PAF Vs IAF Command and Control Systems

[SQ8]

Then the point of the debate comes down to the published facts..
Our C4I system.. based on what is published is in the process of being converted to a network centric system.
Apart from what is available.. such as the radar systems purchased etc..How they are integrated.. protocols.. setups.. etc..very little published info..
online..at least to my knowledge exists..
You may find peeks of it in the usual ISPR releases..or older videos..but that is that..Maybe that is the psyche of the Pakistan military not to be open..
or maybe they are just learning how to be media savvy.
either they know better..or they dont.. I cant judge.
as for the brandishing part.. I can simply state what I know from my sources.
I am incapable of asking the AF to give me any published data or proposal scans on the system.. apart from what is reported on in journals..or on wiki.
Again.. many of these projects are outsourced to universities..if they are published.. one can assume there is a foundation for such and such capability..
But if somebody is not willing to publish it...but if i have seen the groundwork for it..the people working on it.. how am I at fault for still believing in it?
again..agree to disagree.. but you cannot convert my perspective on it.

Now what if .. 6 months..or a year down the road.. a magazine like AFM does another in depth story on the PAF..and then the data is available on the net.
what if it debunks all that I have said here.. I lose my credibility..
what if it confirms all that has been said here...
Isnt that the point of these forums?..
isnt that where we found out about the J-10B from?
the much rumored yet not seen J-XX?
Lets say I tell you that I know that the C4I system has a detection to classification and tracking time of around 3ms..
lets assume I know the guy working on it.. and only deemed it necessary at the time to ask this question...
I dont know about the links..fiber..microwave.. optical or pigeon based..I never bothered to ask.. so does that automatically make the system non existent?
Maybe he is just doing it for research..or as a study..
But he is working on it..and we a pretty cash strapped nation..we dont just do stuff for the heck of it..

I am paranoid..or cautious..
particularly because of an ugly incident involving a colleague..he wasn't thrown into the gulag.. but people did find out he was being very descriptive of his work at his second job teaching university grads..and was severely reprimanded...I probably would not be risking anything if I talked openly here on what I am working on..its been done in india as well..yet..why take the chance.

p.s
I did not back slap him because he derided the Indian system or showed ours as better..but I occasionally do appreciate those who b|tchslap a clown around.
Im all for the discussions Ive had with you and raj..you learn something from them..even if its plain simple humility..
But the infestation of clowns...from anywhere doesn't go well with me..

 

[silent hawk]

PURPOSE OF PAF AND IAF​

I have been following the discussions of paritosh, raj and santro, very informative thankyou.

One important aspect that has come up is that of purpose.

If someone asks me to do a knife vs axe comparision I would want to know the purpose. If you want to cut a tree an axe is better however if you want to eat a steak a knife is better. Having a comparision without a purpose does not make sense.

PAF has always kept its purpose very simple. It is a force geared up for air combat primarily defence of Pakistani Air Space with some OCA (Offensive Counter Air) capability. It has one adversary IAF and has no strategic or global objectives. Pakistan has very little dept and many important installations are close to the border hence Pakistan Air Force with limited resources must protect difficult to defend National Assets against a much larger adversary. This cannot be achieved without force multipliers such as C4I systems. Hence PAF since 1980 has been trying to have the best possible C4I system.

Now lets come over to IAF

First of all there are enough posts in this thread alone to suggest that China is not a threat. Here are some.

Air Bases of China almost no threat to India
http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-aviation/82343-paf-vs-iaf-command-control-systems.html#post1300081

SAMs of China once again not focused on India. It is clear that for China the main threat is from pro American Taiwan and from sea.(credit goes to rockstar for the image)



Quotes regarding China

China is not India's enemy as many here would like to believe, we enjoy great cross border trade and there has been a lot of positive growth between the two countries in the last decade or so. Both countries have no interest in war and so both dont place their major defenses on the border. Please check China's sam placements for a better idea.

Now posts regarding IAFs capability

http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-aviation/82343-paf-vs-iaf-command-control-systems-6.html#post1303885

http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-aviation/82343-paf-vs-iaf-command-control-systems-7.html#post1304118

Looking at the quantity and quality of IAF aircraft it is clear that against Pakistan IAF does not need force multipliers.

The real issue is what is the purpose of IAF and against who is this power going to be unleashed.

 

[rockstarIN]

^^^IF have have a strong army and it never been to battle, the force have been serving you at best optimum level.

Alot of battles did not happen or such a situation didnt arise because of strong armies, which might not see action.

 

[silent hawk]

^^^IF have have a strong army and it never been to battle, the force have been serving you at best optimum level.

A lot of battles did not happen or such a situation didnt arise because of strong armies, which might not see action.

One difference between civil and military is that civil works on probabilities while military works on worst case scenarios.

Take IAF in a worst case scenario. Pakistan or PAF just cannot afford to be benovelent.

Let's review Military Theory

Utmost Use of Force
In such dangerous things as war, the errors which proceed from a spirit of benevolence are the worst.
Carl von Clausewitz

For Pakistan to even consider that IAF is a defensive force would be against the very principles of military theory.

I hope India realizes this

 

[SQ8]

The C4I systems being discussed here should also be taken in context of op req..
for eg..
Can it be said that the C4I system of sweden in the 80's was one of the best in the world? ...and considering its unique situation vis a vis the USSR.. was the best possible implementation of a system? maybe not.
The argument that the PAF's system is better than the IAF's and vice vera has to be based not on whether the operational requirements of the country are met effectively with that system.
In this respect..that IAF systems at this current stage..while being more numerous and incorporating extra sensors..will still not be sufficient to provide adequate coverage of India as a whole.
However.. the systems deployed currently which are concentrated on the western border of India..based on available data and equipment.. from the post made by members here.. is that while it has adequate high and med alt coverage throughout the western sector..there may be gaps in low alt coverage...(although they may have been deliberately ignored as the more imp northern and southern sectors got priority in equipment procurement).
As far as the integration of these systems is concerned. Since Pakistan's new C4I system has been disqualified on the basis of no published data being available..Ill bring out the old system which has been operational.
It has large gaps in low alt coverage in the lower plains of Punjab and upper sindh.
It is however.. networked to each sector operational center.
Since no published data on the internet exists on the integration of the Erieye's into this network.. so lets not consider it to appease the naysayers here.
consequently..the much publicized IAF C4I system of today.. is quite ahead of the last known published data on the PAF's C4I network.

 

[rockstarIN]

One difference between civil and military is that civil works on probabilities while military works on worst case scenarios.

Take IAF in a worst case scenario. Pakistan or PAF just cannot afford to be benovelent.

Let's review Military Theory

Utmost Use of Force
In such dangerous things as war, the errors which proceed from a spirit of benevolence are the worst.
Carl von Clausewitz

For Pakistan to even consider that IAF is a defensive force would be against the very principles of military theory.

I hope India realizes this

It is all depends upon situations, India is a big country, we need a force to protest our interests in the region. You can't compare always India V/s Pakistan, we have larger area, long coasts. Yes, pakistan is one of the concern, it doesn't mean that is the only concern, we only spend 2-3% og GDP for Defense, but when the DGP grows, the spent will also grow.

 

[silent hawk]

It is all depends upon situations, India is a big country, we need a force to protest our interests in the region. You can't compare always India V/s Pakistan, we have larger area, long coasts. Yes, pakistan is one of the concern, it doesn't mean that is the only concern, we only spend 2-3% og GDP for Defense, but when the DGP grows, the spent will also grow.

Although this is a typing mistake but suprisingly it is the truth.

In 1965 protest against operation grand slam

In 1971 protest against atrocities being commited by west Pakistan against East Pakistan.

In 1999 protest against incursion in Kargil.

In 2002 protest against bombing of Indian Parliment.

In 2008 protest against Mumbai attacks.

Indian forces have been reactive for too long

After more than 60 years Pakistan carried out operations in tribal areas to remove known anti state elements.

What stops India from using its forces to carry out operations in Pakistan and remove elements that it considers anti state?

After being reactive for so long what stops India from finally taking an active stance?

 

[rockstarIN]

[

QUOTE=silent hawk;1313126]Although this is a typing mistake but suprisingly it is the truth.

Not a typing mistake

In 1965 protest against operation grand slam

In 1971 protest against atrocities being commited by west Pakistan against East Pakistan.

In 1999 protest against incursion in Kargil.

In 2002 protest against bombing of Indian Parliment.

In 2008 protest against Mumbai attacks.

Indian forces have been reactive for too long

After more than 60 years Pakistan carried out operations in tribal areas to remove known anti state elements.

Whats the point you are trying to point out?

What stops India from using its forces to carry out operations in Pakistan and remove elements that it considers anti state?

After being reactive for so long what stops India from finally taking an active stance?

[/QUOTE]

You have nothing to loose, but we have a vibrant economy.

 

[silent hawk]

[

Not a typing mistake



Whats the point you are trying to point out?

You have nothing to loose, but we have a vibrant economy.

^^^IF have have a strong army and it never been to battle, the force have been serving you at best optimum level.

Alot of battles did not happen or such a situation didnt arise because of strong armies, which might not see action.

The point is that the strong army has not been able to maintain peace. Pakistan continues to provoke India. In Pakistan there is a thinking that the Indian Forces may finally become pro-active. This is a capability which they have always had but never used.

It is true that you have an economy to loose but the forces also have to maintain morale and pride. When events like the bombing of Indian Parliment or Mumbai Incident take place and the armed forces are unable to do anything it must shurely create frustration in younger ranks. Similarly the people must be asking the armed forces what is the use of spending billions on them.

You are clearly trying to develop a missile shield, building a carrier groub , have SLBMs and many other things which clearly show that you must have offensive designs.

To me the purpose of the Indian armed forces is not clear. If such a large force was raised for defensive purposes than the purpose is surely not being achieved. Pakistan at this time feels highly threatened that this time India will not wait for a terrorist attack before trying a surgical strike. Are these fears unfounded?

 

[rockstarIN]

^^ Its not forces being proactive, it is a political decision always..

And we do not need to intervene, you guys have already lots of problems and there is larger players involved, no need for a conventional strike..

 

[silent hawk]

^^ Its not forces being proactive, it is a political decision always..

And we do not need to intervene, you guys have already lots of problems and there is larger players involved, no need for a conventional strike..

Why then all the developments and procurements. Why spend billions to achieve a capability that is not needed. Yes it may be just 4% of GDP but why waste it. What about IACCS if there is no need for conventional strikes why is this system being developed?

India is spending billions to upgrade it's armed forces. There is no threat from China and Pakistan is really to small to give any serious challenge in the conventional domain. If India does not wish to intervene in Pakistan, what is the purpose of upgrading Indian armed forces?

 

[rockstarIN]

Why then all the developments and procurements. Why spend billions to achieve a capability that is not needed. Yes it may be just 4% of GDP but why waste it. What about IACCS if there is no need for conventional strikes why is this system being developed?

India is spending billions to upgrade it's armed forces. There is no threat from China and Pakistan is really to small to give any serious challenge in the conventional domain. If India does not wish to intervene in Pakistan, what is the purpose of upgrading Indian armed forces?

You need a strong force to support your growth.

We have our interests in Indian Ocean region, need ACs. Look at Japan, who are No. 2 economy but shivers when N.Korea trsts its missiles.

And we are not spending too much for our defense, check this out..

 

[Hulk]

Why then all the developments and procurements. Why spend billions to achieve a capability that is not needed. Yes it may be just 4% of GDP but why waste it. What about IACCS if there is no need for conventional strikes why is this system being developed?

India is spending billions to upgrade it's armed forces. There is no threat from China and Pakistan is really to small to give any serious challenge in the conventional domain. If India does not wish to intervene in Pakistan, what is the purpose of upgrading Indian armed forces?

Quick question buddy, you also accuse now on daily basis that India/RAW is targeting Pakistan. Why not you attack India then?

It is easier to say, it works both ways when you have to attack you have to think a lot. It's not easy. When you have to provoke, it does not take much simple as that.

If you want I can further discuss this, will see how much guts Pakistan has when it comes to attack.

We have taken right decision, terrorist attack are not best responded by conventional war, our forces think right. You have think what goal will you achieve? Nothing, it is better if we respond in kind. I would rather respond by enabling TTP. Simple as that, easier, cost effective.

 

[silent hawk]

You need a strong force to support your growth.

We have our interests in Indian Ocean region, need ACs. Look at Japan, who are No. 2 economy but shivers when N.Korea trsts its missiles.

And we are not spending too much for our defense, check this out..

Now I really have my doubts about wikipedia.

This map is surely incorrect. It shows India and Pakistan in the same category. India may be spending very less percentage but Pakistan really has to give a large chunk to keep pace.

You do not wish to be like Japan that I understand. You also wish to be a permenant member of the UN security council. You also admit that the main purpose is political.

Can I than conclude that the purpose of the present upgradation of the Indian armed forces is a requirement for getting a permenant seat in the UN Security Council. India never did and still does not have any offensive designs against any neighbouring country?

 

[lionheart1]

[

Not a typing mistake



Whats the point you are trying to point out?

You have nothing to loose, but we have a vibrant economy.[/QUOTE]

there will be time for every thing, anti-India elements can be taken out many ways , by different means , at different levels ,when time comes , if we think it is necessary we will use force, no power in the world can stops us ,