Pakistan air force superiority over Indian air force in all wars?

[rai_kamal]

I still can't make out, who won the battle..??
Paksitani claiming they won air battle, Even after 1962 war India came back and fought 1965 and we claim that we have killed more soldiers...
Can someone xplain, how to decide which party had won the battle..???

 

[danger007]

I still can't make out, who won the battle..??
Paksitani claiming they won air battle, Even after 1962 war India came back and fought 1965 and we claim that we have killed more soldiers...
Can someone xplain, how to decide which party had won the battle..???

as per PDF member Air killings only they wont consider about Army and navy....

 

[karan.1970]

One war, resulting in a nation which even today is an independent Islamic country, versus 1,000 years of military domination - by our civilization, over india.

Dont some of your brethren claim that there was no India before 1947 ??

Typical Pakistani net warrior.. believe facts based on convenience

 

[killerx]

This is gonging no ware mod close this thread another thread carped by Indians.

 

[Windjammer]

shows the inferiority complex of Pakistanis..kuch 20-30 planes giraye...aur to kuch kar nahi paye..

Lets put them on show and pat our selves and fool Pakistani public into thinking that PAF is great..but forgetting that Pakistani planes also have crashed in India and not in mars..Indian dont need to take pictures of few aircrafts models and use it in debate on who was having air superiority during the war..

really childish posts!!

Kuch kia tha tub hi tumarey Maha Sinha pora eik saal border per zalleel ho kar wapas bahgee thi.
On topic, if you must spill your brains then have the capacity to comprehend the difference between a crashed aircraft and one forced to land and better still one that makes history by air surrender.... BTW, the snow white was well exposed after the Atlantique incident, the Indians running helter skelter stealing pieces of wreckage in a desperate effort to show boat to Indian public.
It's nice to see the divas of 1999 haven't changed even in 2012.

 

[alok mishra]

yes! you are right pakistan airforce is far superior than IAF....why only Airforce your Army and navy is superior than us.

 

[alphamale]

i think Pakistanis should stop believing in this myth that PAF is superior than IAF. i agree PAF had done well in 1965 but all those pilots are retired now, isn't it??? now both sides have new breed of pilots who have not engaged with each other because india & Pakistan haven't fought any full scale war after 1971. so on what basis ppl make such assumptions??????

 

[Strigon]

i think Pakistanis should stop believing in this myth that PAF is superior than IAF. i agree PAF had done well in 1965 but all those pilots are retired now, isn't it??? now both sides have new breed of pilots who have not engaged with each other because india & Pakistan haven't fought any full scale war after 1971. so on what basis ppl make such assumptions??????

First off, topic isn't about future but past wars.

2nd, to say Pakistanis should stop believing in 'myth' just trashes your opinion right there, I think Indians should stop living in denial would be the counter statement if I was as naive as you.

3rdly, those are not assumptions but facts that are too hard to accept.

Its very easy to keep up a stubborn attitude and post rubbish when argument isn't going in your favor which is what we see in almost every thread trashed by Indians. But then again we dont expect anything like a 'reasonable argument' from you guys anyways lol

 

[SQ8]

Lets put it this way...
Did the PAF rule superior over the IAF in 65?
Yes and No..
Because the PAF failed to capitalize on its initial superiority and literally let go of a chance to wipe out a bumbling IAF..something the Israelis emulated with success in 67. It also sacrificed its best to gain that upper edge.. men that could have helped in the next war.
A myth that does need debunking is that the PAF possessed superior equipment..which is absolutely false.
Its mainstay was the F-86.. while the IAF used the hunter.. The hunter was faster.. climbed better.. and had better armament...and was almost as good in a turn as a F-86..
The IAF had an excellent fighter-bomber in the mystere.. capable of low level attacks and nimble enough to escape pursuers.
The IAF also possessed a small number of mig-21's but their presence was negligible.
Against this the PAF had some 12 F-104 interceptors which could be outturned in the air by a DC-3... these were extremely overrated by the IAF.. bad training and leadership.
Both the IAF and PAF possessed the Canberra.. excellent bombers.
65 was simply the IAF acting like a flying club rather than an airforce.. and the PAF being lackluster after its initial success.
So did the IAF perform the role that was given to it? Did the PAF perform the role that was tasked to it?
NO.. but in the relative performance of that role.. the PAF did better.. which is where this misnomer of "superiority" has come about.

In 71... the PAF faced off a much larger adversary.. and unlike 65.. faced equipment superior to itself and was hampered by defections.
It had to survive enough to support an army advance that never came whilst still providing some sort of protection for the borders of Pakistan.
in 71.. the IAF had equipment matched by a well trained..and well led force.
Did the IAf perform the task that was allotted to it?(negate the PAF, provide support to the IA) YES..
Did the PAF perform the task that was allotted to it?(Survive to provide support to the PA)..YES..
Who did their tasks better relatively? that is the question to debate on 71.

 

[karan.1970]

Did the IAf perform the task that was allotted to it?(negate the PAF, provide support to the IA) YES..
Did the PAF perform the task that was allotted to it?(Survive to provide support to the PA)..YES..
Who did their tasks better relatively? that is the question to debate on 71.

Very interesting and viable line of thought.. Though I have a disconnect in the bold part ....The survival could not have been at the cost of decimation of the PA forces that it eventually had to support.. So either the Military planners of the PAF or the Strategic command of Pakistan screwed up real bad.. Either the task assigned was wrong or it was understood incorrectly. Because in the end, PAF saved its planes (by not going on offensive) but left the forces on the ground exposed and vulnerable. Same was seen as a stark example in Longewala..

Funnily enough, the same pattern was seen in Kargil 29 years later as well...

 

[illusion8]

Lets put it this way...
Did the PAF rule superior over the IAF in 65?
Yes and No..
Because the PAF failed to capitalize on its initial superiority and literally let go of a chance to wipe out a bumbling IAF..something the Israelis emulated with success in 67. It also sacrificed its best to gain that upper edge.. men that could have helped in the next war.
A myth that does need debunking is that the PAF possessed superior equipment..which is absolutely false.
Its mainstay was the F-86.. while the IAF used the hunter.. The hunter was faster.. climbed better.. and had better armament...and was almost as good in a turn as a F-86..
The IAF had an excellent fighter-bomber in the mystere.. capable of low level attacks and nimble enough to escape pursuers.
The IAF also possessed a small number of mig-21's but their presence was negligible.
Against this the PAF had some 12 F-104 interceptors which could be outturned in the air by a DC-3... these were extremely overrated by the IAF.. bad training and leadership.
Both the IAF and PAF possessed the Canberra.. excellent bombers.
65 was simply the IAF acting like a flying club rather than an airforce.. and the PAF being lackluster after its initial success.
So did the IAF perform the role that was given to it? Did the PAF perform the role that was tasked to it?
NO.. but in the relative performance of that role.. the PAF did better.. which is where this misnomer of "superiority" has come about.

In 71... the PAF faced off a much larger adversary.. and unlike 65.. faced equipment superior to itself and was hampered by defections.
It had to survive enough to support an army advance that never came whilst still providing some sort of protection for the borders of Pakistan.
in 71.. the IAF had equipment matched by a well trained..and well led force.
Did the IAf perform the task that was allotted to it?(negate the PAF, provide support to the IA) YES..
Did the PAF perform the task that was allotted to it?(Survive to provide support to the PA)..YES..
Who did their tasks better relatively? that is the question to debate on 71.

Good neutral post.

 

[illusion8]

Very interesting and viable line of thought.. Though I have a disconnect in the bold part ....The survival could not have been at the cost of decimation of the PA forces that it eventually had to support.. So either the Military planners of the PAF or the Strategic command of Pakistan screwed up real bad.. Either the task assigned was wrong or it was understood incorrectly. Because in the end, PAF saved its planes (by not going on offensive) but left the forces on the ground exposed and vulnerable. Same was seen as a stark example in Longewala..


Funnily enough, the same pattern was seen in Kargil 29 years later as well...

Thats a mystery, why didn't PAF support its advance tank regiment at Longewala? they were up against 4 or 6 hunters only.

 

[Windjammer]

You enjoy your trophies of downed IAF planes.. Our trophies of the wars with Pakistan are actually distributed all over the world in the shape of the maps (revised in 1971 and 1984) of the Indian subcontinent

The same world also witnessed how your so called trophies fell on your face and ended up giving you a bloody nose.

One of the disputed areas was a small sliver of land near the village of Pyrdiwah which the Indian Border Security Force (BSF) had occupied since the 1971 liberation of Bangladesh. The village was one of the Indian exclaves near the border of Bangladesh with the Indian state of Meghalaya.[19][20] Bangladesh claimed that the village was within its territory.[21] Five battalions of the 19th division of the Bangladesh Army, with additional personnel from the Bangladesh Rifles (BDR), attacked the positions of India's Border Security Force at Pyrdiwah at 01:00 hours on 16 April 2001.[22] India claimed that Bangladeshi troops overran and occupied the village, which was near the town of Dauki, and that Bangladeshi forces were holding more than 20 Indian soldiers hostage.[23] However, Bangladesh insisted that Indian forces launched an early-morning attack on their posts in the frontier district of Kurigram, which lay on the border with the Indian state of Assam, on the morning of 16 April.[23] Indian forces eventually responded but failed to retake the village. The combat remained limited to the border troops of the respective nations, though mortars were used in addition to automatic weapons fire. Between 10,000 and 20,000 villagers living in the area fled the fighting, with at least 17 suffering wounds. Several villages were destroyed or heavily damaged in the fighting. 81 Indian and 2 Bangladeshi troops died during the conflict according to India, although Bangladesh claimed that 89 Indian soldiers were killed with 3 Bangladeshi fatalities.[20][23] Top Indian border security sources claimed that the BDR personnel had retreated in the Meghalaya sector, while in the Assam sector, the Indian BSF had vacated positions seized from Bangladesh.[24] Fresh clashes erupted along the India–Bangladesh border just hours after both sides voiced regret for the recent killings, but by midnight of 20 April firing had again stopped. An article reported that 6,000 Indian civilians had fled the region, and Indian government officials were attempting to convince villagers to return to their homes.[21] The Indian BSF agreed to take back bodies of five of its soldiers at Rowmari sector, whilst the other 11-17 were classified as 'missing'. Bangladesh later agreed to return the dead Indian soldiers the next day.[24] Upon examining the bodies of the dead personnel, India alleged that the BSF men were tortured before being shot dead.

 

[SQ8]

Very interesting and viable line of thought.. Though I have a disconnect in the bold part ....The survival could not have been at the cost of decimation of the PA forces that it eventually had to support.. So either the Military planners of the PAF or the Strategic command of Pakistan screwed up real bad.. Either the task assigned was wrong or it was understood incorrectly. Because in the end, PAF saved its planes (by not going on offensive) but left the forces on the ground exposed and vulnerable. Same was seen as a stark example in Longewala..

Funnily enough, the same pattern was seen in Kargil 29 years later as well...

depends on what you are looking at.
the PAF had to survive to support Tikka Khans counter offensive.. that was never launched...so yes.. it did survive.
At the same time..
The PAF also provided support in the Monabao offensive of the IA..where it stalled it completely.. and in the Shakargarh bulge.
The Longewalla incident was solely the Army's fault.. when the PAF had given PA a briefing on its limitations.. why did the PA go on the offensive. If the PAF did provide support.. it would have been with F-104 aircraft flying at the very edge of their range at with less than 5 minutes of CAP.. what was the point?
The army argues about the activation of jacobabad.. which is also a silly objection as the FoB would take at least a week to get ready and cost precious resources.. while the Army's offensive into longewalla was launched within days notice.
Its simply the usual case of the PA jumping into a mess and then crying foul over their own mistakes.(as they did in 65.. and in 99)
Their idea was
"Jump into Ramgarh one day and the next day be in Jaisalmer"..
Had this been done simultaneously with the planned offensive by Tikka Khan.. it might have worked.
The PA chief was warned beforehand of the IAF having 3 bases able to provide support.. while it would take 40 minutes for the PAF to respond with F-104s or mirages in Full AB..making them useless when they actually got there.
All these misgivings were conveyed BEFORE the offensive was launched...
yet the CGS went ahead and launched the ill-fated operation.

Had the offensive been co-ordinated with the PAF.. planned thoroughly.
And carried out in a pre-emptive fashion.. history would have been written differently.

 

[ashokdeiva]

why are we doing a postmortem on 1971. Its 2012 and the future has to be peaceful. we have to look at ways for mutual development and this chest trimphing of who is better is of no use for the current generation.