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

[Deepak123]

In the minds of Bharatis it was one country. Their dreams were shattered when the land was split. End of story.

Hey I read history by a Pakistani historian that Pakistan was never a part of India then how you split our country.

 

[Foo_Fighter]

read the whole thread so painfully.... and i wonder whats the point?

 

[illusion8]

read the whole thread so painfully.... and i wonder whats the point?

Indians and Pakistanis both end up on the losing side....thats the point.

Both of us are big jacka$$es thats the point as well.

 

[karan.1970]

read the whole thread so painfully.... and i wonder whats the point?

In short... Despite Pakistan losing all the wars with India (or you can call 1965 as a stalemate), Pakistanis claim that PAF performed better than IAF but since the strategic command of Pakistan was incompetent, and Pakistani army behaved like an out of control juvenile, PAF never got utilized to its maximum effectiveness... Rest all of the stuff inthe last 7 pages is cr@p

 

[MilSpec]

You contradict your own assertion, the topic on hand is the air war so lets not drag in regiments of tanks and guns abandoned by the IA in the Chahmb sector or the Kargil coffin debacle.

Daring day light strikes against the likes of Pathankot and Kalaikunda and all other major air bases doesn't sound defensive to me. !!"

In 1971, the aircraft ratio was some 4:1 in India's favour, hence I suggest you compare the sortie rate between the two air forces.... furthermore, according to Indian records, most of the air engagements took place over India....need i say more.

really...

lets see...
1965:

The Indian Air Force's attrition rate (1.5%) was lower than the Pakistani attrition rate (1.82%). Arguably this indicates that had the war continued, the PAF would have found it increasingly difficult to sustain operations at the same level

Large number of Indian aircraft losses occurred on the ground during the attacks on Kalaikkunda and Pathankot

Aircraft ratio for 1965: India retained much of its air force in the East, against the possibility of Chinese intervention, and as a result the air forces were quite evenly balanced in the West. Still IAF flew 3,937 sorties compared to 2,364 sorties of PAF.

Moreover, the 1965 war resulted in the USA imposing a 10 year arms embargo on both sides so traditional technological superiority started dwindling. This had no effect, on India, which had always looked to Britain, France and even Russia for arms, but was disastrous for Pakistan, which was forced to acquire 90 obsolete second hand Sabre via Iran, a mere 28 Mirage IIIs from France and 74 maintenance intensive Shenyang F-6s.


1971: was a different story, beginning with pre-emptive strike on 11 Indian airbase and ending with unilateral surrender making it one of the shortest war in the history...

1965, India had just recovered from a war with china and pakistan took advantage of India's weakened position. 65 was a good learning experience for us to understand what pakistani generals intentions were.

 

[fd24]

Understandably, as in any war, both parties will lay claim to victory, hence a neutral partyu is probably the most reliable source to judge the outcome. This is how the world media reported on the 1965 war.


SUNDAY TIMES, London, September 19, 1965.

"Pakistan has been able to gain complete command of the air by literally knocking the Indian planes out of the skies if they had not already run away.
Indian pilots are inferior to Pakistan's pilots and Indian officer's leadership has been generally deplorable. India is being soundly beaten by a nation which is outnumbered by a four and half to one in population and three to one in size of armed forces".

Peter Preston, The Guardian, London.
September 24, 1965.

"One thing I am convinced of is that Pakistan morally and even physically won the air battle against immense odds.
Although the Air Force gladly gives most credit to the Army, this is perhaps over-generous. India with roughly five times greater air power, expected an easy air superiority. Her total failure to attain it may be seen retrospectively as a vital, possibly the most vital, factor of the whole conflict.
Nur Khan is an alert, incisive man of 41, who seems even less. For six years until July he was on secondment and responsible for running Pakistan civil airline, which in a country, where now means sometime and sometime means never, is a model of efficiency. He talks without the jargon of a press relations officer. He does not quibble about figures, immediately one has confidence in what he says. His estimates proffered diffidently, but with as much photographic evidence as possible, speak for themselves. Indian and Pakistani losses, he thinks are in something like the ratio of ten to one.
"The Indians had no sense of purpose, the Pakistanis were defending their country and willingly taking greater risks. The average bomber crew flew 15 to 20 sorties. My difficulty was restraining them, not pushing them on".
" This is more than nationalistic pride. Talk to the pilots themselves, and you get the same intense story".


Patrick Seale, The Observer, London.
September 12, 1965.

"Pakistan's success in the air means that she had been able to deploy her relatively small army___ professionally among the best in Asia___ with impunity, plugging gaps in the long front in the face of each Indian thrust.
By all accounts the courage displayed by the PAF pilots is reminiscent of the bravery of the few young and dedicated pilots who saved this country from Nazi invaders in the critical Battle of Britain during the last war".


Roy Meloni, Correspondent of ABC,
September 15, 1965.

"I have been a journalist now for 20 years and want to go on record that i have never seen a more confident and victorious groups of soldiers than those fighting for Pakistan right now.
"India is claiming all out victory, i have not been able to find any trace of it. All i can see are troops, tanks and other war material rolling in a steady stream towards the front.
If the Indian Air Force is so victorious, why has it not tried to halt this flow?
The answer is that it has been knocked from the skies by Pakistani planes. These Muslims of Pakistan are natural fighters and they ask for no quarter and they give none.
In any war, such as the one going on between India and Pakistan right now, the propaganda claims on either side are likely to be startling, but if i have to take bet today, my money would be on Pakistan side.
Pakistan claims to have destroyed something like one third of the Indian Air Force, and foreign observers, who are in a position to know say that the actual kills may be even higher, but the PAF authorities are being scrupulously honest in evaluating these claims. They are crediting PAF only those killing that can be checked and verified from other sources.

Everett G Martin, General Editor, Newsweek,
September 20 1965.

"One point particularly noted by military observers is that in their first advances the Indians did not use Air power effectively to support their troops. By contrast, Pakistan, with sophisticated timing swooped in on several Indian bases and destroyed dozens of planes without any resistance from the Indians.
By the end of the week, it was clear that the Pakistanis were more than holding their own".

INDONESIAN HERALD,
September 11 1965.


"The chief of Indian Air Force could no longer ensure the safety of Indian air space. A well known Indian journalist, Frank Moraes, in a talk from All-India Radio also admitted that Indian Air Force had suffered severe losses and it was no use hiding the fact and India should be prepared for more losses.........".

Thanks Windy - always good to see how something is seen with the neutral eye - this makes it clear how the world viewed both airforces. - My personal favorite is the Sunday Times comment - always a well respected sourse. Those words are a fitting tribute to our brave pilots......

 

[Foo_Fighter]

In short... Despite Pakistan losing all the wars with India (or you can call 1965 as a stalemate), Pakistanis claim that PAF performed better than IAF but since the strategic command of Pakistan was incompetent, and Pakistani army behaved like an out of control juvenile, PAF never got utilized to its maximum effectiveness... Rest all of the stuff inthe last 7 pages is cr@p

Dear Karan,

Agreed. However, how will it make you better to confront for the past you already believe is the truth? We won the wars... even we know it's a stalemate which is a victory day in Pakistan because it's what they believe. It's all about the truth we believe is perception and what we are taught. I will guess you are a CBSE student... and I am sure you were more exposed to education than radicalism... but then we can't blame the people who got educated but to blame the education and somehow you won't find them here. The whole fact is... we need to believe that the whole point is acceptance and then we can move on... else who wishes to move on?

 

[karan.1970]

Thanks Windy - always good to see how something is seen with the neutral eye - this makes it clear how the world viewed both airforces. - My personal favorite is the Sunday Times comment - always a well respected sourse. Those words are a fitting tribute to our brave pilots......

One would expect a little more thinking from a think tank .. Remember this was the time when Pakistan was the apple of NATO's eye and India was seen with suspicion at best and contempt at worst for being a friend of USSR. Kinda stupid calling news articles from NATO countries as neutral on a fight between India and Pakistan.. Innit?

 

[MilSpec]

Thanks Windy - always good to see how something is seen with the neutral eye - this makes it clear how the world viewed both airforces. - My personal favorite is the Sunday Times comment - always a well respected sourse. Those words are a fitting tribute to our brave pilots......

sir,

So should w also unanimously believe "the guardians" report on ISI's support to taliban etc. or should we do selective reading where it bashed IAF in air warfare????

Next If PAF was so competent and was about to win ... why didn't they crush India, afterall they started the war, they wanted to annex the state of J&K ... If indian amour was being slain by pakistani pattons, and PAF was reigning havoc on IAF, you should have marched right onto delhi... I wonder what stopped you guys? your american allies or chinese allies? India wasn't even backed by the russians back then...

 

[Foo_Fighter]

One would expect a little more thinking from a think tank .. Remember this was the time when Pakistan was the apple of NATO's eye and India was seen with suspicion at best and contempt at worst for being a friend of USSR. Kinda stupid calling news articles from NATO countries as neutral on a fight between India and Pakistan.. Innit?

I must say I loved the innit in the end...

 

[illusion8]

I must say I loved the innit in the end...

Always leave a door open. Don't rub it in beyond a point.

 

[ejaz007]

Normally I refrain from commenting in these kind of threads because their is no point. The discussion is endless and members do keep on commenting the whole day and at the end of day they still hang on to their original positions.

For Indians they won all the battles and for us we won all the battles.

However most of you people perhaps actually do not know what really happened. I belong to a family who was serving in all three branches of the military and took active part in all the wars so far.

To put it in simple terms the truth is somewhat different than what Indians and Pakistanis are generally told. Stop creating threads which normally do not add to the value of forum and move on with your lives.

Just keep in mind that not all Pakistanis want to destroy India and not Indians want to destroy Pakistan. At the end of the day they are just human beings trying to improve their own life.

By the way where were you all geniuses when the action was taking place?

 

[Avatar]

 

[Mav3rick]

humiliating defeat in 1965???? made my day.....

What would you call defeat in IAF purpose during the 1965 war against 1/4th sized Air Force? Just for example, if PAF takes on Afghan Air Force and is tied down, I would consider it a humiliating defeat . Agreed that PAF was not AAF and IAF was not PAF in the scenario, however the resources and size of the IAF was too big compared to PAF hence my conclusion.

 

[Contrarian]

Normally I refrain from commenting in these kind of threads because their is no point. The discussion is endless and members do keep on commenting the whole day and at the end of day they still hang on to their original positions.

For Indians they won all the battles and for us we won all the battles.

However most of you people perhaps actually do not know what really happened. I belong to a family who was serving in all three branches of the military and took active part in all the wars so far.

To put it in simple terms the truth is somewhat different than what Indians and Pakistanis are generally told. Stop creating threads which normally do not add to the value of forum and move on with your lives.

Just keep in mind that not all Pakistanis want to destroy India and not Indians want to destroy Pakistan. At the end of the day they are just human beings trying to improve their own life.

By the way where were you all geniuses when the action was taking place?

Reposted to emphasize! Great post Sir!