern aircrafts has taken bravery---last man last bullet out of the equation---.

You target your enemy---you launch your missile---and you get out of the arena---.

Please watch the whole video of Kaiser Tufail---and also the Gripen dogfight video---.

 

[Falcon26]

I would not make too much of that 'evidence'. However, weapons inventory is, or should be, controlled, so if Pakistan dispensed X amount of missiles in that event, Pakistan should be upfront about it. If no F-16 were in that event, then what India presented cannot be taken seriously.

Thanks for your feedback. Does the physical condition of the wreckage, one way or the other, establish that it made a successful kill?

 

[gambit]

Thanks for your feedback. Does the physical condition of the wreckage, one way or the other, establish that it made a successful kill?

You mean the remains of the missile? No way to tell.

Even if a missile make physical contact with its target, there is no way to tell from its fragments that there was a target kill. Unlike the movies, an aircraft hit by a missile does not explode immediately and fall straight down. There is forward momentum and the damaged aircraft would be veering in various directions. To find the remains of the aircraft itself is fortunate enough, now there is the remains of the missile?

 

[Fawad alam]

Its hard to believe PDF stories as no evidence is attached and even they are contradicting to each other, Its better to believe only Main stream media and ISPR.