Pakistan will soon get the J-10B

[Super Falcon]

im sure after 5 years time it is impossible for us to buy J 10B

 

[Whiplash]

JF-17 vs LCA, MIG-21
F-16 vs Mirage 2000, MIG-29,
J-10B vs Su-30, MMRCA
J-20 vs FGFA

and who is going to account for the huge iaf numerical superiority in each category?

 

[Whiplash]

we have evaluated them in past and they are not up to our requirements. jf-17 is comparable to them..............

what you evaluated was not the gripen ng which has an aesa radar, ge f414 engine, upgraded avionics and ew suite.

 

[Luftwaffe]

whiplash..and who is going to account for the huge iaf numerical superiority in each category?

Without going into VS..the whole iaf fleet won't be going against PAF, % of it is to cover airspace and go against China. Probably 70% inventory of iaf/inaf is reserved for China, as PLAAF/PLANF has large numbers. Now the remaining fleet against PAF would be interesting as in any War/Conflict with Pakistan, Chinese could also be active on their side of the border to disrupt and engage indians to engage/ keep active rest of iaf fleet this way iaf won't be able to dedicate the whole fleet against PAF. This is way China/Pak strategic relationship is a headache for india.

 

[Secret Service]

whiplash..and who is going to account for the huge iaf numerical superiority in each category?

Without going into VS..the whole iaf fleet won't be going against PAF, % of it is to cover airspace and go against China. Probably 70% inventory of iaf/inaf is reserved for China, as PLAAF/PLANF has large numbers. Now the remaining fleet against PAF would be interesting as in any War/Conflict with Pakistan, Chinese could also be active on their side of the border to disrupt and engage indians to engage/ keep active rest of iaf fleet this way iaf won't be able to dedicate the whole fleet against PAF. This is way China/Pak strategic relationship is a headache for india.

absolutely .....

 

[SQ8]

I would change that number..
IAF would commit all possible assets it can in a scenario involving only Pakistan.
While there would be heightened alerts near the Indo-China border...I doubt they would keep such a large percentage of their fleet committed to backup.
The PAF has always relied on higher sortie rates and higher turn around rates to offset the numerical superiority.
And whilst being 1/3rd the size currently.. still maintains a favorable ratio of pilots. The IAF knows that.. and while recruiting new pilots is not the option.. committing all possible assets is.. which means employing a greater number of aircraft at any given time.
The introduction of AEW&C assets will add another twist..that the element of surprise once at hand for the IAF is now greatly reduced.
Considering the new doctrine of short precise conflicts for the Indian forces..any such engagement would be less disparate than thought.
In fact..the whole idea of a short war suits Pakistan more than India.
It is something that we can survive and possibly hold out on..
Its the prolonged war that will drain our resources and result in the "samson option" as the Israeli's call it.

 

[kingdurgaking]

self delete

 

[rockstarIN]

whiplash..and who is going to account for the huge iaf numerical superiority in each category?

Without going into VS..the whole iaf fleet won't be going against PAF, % of it is to cover airspace and go against China. Probably 70% inventory of iaf/inaf is reserved for China, as PLAAF/PLANF has large numbers. Now the remaining fleet against PAF would be interesting as in any War/Conflict with Pakistan, Chinese could also be active on their side of the border to disrupt and engage indians to engage/ keep active rest of iaf fleet this way iaf won't be able to dedicate the whole fleet against PAF. This is way China/Pak strategic relationship is a headache for india.

70% for China? naa..

Unlike popular concepts, China won't be aggressive to India. Even if they do, we do not need 70% fleet there, its a mountain region. We both have limited chances of air resources there. And we are developing a good SAM cover in NE area, which is enough.

 

[rockstarIN]

I would change that number..
IAF would commit all possible assets it can in a scenario involving only Pakistan.
While there would be heightened alerts near the Indo-China border...I doubt they would keep such a large percentage of their fleet committed to backup.
The PAF has always relied on higher sortie rates and higher turn around rates to offset the numerical superiority.
And whilst being 1/3rd the size currently.. still maintains a favorable ratio of pilots. The IAF knows that.. and while recruiting new pilots is not the option.. committing all possible assets is.. which means employing a greater number of aircraft at any given time.
The introduction of AEW&C assets will add another twist..that the element of surprise once at hand for the IAF is now greatly reduced.
Considering the new doctrine of short precise conflicts for the Indian forces..any such engagement would be less disparate than thought.
In fact..the whole idea of a short war suits Pakistan more than India.
It is something that we can survive and possibly hold out on..
Its the prolonged war that will drain our resources and result in the "samson option" as the Israeli's call it.

In this scenario, one thing which will favor IAF unlike earlier conflicts is the SAM systems, IAF is filling most of the gaps with own produced SAM systems and in near future will add more medium range SAMs.

Short war will not favour Pakistan because probably India will decide the 'degree of fierceness' of the conflict as PAF's strike capability is limited in a short war as IAF will dictate the war zones and they can just simply add more sorties to engage PAF to reduce the possibility of the counter attack apart from SAMs.

 

[Silk]

With India buying in the long term so many advanced weapons there is a limit for Pakistan to react. We made lots of fun about LCA but let us be serious. They have older mig29 to be upgraded. They have older Mirage2000H to be upgraded to something serious. They have a few hundred MKI. They bought latest Mig29K. They will buy impressive number of MRCA. No matter what they select, it will be better then anything PAF has at the moment. So, funny things about LCA are nice but the strategic implications are serious. Pakistan is and can only move towards defending. So...

-Tankers are bought to counter the numbers. You cannot keep going to CAP area if you have less planes then opponent. Within a few waves you are dead.

-AWACS are bought to get tactical insights. With a border that is longer then wished you need to see what happens up there and beyond. That way you can predict and react. Besides that you can use your assets optimal. You can counter enemy radars and make your own fighting assets more hidden.

-No eggs in one basket. So anything bought has its diversity in the system. F16-FC20/JF17. Erieye-ZDK03.

-Investing in effective programs to get TOT and cheap assets. There is no nation that can achieve what Pakistan achieved with JF17. Here you have a plug and play fighterjet that has enough room to be a valuable asset for extremely low price. Tell me where you can buy a (second hand) fighterjet with same capabilities as JF17?

-Being part of alliance that is hard to beat. China has signed a contract that it will defend Pakistani integrity as a nation. Same goes the other way. China needs Pakistan for energy, supply of raw material and export. And last but not least... It needs Pakistan to counter India. Pakistan needs China for everything. That means there is no alternative for these two to become one.

-With that you have Pakistan being upgraded and pushed towards a higher level. Pakistan gets probably long range SAM. It gets nuclear material cause China has the largest reserves in the world located in Tibet. Pakistan gets the ability to produce good weapons (JF17,El Khalid, Anza, F22 etc) and be less depending on good weather friends in Europe and USA.

-The most important development is that Pakistan moved from uranium to plutanium nuclear weapons. That means with cheap but high tech weapons like Ra'ad and Babur it can deliver these assets much easier then BM. And even those BM will get more and more range due to lighter load. Even if all those non nuclear weapons fail, India will not risk a plutonium weapon being delivered. Neither will Pakistan risk conventional being drained due to smaller economy and failed politicians.

 

[SQ8]

In this scenario, one thing which will favor IAF unlike earlier conflicts is the SAM systems, IAF is filling most of the gaps with own produced SAM systems and in near future will add more medium range SAMs.

Short war will not favour Pakistan because probably India will decide the 'degree of fierceness' of the conflict as PAF's strike capability is limited in a short war as IAF will dictate the war zones and they can just simply add more sorties to engage PAF to reduce the possibility of the counter attack apart from SAMs.

I would contest that..
More sorties that can be picked up..
we have a higher sortie generation rate..
and there are other factors
but on another thread perhaps.. lets not derail this one.

 

[Silk]

I do not think the IAF can fill up the gaps. Besides that PAF will defend its airspace and with long range radars and AWACS it is able to generate enough CAP. Short term war will not be a win for IAF. Long term is an option but if they had guts they would have countered more action after the Mumbai attack or Kargil. The Indians know they can do not much. PAF knows it should limit its force near the borders. With PAF taking more and more advanced weapons there is not much left to counter IAF. They had no BVR and they could handle it. If I am more accurate. Even F7P could do the CAP job. Not good enough but the IAF stayed away when Block15 F16 were doing CAP. You cannot compare that what PAF has at the moment.

 

[rockstarIN]

^^^not in this thread..any ways..

 

[webber]

not a surprise coz ...

 

[notorious_eagle]

In this scenario, one thing which will favor IAF unlike earlier conflicts is the SAM systems, IAF is filling most of the gaps with own produced SAM systems and in near future will add more medium range SAMs.

Short war will not favour Pakistan because probably India will decide the 'degree of fierceness' of the conflict as PAF's strike capability is limited in a short war as IAF will dictate the war zones and they can just simply add more sorties to engage PAF to reduce the possibility of the counter attack apart from SAMs.

I dont know on what basis are you claiming this, but facts and logic dictate that a short war will favour Pakistan. In a short war Pakistan can equally match the ferocity of the fight, but if the war drags on India's superior resources will prevail and you are risking crossing the nuclear threshold. This is exactly why the 'Cold Start Doctrine' has failed to materialize, Indian war planners have realized that a short war fails to guarantee a victory that is politically acceptable. This is why India growled but never bit after the Mumbai attacks!!