PAF Long Range Capabilities

[Abingdonboy]

I can't see that any long range capability really exists with the PAF, after all the PAF is be doctrine purely a defensive force and not offensive and not expeditionary. Look at the way the PAF is structured-its main strike a/c the F-16 within the PAF doesn't even have IFR capability because the IL-78s are unable to refuel them. As such it is unlikely there will be any IFR experince within the PAF F-16 pilot cadre. Yes, a few pilots might have done some IFR in various exercises but this is hardly substantial and not enough to actually have an affect on the PAF as a whole. The PAF is structured to defend Pakistani skies and conduct CAPs not go on long-range strike missions to Israel. This is simply not a capaility the PAF has or needs to have.


And then there is the lingering issue of the infamous "kill switches" on the F-16s. If these do exist or if they don't tracking systems almost certainly are present on PAF F-16s so the US would almost certainly either flat out allow the PAF jets to go on their mission or would warn their good buddies in Israel long before PAF fighters got anywhere near Israeli airspace. And the other PAF a/c either don't have the "legs" or level of sophistication to undertake such a long range mission. And I seriously doubt the PAF pilots are trained in such missions.


I just can't see that in the condition Pakistan is in why it would invite more hardship or turmoil to the nation, it would be lunacy to say the least. Paksitan has little buisness being concerned about the ME it has bigger fish to fry closer home. There are only a handful of nations who could truly do such a mission successfully. Pakistan isn't one of them and doesn't need to be.

 

[SQ8]

I can't see that any long range capability really exists with the PAF, after all the PAF is be doctrine purely a defensive force and not offensive and not expeditionary. Look at the way the PAF is structured-its main strike a/c the F-16 within the PAF doesn't even have IFR capability because the IL-78s are unable to refuel them. As such it is unlikely there will be any IFR experince within the PAF F-16 pilot cadre. Yes, a few pilots might have done some IFR in various exercises but this is hardly substantial and not enough to actually have an affect on the PAF as a whole. The PAF is structured to defend Pakistani skies and conduct CAPs not go on long-range strike missions to Israel. This is simply not a capaility the PAF has or needs to have. .

Two different approaches existed..
but in short..one was the PAF had practiced operating from a friendly country to strike against Dimona..and this was back in the 80's without the F-16's.
This was always considered a one way mission and chances of success low..
even the positioning of PAF aircraft to that friendly country without detection was considered impossible but the very idea that the PAF was prepared to strike at Israel was supposed to be "picked up" by tel aviv as a deterrent.


The other is best left unsaid for.

However, whether the PAF actually needs to strike Israel.. no
There are already too many threats the PAF has to handle and Israel is simply not on that list for now.
Moreover, even the IASF does not consider Pakistan as such a pressing target since it has decided to leave it to India to carry that task out for it.

 

[batmannow]

Two different approaches existed..
but in short..one was the PAF had practiced operating from a friendly country to strike against Dimona..and this was back in the 80's without the F-16's.
This was always considered a one way mission and chances of success low..
even the positioning of PAF aircraft to that friendly country without detection was considered impossible but the very idea that the PAF was prepared to strike at Israel was supposed to be "picked up" by tel aviv as a deterrent.


The other is best left unsaid for.

However, whether the PAF actually needs to strike Israel.. no
There are already too many threats the PAF has to handle and Israel is simply not on that list for now.
Moreover, even the IASF does not consider Pakistan as such a pressing target since it has decided to leave it to India to carry that task out for it.

The question is can india do it?
Last time that was a hot logged on your mirrage 2005 , which was showen to the IssaF chief by gen. kiyani, if iam not mistaken!
India is much heavier in airpower but still, it doesn't hve the capability to dominate PAF.

 

[Abingdonboy]

The question is can india do it?
Last time that was a hot logged on your mirrage 2005 , which was showen to the IssaF chief by gen. kiyani, if iam not mistaken!
India is much heavier in airpower but still, it doesn't hve the capability to dominate PAF.

The IAF (India) certainly does have this capabilty but this is because this is due to doctrincal differences between the 2 AFs (PAF and IAF). The IAF is activly seeking to add to its long-range strike capabilites with the addtiona of more and more AARs and fighters able to utilise IFR and go on long-range missions. Additionally the IAF has built up a capable store of buddy refuelling pods for its strike a/c and will continue doing so for new additions. But then the IAF also has a much larger AO to the PAF, it extends all the way to the A&N islands. As such the IAF has the training and doctrine to be able to do such missions. The IAF (like all wings of the Indian military today) is seeking to gain expeditionary war-fighting capability. This sort of capability is incredibly expensive to build up and it is no surprise the IAF is looking to spend in excess of $50 BN in the next decade on moving towards this end. The IAF is adding fighters with the range and sophistication to carry out missions such as Rafales and MKIs (SUPER) and later PAF-FA/FGFA as well as a/c that can support such missions such as stragic airlifters such as the C-17 and AARs like the A330 MRTT and AWACs. But again is is a matter of doctrine, the PAF simply has no need of this capability.

 

[SQ8]

The question is can india do it?
Last time that was a hot logged on your mirrage 2005 , which was showen to the IssaF chief by gen. kiyani, if iam not mistaken!
India is much heavier in airpower but still, it doesn't hve the capability to dominate PAF.

While beyond the scope of this topic.. Yes they can , but not without heavy losses.

 

[Abingdonboy]

While beyond the scope of this topic.. Yes they can , but not without heavy losses.

The IAF can certainly deny the ability for the PAF to intrude into Indian airspace and can take the fight to Pakistan in its own airspace but to leave the PAF combat ineffective without the situation going nuclear on the Pakistani side seems far- fetched-the Pakistani leadership simply wouldn't tolerate such heavy losses on their side especially if the IAF is allowed to gain air-supremacy in Pakistan the IA and IN will have pretty much free reign to wreck havoc on Pakistan.

 

[Edevelop]

i guess the f16 block 52 with cft and drop tanks might be able able for deep strike in Israel

You forgot the IL-78 Refuelling Tankers. So on that note, its not just the F-16s mainly the Block 52s with CFT that would get additional punch but also Mirage V fitted with IFR. I don't know how long it takes to add a refuelling probe in general to a new fighter, but JF-17 is very much capable of getting such thing, if needed that is.

 

[Peregrine]

Even Israel doesnt possess the capabilities to destroy Iranian nuclear sites and make it back. If they could, we wouldnt be discussing the hypothetical scenarios.

 

[baqai]

I find it interesting and at times funny that many of our Indian and Even Pakistani members think in this way

PAF = F-16

i am sure military strategies, tactics and plans are made by people who are aware of all the facts and figures including the ever famous kill switches.

 

[Abingdonboy]

I find it interesting and at times funny that many of our Indian and Even Pakistani members think in this way

PAF = F-16

i am sure military strategies, tactics and plans are made by people who are aware of all the facts and figures including the ever famous kill switches.

Of course PAF doesn't =F-16 but as,by far, the most poten fighter in the PAF's aresenal it makes sense to assume any action of this kind would employ the F-16. If not then the mission will be severly restricted due to the rudamantory nature of the Mirages and JF17s relative to the F-16s.

 

[AUz]

PAF doesn't need to go against Israel. Israel will never use its airforce to strike Pakistan....

Plus : It is funny how Indians here think that PAF F-16s can't go outside of Pakistani airspace ....It is not Acecombat where if you go outside of pre-programmed territory , the signal comes "wrong way...return or mission will fail" ...

And oh yeah..why would Pakistan use its airforce against Israel? Pakistani missile force exists for a reason

 

[Abingdonboy]

PAF doesn't need to go against Israel. Israel will never use its airforce to strike Pakistan....

Plus : It is funny how Indians here think that PAF F-16s can't go outside of Pakistani airspace ....It is not Acecombat where if you go outside of pre-programmed territory , the signal comes "wrong way...return or mission will fail" ...

And oh yeah..why would Pakistan use its airforce against Israel? Pakistani missile force exists for a reason

Well it all depends on whether the US allows the PAF F-16s to go outside Pakistani territory of cousrse they can wrt fuel and range but the question is will they be allowed to?

 

[Thorough Pro]

Two different approaches existed..
but in short..one was the PAF had practiced operating from a friendly country to strike against Dimona..and this was back in the 80's without the F-16's.

The other is best left unsaid for.

As time passes capabilities change (on both sides), as capabilities change, so does the strategy.
In todays scenario I don't think except F-16 any other platform will have any chance of making it more than 10 KM across and into Israel airspace. F-16 in large numbers may be 10 four-team waves can accomplish limited success with heavy losses, if that happens then PAF will not be left any potent assets to counter IsAF retaliatory strikes.

In todays scenario, Pakistan has much better and potent options to achieve the same objective with complete surprise and and a very high probability of success, not only that it can also seriously hamper IsAF's retaliatory missions which can be met by ready PAF assets.

But these are only wht-if, if-then hypothetical scenarios. There is no bone on contention between the two sides and I trust both sides are sane enough, and realize the potential devastating after effects of any miscalculation.

 

[jha]

PAF can target the nuclear station. It has the capability but the possibility of the planes making back will be close to zilch. Plus the success is not guaranteed.

Any such mission will make PAF severely weaker and will be close to impossible to handle the retaliation by IsAF and USAF...

 

[Fieldmarshal]

The thought process of most of the members is with due respect naive to say the least.
this is not a video game or a movie we are talking about, but rather real people in real world scenarios.
in todays battle field with heavy state of the art sam concentration, backed up by radars with over the horizon capability, which are further backed by fighter ac. it would be nothing but suicidal to even think of even mounting an attack using ac.when this job can be safely and accurately achieved by using cruise missiles or even BMs. once a hole has been created in the enemies defenses or better yet been taken out. ac can be used in what ever way they are seen fit.

73 arab isreali war is good example of this as long as the egyptians operated under the cover of sams they created havoc by bring down scores of isreali ac. but once they left the cover of sams the same egyptian army suffered badly.
similarly the us did not start desert storm I until they have punched a hole in the iraqi defenses and than went about to neutralize the iraqi offensive capabilities, all using cruise missiles or stealth ac.