PAF's Defensive Doctrine---Out of Ignorance---Out of Incompetence Or What?

[New World]

Hi,

For the last 30 plus years I have been hearing these words that the Pakistan's air force's doctrine is defensive in nature. And every time it raises the level of concern that I have for my motherland as if something does not sound right.

Because I know very well---that my navy----the ones with the least amount of budget and no show pomp and strut---they sent their men 2500 miles away to strike at the heat of the enemy's mighty ships in their little submarine. Even though they failed in their venture but they died in the far away backyard of the enemy heartland---nothing can glorify a death like dying in the enemy's backyard---so far away from your base---in anonymity to this day---we don't know the whole truth except that they laid down their lives on distant shores and are not with us anymore.

Because I know---that our army---the one that faces the wrath of the nation every 10 to 12 years---it also sent its soldiers across of the borders---and even though the things did not go well for them----and many of them died---but so many of them died on the other side of the border in the enemy territory----in the enemy's front yard---and that is no small achievement for a small army.

And then I hear about this doctrine----from our supposedly, the most cherished arm of our military wing---who claim to be the best of the best in the world---the military arm that struts around in arrogance and bravado---and preens around everywhere like Peacocks in heat----that they want to stay home and fight the battles on the home turf----basically what they are saying is that we will bring the enemy home---the enemy will destroy us and thus destroy the rest of the infra structure----.

This is called the defensive air combat doctrine---where out of fear or incompetence or for whatever reasons you do not have the ability to strike at the enemy deep in its own woods---this doctrine is also know as the doctrine of cowardice.

But how did it start---how did we get from an offensive air force to the one fighting with the tail between our legs.

Well---like everything else---it started with incompetence at the top during the 1971 war----. The afghan war brought an opportune moment for the Pakistan air force---sanctions were off---and PAF had the option to buy different aircraft----. Being a French aircraft dominant air force---it should have by default stayed with the French---goinf rom Mirage 3/5 to Mirage F1 and then Mirage 2000.

But during the war---it got the carrot dangled in front of it--the fabled F16----. On the other side was the Mirage 2000---on a given day each aircraft could outdo the other. The PAF BLUNDERED into buying the F16---and it left the gate open for its arch enemy to buy the supposedly number 2 aircraft.

Indian air force was woefully equipped at that time---it only had Russian aircraft as its primary fighter aircraft.

PAF thru its blunder---allowed the indian air force to purchase the Mirage 2000---and gave the enemy parity in the battlefield in the skies----.

PAF lies that it needed the F16's to fight afghan air force----now we know that was not right---. The mirage 3 were well equipped to take on the afghan air force---as was the case in the first couple of afghan planes shot down by the mirages---.

If the PAF had rejected the F 16----the indian air force would not have been able to buy the mirage 2000---because the Pakistan would have been the primary buyer.

Then came the sanctions and another opportunity to buy mirage 2000----and the supposedly honest sec def of Pakistan rejected the deal because there was too much graft in that deal.

So---what was the big deal about the graft---100 million---200 million---in the fortunes of nations---this amount is not even peanuts. This purchase would have given us back our parity over our arch enemy India.

This blunder was a nail in the coffin of a prestigious air force which got destroyed by the actions of an HONEST OFFICER.

Then came 9/11 and lifting of sanctions---PAF now has the funds to purchase an aircraft on a fastrak to fill up the gap that had widened over the years---but we forget to realize is that this was not the same fighting force of the mid 60----this was a force that had ROT set in its roots---the solid frame had been eaten by the termites---it was force in show only and the GUTS belonged to men long dead lying in their graves.

The 4 years after 9/11 were lost in jumping from one plane to the other---acting totally clueless like a kid in the candy store with pocket full of money wants to buy every thing and ends up buying nothing.

The primary target of the air force like any other force was to procure and aircraft that can match the front line enemy aircraft one on one and come out ahead. So that the enemy does not pose a threat to strike and create instability in the country----.

CONTD

You are right sir, In 80's Paf bought f-16 to counter Iaf mig-29 and in 20's Paf still want to buy f-16..where as Iaf has bought 50 mirage M2k , 272 su-30mki +40 on order and 36 rafale are on order..

 

[r0ck]

But IAF does not feel in any way challenged by the PAF at the moment.

Whilst I understand your post for the most parts, however, I disagree with the above point.

Though I can agree that its your opinion, fair enough.

But in my opinion, if the IAF does not feel in any way challanged by the PAF at the moment, then I would've seen atleast something, anything, from the IAF in my lifetime.

So far I've only heard stories from my elders about an IAF Mig being chased by PAF Sabres over the skies of Karachi.

 

[redgriffin]

Hi,

For the last 30 plus years I have been hearing these words that the Pakistan's air force's doctrine is defensive in nature. And every time it raises the level of concern that I have for my motherland as if something does not sound right.

Because I know very well---that my navy----the ones with the least amount of budget and no show pomp and strut---they sent their men 2500 miles away to strike at the heat of the enemy's mighty ships in their little submarine. Even though they failed in their venture but they died in the far away backyard of the enemy heartland---nothing can glorify a death like dying in the enemy's backyard---so far away from your base---in anonymity to this day---we don't know the whole truth except that they laid down their lives on distant shores and are not with us anymore.

Because I know---that our army---the one that faces the wrath of the nation every 10 to 12 years---it also sent its soldiers across of the borders---and even though the things did not go well for them----and many of them died---but so many of them died on the other side of the border in the enemy territory----in the enemy's front yard---and that is no small achievement for a small army.

And then I hear about this doctrine----from our supposedly, the most cherished arm of our military wing---who claim to be the best of the best in the world---the military arm that struts around in arrogance and bravado---and preens around everywhere like Peacocks in heat----that they want to stay home and fight the battles on the home turf----basically what they are saying is that we will bring the enemy home---the enemy will destroy us and thus destroy the rest of the infra structure----.

This is called the defensive air combat doctrine---where out of fear or incompetence or for whatever reasons you do not have the ability to strike at the enemy deep in its own woods---this doctrine is also know as the doctrine of cowardice.

But how did it start---how did we get from an offensive air force to the one fighting with the tail between our legs.

Well---like everything else---it started with incompetence at the top during the 1971 war----. The afghan war brought an opportune moment for the Pakistan air force---sanctions were off---and PAF had the option to buy different aircraft----. Being a French aircraft dominant air force---it should have by default stayed with the French---goinf rom Mirage 3/5 to Mirage F1 and then Mirage 2000.

But during the war---it got the carrot dangled in front of it--the fabled F16----. On the other side was the Mirage 2000---on a given day each aircraft could outdo the other. The PAF BLUNDERED into buying the F16---and it left the gate open for its arch enemy to buy the supposedly number 2 aircraft.

Indian air force was woefully equipped at that time---it only had Russian aircraft as its primary fighter aircraft.

PAF thru its blunder---allowed the indian air force to purchase the Mirage 2000---and gave the enemy parity in the battlefield in the skies----.

PAF lies that it needed the F16's to fight afghan air force----now we know that was not right---. The mirage 3 were well equipped to take on the afghan air force---as was the case in the first couple of afghan planes shot down by the mirages---.

If the PAF had rejected the F 16----the indian air force would not have been able to buy the mirage 2000---because the Pakistan would have been the primary buyer.

Then came the sanctions and another opportunity to buy mirage 2000----and the supposedly honest sec def of Pakistan rejected the deal because there was too much graft in that deal.

So---what was the big deal about the graft---100 million---200 million---in the fortunes of nations---this amount is not even peanuts. This purchase would have given us back our parity over our arch enemy India.

This blunder was a nail in the coffin of a prestigious air force which got destroyed by the actions of an HONEST OFFICER.

Then came 9/11 and lifting of sanctions---PAF now has the funds to purchase an aircraft on a fastrak to fill up the gap that had widened over the years---but we forget to realize is that this was not the same fighting force of the mid 60----this was a force that had ROT set in its roots---the solid frame had been eaten by the termites---it was force in show only and the GUTS belonged to men long dead lying in their graves.

The 4 years after 9/11 were lost in jumping from one plane to the other---acting totally clueless like a kid in the candy store with pocket full of money wants to buy every thing and ends up buying nothing.

The primary target of the air force like any other force was to procure and aircraft that can match the front line enemy aircraft one on one and come out ahead. So that the enemy does not pose a threat to strike and create instability in the country----.

CONTD

Once again ignorance of the factors at play & behind the acquisitions at that time being shown. Ignorance of the development status of the airframes at the time available, financial constraints etc
The graft btw wasn't 100 or 200 million but way more.
Even this post is a waste I guess because observing your posts over the years I've concluded you are one of those people who are so rigidly set in their views that it is no use debating with them.

 

[niaz]

In my humble opinion there are 4 essential air power capabilities; control of the air; attack/interdiction in support of the ground forces, strategic bombing to destroy/weaken enemy’ s fighting capability and reconnaissance to gather situation awareness and intelligence about deployment of enemy forces.

Based on the above premises, one would think that an offensive doctrine would primarily be concerned with destroying enemy's command & control network, fuel depots, ammunition & armament production factories and bridges etc.

However for this kind of strategic strike to be effective, one would need overwhelming superiority in numbers as well as in Cyber technology (Growlers to blind the enemy radar). Pakistan lacks manpower, equipment & avionics /radar jamming resources to conduct any offensive operations of this kind and it is uncertain that even we had sufficient funds, countries will sell Pakistan weapons systems to perform this task.

Acquisition of a couple of squadrons of Stealth Aircraft would be useful in strategic bombing role. However, our main adversary India has sufficient anti-aircraft missile systems and electronic counter measure assets and given the depth of the country; strategic strikes by PAF would at best meet with partial success only.

In the light of the above definition of ‘Offensive’ strategy, IMHO PAF is better off not wasting its resources. Any strategic bombing would be done by the Armed Forces Strategic Command using its medium range ballistic missiles.

I don’t see any modern Recce aircraft in the PAF inventory either. One would therefore assume that drones will be used for the Recce work. However PAF desperately needs a dedicated ECM & Electronic Eavesdropping platform.

PAF therefore appears to be concentrating on Control of the Air and Tactical Support. In my view Air power is inherently offensive and during the current COIN operations against TTP; PAF has been taking part in offensive operations. PAF also has 4 squadrons of F-16’s, a very capable tactical attack platform which I would classify as ‘Offensive’.

Control of Air the includes defending air bases and strategic assets against enemy air attack and denying enemy ‘Air Superiority’ over the battle field. Current inventory of the PAF and future acquisitions do indeed reflect that PAF is giving this aspect top priority. Probably that is why Hon Mastan Khan got the impression of a purely ' Defensive' nature of PAF philosophy.

I would however conclude that PAF doctrine is not purely ‘Defensive’ but does include tactically offensive aspects. Additionally, given the constraints of the capital & manpower and restrictions on the available technology; PAF planners are on the right track.

I am only an arm chair general, and welcome Hon member’s criticism of my way of thinking.

 

[Tipu7]

The day I gain faith in PAF .......Mastan Khan single post ruin it completely .......

 

[aliyusuf]

Whilst I understand your post for the most parts, however, I disagree with the above point.

Though I can agree that its your opinion, fair enough.

But in my opinion, if the IAF does not feel in any way challanged by the PAF at the moment, then I would've seen atleast something, anything, from the IAF in my lifetime.

So far I've only heard stories from my elders about an IAF Mig being chased by PAF Sabres over the skies of Karachi.

Well in my post I did state that it is to the credit of the PAF that the threshold for action against Pakistan has not come
down. But that does not mean that the IAF feels in any way challenged by the PAF.

Like I had stated it feels quite safe over its own skies and coming into Pakistani airspace entails a risk that should first be justified and equated to a definitive objective. The will and need to attain that objective is governed by the prevailing situation. India is pursuing a policy of bolstering its image of a very restrained non trigger happy nation despite having significant conventional superiority viz-a-viz its neighbors. This helps portraying it as a responsible nation which helps it diplomatically, politically and eventually in garnering foreign investments.

It is doing far too much damage diplomatically to Pakistan, world over, to feel the need to resort to violence.

However Modi Sarkar is a deviation from the norm and really is a wild card and a loose canon at the moment. Difficult to predict to what extent he is willing to take the current anti-Pakistan tirade. He is playing for his home popularity as he has so far fallen short of his election campaign rhetoric and promises of taking the Indian economy to the next level.

 

[araz]

FOREWARD: It is ALWAYS recommended for members who are truly interested in the defence matters of our country to carry out some research. Not just read the first two threads and consider them gospel. The same way, don't go by the first or second pages of google but read through more accounts, more narratives; both for and against. Whilst an old practice, books always help and there are many available now in both original and(sadly) pirated form on the internet.
Books(unlike forum posts) carry with them the reputation of the publisher and are generally better sorted out factually or at the very least carry a name which has(or has not) a reputation. Getting even some information out of various sources will not have you going around clapping your hands like monkeys at every other supposed "revolutionary" idea or dismissing anything that does not conform to what you have read in the 8th grade. It is what distinguishes knowledge from university degrees and work experience.

Forming opinions or assuming forum rants as a basis for knowledge especially in subjects such as defence matters is a folly no different than being brainwashed into believing that our religion wants you to kill all non-muslims wherever you find them. There are well versed writers on the subject, and many from our country whose works are available at the click of the mouse if you know how to use google(I cant help you with that) to sort out the rhetoric from the factual, the fictional from the well grounded.

That goes not just for the following post, but also for anything you find written on Defence.pk be it from Me, the Admin or a new member. Always read much much more than you think the other member has before posting something. Because regardless of whether you know more or not, at least you wont look like a fool answering them.

As a final note, KNOW TO AGREE TO DISAGREE.

NOW::. AHEM..




The fact that there is not one bit of historical accuracy in any part of your posts is surprising to say the least, sounds like a rant akin to John Mc Cain at the 2008 election. Guess I need to come up with a better rant then.

Lets start with your claim that the PAF is defensive and never has gone beyond the border unlike our puny Navy and Army. Sure, I guess than the various airfield strikes taken in 65 were all just myths then. Pity the tail choppers never heard MastanKhan's version of history. The TRUTH IS OUT THERE.. ...or the new "Mere paas ao mere doston , aik Qissa suno".

The fact that PAF was the first to attack the IAF in 71 and repeated its nightly raids, but then again.. somehow MK only saw the Navy go and hence his rather dementia influenced ideal is probably correct. Not to mention the idiots in the Army who led their men to sure slaughter at Longewalla are the sort of heroes MK wants; martyrs, not effective warfighters.

Lets come to the new rant. Clearly since the JF-17 rant did not work out as it was rooted in logically baseless ideas, lets go after the F-16 because clearly we have a better idea of what to do with the PAF than those nincompoop Staff College graduates like with our years of experience in running air forces unlike ACM Shamim and his staff with people like ACM Hakimullah and Abbas Khattak.. who probably never fought a war and have no idea what air combat planning is about.

So here goes.

The afghan war brought an opportune moment for the Pakistan air force---sanctions were off---and PAF had the option to buy different aircraft----. Being a French aircraft dominant air force---it should have by default stayed with the French---goinf rom Mirage 3/5 to Mirage F1 and then Mirage 2000.

That sounds wonderful doesn't it? I mean the Afghan war starts out in 1979 and the whole Zia "peanut" speech to Carter. The Mirage F-1 was offered to the PAF back in the late 70's but perhaps the idea that the PAF has always had billions in its coffers seems to be only known to our resident oracle here who during his cheech and chong years had his pulse on the exact balance of the national exchequer. Because clearly the PAF was not aware of it and was instead scraping stuff out of its pockets to somehow get the blue flash purchases complete and provide a semblance of defensive capability.

Then comes all the aid, and mind you this is 1979-80, the Mirage 2000 is not even in the production stage whilst the F-16 is literally making every scene in Europe and had beaten the Mirage F-1 which was the latest the French offered even to their close neighbour Belgium( Not to mention Israel which by this time was pretty ok with the French but knew what is a better fighter, but the hell with the Israelis, what do they know of the great strategist MK).

But during the war---it got the carrot dangled in front of it--the fabled F16----. On the other side was the Mirage 2000---on a given day each aircraft could outdo the other. The PAF BLUNDERED into buying the F16---and it left the gate open for its arch enemy to buy the supposedly number 2 aircraft.

Indian air force was woefully equipped at that time---it only had Russian aircraft as its primary fighter aircraft.

Fiction works when preaching to those without knowledge, but when it comes to people who actually bothered to read and learn from multiple sources, your arguments are like tissue paper MK; what the heck as become of you?

The F-16 was NEVER dangled for the PAF, rather the PAF was being given the cheap hook with the F-5G(later F-20 tigershark). The PAF DEMANDED the F-16 which at that time was thought to be too sophisticated to be released to Pakistan. But the fact remained that the aircraft then(and TODAY) is still the epitome of Pakistan Air Force's fighting concept. It is the perfect balance of Manoeuvrability, Armament and speed that the PAF wanted in its fighting concepts.
The Mirage 2000 was still in its development phase and unlike the F-16, did not demonstrate the ability to go and outright bomb a heavily defended nuclear reactor. Something the PAF wanted outright of its new aircraft.

The IAF may have been woefully ill-equipped, but it was still better equipped than the PAF with the Mig-23 coming online, which makes this next one really nice.

PAF thru its blunder---allowed the indian air force to purchase the Mirage 2000---and gave the enemy parity in the battlefield in the skies----.

The PAF bought the F-16 with funds partially procured from Aid and the rest from its own coffers. Unlike the Americans, the French were looking to fleece the PAF throughout their dealings with us. So let me see, somehow getting an aircraft that is at the time the most sophisticated machine that can be procured the fastest(the M2K did not even have a production prototype until 82 while the F-16 was operational and battle tested) to defend against the Soviets was in our inventory by 1983.
And its gets funnier

PAF lies that it needed the F16's to fight afghan air force----now we know that was right---. The mirage 3 were well equipped to take on the afghan air force---as was the case in the first couple of afghan planes shot down by the mirages---.

I believe this is what inspires that,

Not much about operations undertaken by these units is known, but, according to press reports from that time, they scored their first kill - one MiG-21 of the DRAAF - on 16 April 1986, followed by another MiG-21 on 10 May. The PAF never confirmed any of these claims. Considering the circumstances at the time, it is possible that these engagements have happened, but, that - due to RoEs, influenced by the politics - the PAF was not ready to confirm kills of aircraft whose wreckage fell inside Afghanistan. The - probably - third engagement of Pakistani Mirages happened on 14 May 1986, around 11:00AM, when At 11:00AM of 14 May 1986, Sqn.Ldr. Rao Qamar Suleman and Flt.Lt. Nawaz of the 18th Sqn were on a CAP SE of Parachinar, when the GCI vectored them towards several slow flying targets closing at the border. Closing at high speed, both Mirage pilots experienced a dilemma of many fast-jet fliers when confronting heavily armed but slow attack helicopters.

I would take the kill account from Pakistani press as caution as NO other source corroborated the events nor has the PAF along with its later historical accounts ever acknowledged it.
AC Abdul Hameed Qadri (After whom PAF Minhas was later named)
No 5 TA&R and No 18 AS Squadrons. These squadrons operated from PAF Base Minhas in the relatively active period of 1986. Their participation was restricted to patrolling the border areas and manning the CAP stations with other squadrons. The enemy always respected their presence and did not dare to pursue attacks beyond the border. No 5 Squadron flew 108 sorties, including 54 CAPs whereas No 18 Squadron scrambled twelve times.
http://www.defencejournal.com/aug98/pakafghanwar1.

But if MK's logic on the Mirages being a massive deterrant is to be taken correct, then ipso facto there was NO need for the Mirage-2000 either because if the PAF bought that it would ALSO be lying about getting the Mirage-2000.

However, I would refer to the book of a man who might just know more about why the PAF wanted the F-16. His name is ACM Anwar Shamim and he also wrote a book called "The cutting edge". You folks should have a read instead of just sitting on defence.pk and believing every other thing put out here.

In the book ACM Shamim outlines the need for buying the F-16 was the growing Indian threat to attack Pakistan's nuclear facilities which were starting to develop. In return the PAF possessed NOTHING that could reply back to India. The Mirages were clearly unable to ensure that they would make it to Trombay in case Kahuta was hit, and hence the F-16 came about and not what the Americans were told about it or what is being repeated here. It was also the aircraft that the PAF could get the fastest and was at the time still a better buy than the Mirage-2000 as the PAF was aware of the limitations of the delta in sustained air combat.

Then came the sanctions and another opportunity to buy mirage 2000----and the supposedly honest sec def of Pakistan rejected the deal because there was too much graft in that deal.

So---what was the big deal about the graft---100 million---200 million---in the fortunes of nations---this amount is not even peanuts. This purchase would have given us back our parity over our arch enemy India.

This blunder was a nail in the coffin of a prestigious air force which got destroyed by the actions of an HONEST OFFICER.

Which brings us to the question of the Mirage 2000 ram kahani and MK's obsession with it for reasons he is yet unable to coherently present. I think I'll do those honors as to why the Mirage-2000 remains a Saga to the PAF.

The first rumblings for the Mirage-2000 in the PAF started back in 1985 as the PAF's high command was still looking for a long range deep strike aircraft to augment the F-16(in case the Americans dumped them again) as the secondary/substitute strike force. The F-16s provided to the PAF were configured with some top notch electronics but a lot of these were focused on the air to air threat and with the requirements of attacking some of the more heavility defended targets in India, the PAF was looking for something to provide precision guided capability as its F-16s then were still configured for dumb bombs and AGM-65s. Let this be cleae that it was the French that invited the PAF to look at the aircraft after some airshow talk regarding the ground attack capabilities of the Mirage 2000 and the ATLIS pod(The french love playing both sides for money). in 1986 a PAF team went to France to evaluate the fighter and found it very impressive but compared to the cost of inducting the aircraft via a vis further F-16s and a well established training base opted for the latter(Ironically the French did sell us the ATLIS in anticipation of a Mirage-2000 deal later on providing the PGM capability the PAF wanted in the first place)

By the time it got to the 90's the PAF realized that the F-16 would be difficult to keep in the air after the nuclear issue and good old Pressler. The Mirage 2000 was already purchased by India and Greece was at then taken as the best alternative to the F-16 in terms of offering the best package for strike operations along with an added air to air bonus. In addition, the PAF wanted the newer Mirage-2000-5 which was at that time the hottest thing in the market and unlike the F-16 block-50 it was something the PAF could purchase. It would have been a very good deal had the French and the corrupt in Pakistan played fair.


However, MK contends that the PAF should have given in to corruption and rot(the same thing MK decries is the problem in the first place with the PAF) they would have possessed the edge again which would have made it worth it.

Sounds like a good point, the PAF could have gotten its edge back with that move.. but when HONEST men opposed it, to the extent that people who are deserving of much more respect such as ACdre Sajjad Haider also support this decision along with many others; I am inclined to think the latter was better.

Lets come to post 9-11. The PAF needed a quick boost as right after 9-11 came Operation Parakaram and the looming Indian purchases of Su-30s. The first thing that any astute planner would do was to look at cost-effectiveness; the measure of which was to look at our existing F-16 fleet and how they could be brought up to full speed and hence provide the PAF with a powerful force with 1/5th of the cost of getting a new fighters. In Addition, additional F-16s and the Block-52s would then form the core of this new quick capability buildup whilst reducing the cost in logistics and training for the PAF. In addition, the opportunity allowed the PAF to get all that it required from the United States in terms of the hardware that goes into these aircraft was easily and readily available for purchase. It was the best choice to make for the PAF in terms of an already existing capability. Contrary to the spurious reasons given above, the F-16 upgrade and Block-52 was coming to bolster that equipment base of the PAF no matter what

Where the Mirage-2000 came in is where we get another of MK's rants regarding the JF-17 and why the Gripen was better. The JF-17 was a no brainier after pressler and I have already written on why it was always the straight forward option on ANOTHER of MK's rant threads(not the first one he has put on the topic, they repeat after every few months to get the uninformed youngsters going like those in Zaid Hamid's speeches)
Please see here.
JF 17 is The Wrong Omnirole Aircraft For PAKISTAN | Page 9

The PAF still wanted a deep strike aircraft to augment the F-16 for the same reasons they did in the 80's. IDEAS 2000 had just happened and Pakistan's coffers were booming(supposedly) with everyone trying to sell stuff to Pakistan. The Swedes were trying to sell the Gripen as part of the Erieye package but the PAF was not interested in another Air Defence fighter with secondary air to ground capability because that is what the JF-17 was for. It wanted a strike fighter to work alongside the F-16 as the main offensive(KUFR!, SHIRK!.. PAF is defensive!) force in its war plans against India. The mirage-2000 fit the bill well as the PAF was familiar with it and already had an induction plan worked out; however, the French were trying to push the Rafale instead which the PAF(regardless of its budget) could not afford at the prices the French were offering it at and more importantly the numbers the PAF wanted the aircraft in(As a clear indication, the PAF could only afford 18 Rafale's when it wanted at least two squadrons of this secondary fighter).At the end, the French would not budge and the PAF was not going to dish out that much for the Rafale. The final nail in this particular induction came with the 2005 Earthquake and the PAF budget shrank.

Now I will add a more recent piece of history that is relevant to this and is based off real world news you all are much more familiar with unlike the Fox news report in the opening post. As the Earthquake kicked in and the budget shrank, the PAF fell back to its alternative option which was the Chengdu J-10. They were convinced that given the Frankenstein of electronics that the PAF has gotten good at, along with the addition of bigger drop tanks that CAC had promised; the PAF might be able to get a pretty decent strike fighter out of the J-10 that would give it somewhat the capability that it wanted to fulfill with the Mirage-2000. This kept in earnest and many of you are familiar with this story but not the origins of it, but all of you are familiar with Mr 90% and his utter destruction of our economy, and with it the PAF's plans.

At the end, like the previous three threads MK; I have no idea what it is with you as of lately with the incoherent rants. But I can only think of one thing, and here you are exactly how Robin Williams(god rest is soul) described John McCain.at 4:45.

.

What a nice post and if something deserves a positive rating this one did. The only addition that I would do is based on my conversations with the very "Honest man" who Mastan Khan chooses to malign without reason. As the Benazir Government fell; just 90 days after the whole incident of throwing the file out of the office and dismissing the man and sending him back to AF, PAF made a formal request for the M2K5s. The french refused on ground that the tenure of the offer had expired. So there goes the premise of an incompetent PAF. On the M2k offer I would say to Mastan Khan, it happened through a set of unfortunate circumstances and perhaps for the batter as M2Ks would have turned into nightmares now with the supply chain interrupted and the assembly line discontinued since 2002 so we need to make our peace with it and move on.

@Oscar

Your post is full of it-----you and your SOB STORIES---. I am pretty sure that you have heard this term in the U S if not at home.

As they say---the proof is in the pudding---. 14 years now after 9 / 11 and still no primary air superiority fighter----still no deep strike aircraft----excuses all the way.

Mastan Khan
If you dont like the sob stories then please respond with some solid proof instead of your usual rhetoric. Its time you qualified your posts as well .
Araz

 

[Side-Winder]

Any strategic bombing would be done by the Armed Forces Strategic Command using its medium range ballistic missiles.

Sir, I assume you're refering to missiles with conventional payload but how about india comprehending it as a "pre-emptive" nuclear strike? Afterall once you see missiles coming at you. You don't have enough time to think, What if they launch Nukes in response?

 

[araz]

Hi,

Yu should visit sinodefence forum and check out some of the posts of professionals on this aircraft and who they recommend it for.

The gist of my post is---is not an aircraft A B C or D ( even though it is )-----it is primarily about stopping this constant threat to go nuc every time their is an issue---.

So---suppose there starts a war---tomorrow----we start to lose---and we have to go nuclear and both of us destroy each other---we are com[lately wiped out-----

But only if had invested aroud 5---10 Billion Dollars of frontline fighter aircraft---we would be seeing that day------that is where my problem is with the issue----.

In order for the two to keep the conflict nuc free---Pakistan needs better aircraft than the one they have.

Your logic is faulty. It is precisely the threat of a nuclear attack which has kept India and Pakistan from getting at each other's throat. In case of an attack do you think the enemy will wait for you to initiate a nuclear strike before responding in kind. Do you think they will wait to find out if the missile approaching them carries a nuclear warhead. So what will you as a military head do in spite of 500 planes waiting when you see a salvo of missiles coming towards you? This is the dilemma facing every military planner in the subcontinent and this is why in many ways a mammoth aircraft deal by India was such a waste of time and effort.

 

[Pulsar]

We need to build up our attack arsenal and be in a position to seriously harm india without having to resort to killing millions of civilians

And do you think that you will not be harmed in turn? Would the Indians be sitting on their haunches watching you bomb them? Get real! India is twice as strong as Pakistan is - both qualitatively and quantitatively. And if you try catch-up, the arms race will only destroy your economy.

Sir, I assume you're refering to missiles with conventional payload but how about india comprehending it as a "pre-emptive" nuclear strike? Afterall once you see missiles coming at you. You don't have enough time to think, What if they launch Nukes in response?

And there lies the danger. And then, even if one so called battlefield nuke, Nasr is fired, it would result in an all out nuclear war with devastating consequences as India's nuclear doctrine envisages massive retaliation with all resources at its disposal as a response. There would be no 'ifs' and 'buts'! And Pakistan being one seventh the size of India, the damage would be too severe to comprehend.

And thus, Nasr was a bad idea to begin with! Using it to stop an Indian advance deep into its own territory is even worse! Nuking yourselves isn't the best strategy!

 

[r0ck]

Well in my post I did state that it is to the credit of the PAF that the threshold for action against Pakistan has not come
down. But that does not mean that the IAF feels in any way challenged by the PAF.

Like I had stated it feels quite safe over its own skies and coming into Pakistani airspace entails a risk that should first be justified and equated to a definitive objective. The will and need to attain that objective is governed by the prevailing situation. India is pursuing a policy of bolstering its image of a very restrained non trigger happy nation despite having significant conventional superiority viz-a-viz its neighbors. This helps portraying it as a responsible nation which helps it diplomatically, politically and eventually in garnering foreign investments.

It is doing far too much damage diplomatically to Pakistan, world over, to feel the need to resort to violence.

However Modi Sarkar is a deviation from the norm and really is a wild card and a loose canon at the moment. Difficult to predict to what extent he is willing to take the current anti-Pakistan tirade. He is playing for his home popularity as he has so far fallen short of his election campaign rhetoric and promises of taking the Indian economy to the next level.

Yep, you did credited PAF. But you still maintianed your views that the IAF doesn't feel in any way challagened by PAF, it's just that incursion into Pakistan are not on the IAF's agenda at the moment.

I'm of the view that even if incursions into Pakistan are on the IAF's agenda at the moment, IAF would definitely feel challenged by PAF.

The suggestion that IAF is not challagened in any way on PAF's home turf is too big a pill for me to swallow.

To each his own then.

 

[Spectre]

Your logic is faulty. It is precisely the threat of a nuclear attack which has kept India and Pakistan from getting at each other's throat. In case of an attack do you think the enemy will wait for you to initiate a nuclear strike before responding in kind. Do you think they will wait to find out if the missile approaching them carries a nuclear warhead. So what will you as a military head do in spite of 500 planes waiting when you see a salvo of missiles coming towards you? This is the dilemma facing every military planner in the subcontinent and this is why in many ways a mammoth aircraft deal by India was such a waste of time and effort.

Absolutely true, the best thing to happen to establish stability in terms of major conflict in subcontinent was nuclear parity.

Stability - Instability Paradox has resulted in simultaneous increase in low key skirmishes and proxy warfare but that is an acceptable cost in my opinion. The point to apply over here is these conflicts don't involve Air-force for fear of escalation and hence Indian deal has to viewed solely in Chinese Context and if viewed through prism of Pakistani Threat then as you rightly said it was huge waste of time.

As for point of Nuclear Saber Rattling, then that doesn't amount to much but is infact a zero cost solution to remind India of the threat it faces.

 

[araz]

Hi,

So---why do you think that the U S is producing faster cars every 15--20 years---like the F15 and F 16---then F 18---then the F22---then the F 35---and then the 6th gen in test flights----.

So---what is happening in the U S---the leader in weapons technology---what makes them churn out " Faster cars " than before.

Are you comparing PAF to the USAF? Come on Mastan Khan what are you doing? Do you really want to go down this route? Do you not see that the USAF is a world dominating and power projecting arm of the US armed forces. It is required to travel long distances and remain on station for longer. It needs fighters to operate off of Aircraft carriers which is why it needs twin engined fighters. Even with its single engined fighters it has devised CFTs to increase their range.
The only area where I see a need for the PAF to have a twin engined aircraft is for Naval cover and attack. The rest of the scope of action can be covered by a combination of aircrafts and stand off weaponry and missiles.
Araz

 

[Paksanity]

@niaz sir you made some excellent points. May I add that unlike some people believe JF-17 packs a hefty offensive punch that sometimes surpasses PAF F-16s. It should be understood that ALCM capability, CM-400AKG, H-2, H-4, Takbir and LS series glide bombs, all of these are slated to arm JF-17. Some might have already been as some media reports suggest. Add future AAR capability and JFT can really taake out targets deep inside without getting inside SAM web of India. If your weapon can fly 350km after drop, aircraft can fly another 350km far out and a single refuelling in air extends range say about 250km, we are talking of hitting targets some 900km deep with JFT. Not bad at all I say.

Sir, I assume you're refering to missiles with conventional payload but how about india comprehending it as a "pre-emptive" nuclear strike? Afterall once you see missiles coming at you. You don't have enough time to think, What if they launch Nukes in response?

No sir. First nuclear response is generated either on confirmation of nuclear strike or at least on confirmation by a reliable source that nuclear tipped missiles have been hurled. In war there are likely to be a lot of objects flying in both sides. India will not just assume they are nuclear. They need confirmation to retain sympathy of playing victim.

 

[araz]

Absolutely true, the best thing to happen to establish stability in terms of major conflict in subcontinent was nuclear parity.

Stability - Instability Paradox has resulted in simultaneous increase in low key skirmishes and proxy warfare but that is an acceptable cost in my opinion. The point to apply over here is these conflicts don't involve Air-force for fear of escalation and hence Indian deal has to viewed solely in Chinese Context and if viewed through prism of Pakistani Threat then as you rightly said it was huge waste of time.

As for point of Nuclear Saber Rattling, then that doesn't amount to much but is infact a zero cost solution to remind India of the threat it faces.

To add to this logical thought process is the fact that in turn it will make the two countries see the logic of a zero sum event and come to the table sooner or later to resolve/settle their differences and move on. Neither India nor Pakistan can afford to pay billions for arms that may never see the light of the day in a war scenario. What is actually required is a credible deterrence and relative parity with an emphasis on local build up of industrial base. This in my humble opinion would be so much more beneficial than spending billions on procuring arms form another source rather than building your own(partly or wholly).

Hi,

I was wondering at something nagging in my brains----and now I know what it is----.

See---you write what you did---because you might have to go back ad work for them again----. I don't---I am almost retired----.

Other than that---only and active service personal would post something like you did----do you work for them---.

Again a post without relevance and matter. A cheap shot. You need to do better. You need to give ONE concrete proof in support of your assumption.
Araz