PAF training comparison

[SQ8]

Yes. And by a good margin.



Though PAF training has gone down over the decades in terms of experience of pilots- their flight hours per trainee have dropped, while India's that was low earlier has increased.

Proof?

 

[Judge]

Proof?

Got to search for it, I have IAF flight hour stat links somewhere.

Though you would have access to PAF flight hours better than me.

Oh and I was not comparing PAF trainee flight hours with IAF. I was comparing current PAF training flight hours with PAF flight hours a couple of decades back. Same for IAF now with IAF a couple of decades back.

 

[SQ8]

Got to search for it, I have IAF flight hour stat links somewhere.

Though you would have access to PAF flight hours better than me.

Oh and I was not comparing PAF trainee flight hours with IAF. I was comparing current PAF training flight hours with PAF flight hours a couple of decades back. Same for IAF now with IAF a couple of decades back.

PAF flight hours did go down during the sanctions period(pre-2001) to around 9 hours a month or 110 hours on average .. which was brought back up to what is now the minimum of 180 hours on all fighter types..interview of ACM available to verify this(transport pilots fly more). Please read my post above on how I have detailed the variance of flight hours.(F-16s , JFT flying more than F-7s or Mirages)

The same goes for the IAF. The MKI pilots and units converting were averaging 250 hours at one point during the 2008-10 workup for the type but would have settled to 180-200. This would go lesser for Mig-29,Mirage-2000 pilots(as the aircraft goes through MLU).. and also for the older types such as the Bison to reduce wear and year on those aircraft.
By contrast IAF Il-76 and An-32 pilots would be flying more than 300 hours..but that is due to the nature of the platform.

The bigger issue for the IAF was a loss in early training hours for its pilots due to lack of trainers
Indian Air Force to reinforce pilot training - Economic Times

Something that happened with the PAF in the early 2000s before the LOTEX of its F-5s and induction of more K-8s.

 

[That Guy]

please list the facts, backed with credible sources. Not "hey i call it a fact, so shall you, even though I don't have a source for this. You should look it up google to see if I'm wrong or correct." If you're making a claim, you have to put forth the source.

"Would you expect one of your friends to come into your household and start beating you? Probably not."

If there is a possibility that in my home lives a person who has killed my friend's family, yes I'll be prepared.

"Pakistan was not prepared for an arial invasion from the west, because there was no reason to be prepared. The radars were under peace time deployment, this is a fact. You cannot keep ignoring facts to hide your own foolishness any longer. Everyone keeps telling you the truth and you keep ignoring it.

Here is the report about abbottabad commision: The whole episode of the U.S. assassination mission of May 2, 2011 and the Pakistan government's response before, during and after appears in large part to be a story of complacency, ignorance, negligence, incompetence, irresponsibility and possibly worse at various levels inside and outside the government.

US had warned Pakistan before that it'll come in and get Osama. Yet you say there was no reason for US to pull this move. I'll add further "Despite signals from Washington that American forces would enter Pakistan if they thought they could capture bin Laden, Pakistani’s air defenses were set to a “peace time mode” when the U.S. helicopters crossed into Pakistani airspace, the report said."

So your say about "There was no reason to believe that the US (Pakistan's friend) would pull something like this. " is trash. US had already given signal to Pakistan, yet...

And oh "The Chinese Vietnam war gave valuable knowledge to the Chinese, but that was only one war." So who fought the korean war? It was a different China? Who fought during WW2? Or wars before that?

"Pakistani pilots have experience in many wars against many different opponents, including Afghanistan, India, the Soviet air force,"

Afghanistan or Soviet? I think it's only one. Afghan air force was basically soviet air force. So that is Soviet, India and Israel only. Meanwhile China has experience with US, Japan, UK, South Korea, Australia and possibly other NATO members. These are world superpowers. And they have many different kinds of planes. Meanwhile India and Soviets employed near similar kinds of jets/technology. Now this is a fact.

@Chinese-Dragon may be able to offer more insight into Chinese air force. I'm not very well versed. But I do think that China made many sacrifices and fought despite the odds.

@Manticore allow me to edit all my posts here, such as the OP, so I can post sources (such as PLAAF exercises). Limiting to just one comment is quite a bait thread. This site has a lot and they will read my initial post, ignore 4 pages of the thread, and start discussing the very first post. It's like judging book by cover: "PAF pilots are not as good as PLAAF" and person ignores the book and start bashing the book.

Oh and while you're at it, why don't you put the post where the guy said initially "PAF pilots are better than PLAAF pilots?" That post was off topic certainly.

You should also give me the right to change the title. It should be somewhere along the lines of "PAF training vs PLAAF." That is what the whole argument has been about.

Wow, way to cherry pick and ignore the context of my comments. Evidence has been presented by others, namely Horus. I'm basing most of my arguments on the evidence he presented, ones that you said that you agreed with; Thus, I can only conclude that you did not even read what Horus presented at all.

I'm done here. If you aren't going to take anything anyone says seriously, then there is no point to you. If nobody on these forums can convince you, then there is literally no way that you will ever change your mind, because you're so dug in.

PS. When you say something ignorant, you're going to get called out on it, even if what you said was irrelevant to the topic at hand. Next time, think before you type.

 

[WishLivePak]

Wow, way to cherry pick and ignore the context of my comments. Evidence has been presented by others, namely Horus. I'm basing most of my arguments on the evidence he presented, ones that you said that you agreed with; Thus, I can only conclude that you did not even read what Horus presented at all.

I'm done here. If you aren't going to take anything anyone says seriously, then there is no point to you. If nobody on these forums can convince you, then there is literally no way that you will ever change your mind, because you're so dug in.

PS. When you say something ignorant, you're going to get called out on it, even if what you said was irrelevant to the topic at hand. Next time, think before you type.

Cherry picking and ignoring the context? No chance.

You said China has only fought one air warfare, proven wrong with evidence.
You said Pakistan didn't expect US to attack, proven wrong with evidence.
Pakistan has experience with multiple air forces (only 3), while China has experience vs more than 3, proven with evidence.

Horus and I had different discussion (about Soviet war in Afghanistan). And I did take what Oscar and Horus wrote seriously. They backed with evidence. Meanwhile you and Organzaib had no clue what you two wrote about.

You're done because you're wrong. But that's good, I wouldn't have to waste anytime with you.

PS. Get your facts straight before you come here to post. And when you're proven wrong, accept it. Oh and make sure you provide evidence to back your statements, like I have.

 

[That Guy]

Cherry picking and ignoring the context? No chance.

You said China has only fought one air warfare, proven wrong with evidence.
You said Pakistan didn't expect US to attack, proven wrong with evidence.
Pakistan has experience with multiple air forces (only 3), while China has experience vs more than 3, proven with evidence.

Horus and I had different discussion (about Soviet war in Afghanistan). And I did take what Oscar and Horus wrote seriously. They backed with evidence. Meanwhile you and Organzaib had no clue what you two wrote about.

You're done because you're wrong. But that's good, I wouldn't have to waste anytime with you.

PS. Get your facts straight before you come here to post. And when you're proven wrong, accept it. Oh and make sure you provide evidence to back your statements, like I have.

Evidence was already provided by others, namely horus and oscar. If you took any of the arguments seriously, you'd know I was basing my entire argument on what they provided, and in fact referenced their evidence.

But no, you're to arrogant and ignorant in your stance to admit that you're wrong, and in fact have not been reading any of the evidence presented by anyone. Myself posting the same evidence would have been redundant.

Consider this my last post. I won't stoop to your level, I'd only lose my sanity doing so.

 

[Viper0011.]

Consider this my last post. I won't stoop to your level, I'd only lose my sanity doing so.

Smart move. I've counted my losses already battling this genius. He's not listening to anyone so let it go. The entire forum has been derailed to off topic, some weird lala land!

 

[WishLivePak]

Evidence was already provided by others, namely horus and oscar. If you took any of the arguments seriously, you'd know I was basing my entire argument on what they provided, and in fact referenced their evidence.

But no, you're to arrogant and ignorant in your stance to admit that you're wrong, and in fact have not been reading any of the evidence presented by anyone. Myself posting the same evidence would have been redundant.

Consider this my last post. I won't stoop to your level, I'd only lose my sanity doing so.

Thanks for admitting you did not provide evidence. When I ask for evidence, you point at others. And when you can't find any evidence, you just say "but you won't agree to it anyway."

I'll repost:

You said China has only fought one air warfare, proven wrong with evidence.
You said Pakistan didn't expect US to attack, proven wrong with evidence.
Pakistan has experience with multiple air forces (only 3), while China has experience vs more than 3, proven with evidence.

Smart move. I've counted my losses already battling this genius. He's not listening to anyone so let it go. The entire forum has been derailed to off topic, some weird lala land!

And if you looked at thread title, the discussion is on topic. But then you still haven't sobered up.

 

[SQ8]

You said China has only fought one air warfare, proven wrong with evidence.
You said Pakistan didn't expect US to attack, proven wrong with evidence.
Pakistan has experience with multiple air forces (only 3), while China has experience vs more than 3, proven with evidence..

The Singaporeans have experience with none, yet their pilots are some of the highest rated in the world. So either the USAF, RAF, Indians, IDF are all ignorant to rate the RpSAF.. or you are.

 

[Zarvan]

you're saying that PAF training is better than Chinese?

Pfft.

Yes because hardly any country train its forces keeping in mind that enemy will be at least 3 times bigger

 

[xyxmt]

Facts offend me? Oh come on. A war that was fought 26 years ago carries modern aircrafts but a war that was fought 15 years prior to that one is an old one? Sorry, but in today's world, there are these missles (fire and forget) as well as jets seeing jets from hundreds of KMs away. These are modern aircrafts. A jet cannot do a dog fight or practice 26 year ago experience if it gets blown up before it gets even close. (here's your words "The Soviet-Afghan war isn't even that old, in fact, it's still very relevant today for lessons to be learned with modern air crafts. ")

Another fact for you, I have been agreeing with points. I agreed with Horus. So I'm not some "screw you all, i'm right here" person. What did you come up with anyway. Instead of posting facts, like Horus did, you said "PAF would win 10/10 times. That's not to say that PLAAF pilots are bad, they just lack experience." Yeah, PLAAF lacks experience and PAF wins 10/10 (even 8/10 is exaggeration). Any facts to prove they lack it? Because the fact is, they fought in Vietnam, a 20 year long battle, and they fought in Korea, against a massive coalition.

when pilots return from a mission, everything is recorded, every maneuvers and its pros and cons are recorded and discussed and becomes part of trianing. So, the training is the comprehensive manual of past combat missions and only the pilots involved in that mission are not the ones getting experience but the whole generation of pilots. So the war fought 26 years ago which involved F16 had recorded full capabilities on F16 and as long as F16 are in service all coming pilots have that experience.

 

[WishLivePak]

The Singaporeans have experience with none, yet their pilots are some of the highest rated in the world. So either the USAF, RAF, Indians, IDF are all ignorant to rate the RpSAF.. or you are.

Where in the quote do I say that if a country has no experience in war, it cannot be a good air force?

when pilots return from a mission, everything is recorded, every maneuvers and its pros and cons are recorded and discussed and becomes part of trianing. So, the training is the comprehensive manual of past combat missions and only the pilots involved in that mission are not the ones getting experience but the whole generation of pilots. So the war fought 26 years ago which involved F16 had recorded full capabilities on F16 and as long as F16 are in service all coming pilots have that experience.

I wholeheartedly agree. But I'll add that just because old planes are retired, their recorded data is not put in trash. Valuable data is still kept and used and applied onward when needed and possible.

 

[SQ8]

Where in the quote do I say that if a country has no experience in war, it cannot be a good air force?.

WHen you find that the experience of the Korean war is greater than that of the India Pakistan conflicts.
Or that with the Russains in Afghanistan. Essentially, your entire line of posts here are tangential and self-contradictory.

 

[WishLivePak]

WHen you find that the experience of the Korean war is greater than that of the India Pakistan conflicts.
Or that with the Russains in Afghanistan. Essentially, your entire line of posts here are tangential and self-contradictory.

And where did I say that Korean war alone is greater than that of India/Pakistan conflict?

 

[SQ8]

And where did I say that Korean war alone is greater than that of India/Pakistan conflict?

PAF training comparison | Page 3

And china has fought "real war." Which is, Korean war.