Pakistani & Chinese air forces kick off, Shaheen III (2014) exercise.

[MastanKhan]

because of the advance "FLY BY STRINGS" technology.

Hi,

I would rather say that PAF used DISCRETION when it came to not flying the F16. We really don't need to pitch the F16 against any of the chinese aircraft---because the other aircraft flying in our colors would do that job and tell us what needs to be done.

 

[Windjammer]

Mirage-VEF of Sqn. 25

I believe they belong to No 27 squadron (ZARRAR)

HBifgwv_zps4235517f.jpg~original
It is not a big task finding him in the picture here...

Standing in the back row between the two Chinese officers.

 

[Mav3rick]

buddy were you sleeping?

“In response, Russia sent an unarmed bomber Su- 24 to fly around the U.S. destroyer. However, experts say that this plane was equipped with the latest Russian electronic warfare complex. According to this version, “Aegis” spotted from afar the approaching aircraft, and sounded alarm. Everything went normally, American radars calculated the speed of the approaching target. And suddenly all the screens went blank. “Aegis” was not working any more, and the rockets could not get target information. Meanwhile, Su-24 flew over the deck of the destroyer, did battle turn and simulated missile attack on the target. Then it turned and repeated the maneuver. And did so 12 times.

“Apparently, all efforts to revive the “Aegis” and provide target information for the defence failed. Russia’s reaction to military pressure from the United States was profoundly calm, feels the Russian political scientist Pavel Zolotarev:

“The demonstration was original enough. A bomber without any weapons, but having onboard equipment for jamming enemy radar, worked against a destroyer equipped with “Aegis”, the most modern system of air and missile defence. But this system of mobile location, in this case the ship, has a significant drawback. That is, the target tracking capabilities. They work well when there is a number of these ships which can coordinate with each other somehow. In this case there was just one destroyer. And, apparently, the algorithm of the radar in the “Aegis” system on the destroyer did not load under the influence of jamming by the Su-24. It was therefore not only a nervous reaction to the fact of flying around by the Russin bomber which was common practice during the Cold War. The reaction of the Americans was due to the fact that most modern system, especially its informative or radar part, did not work adequately. Therefore, there was such a nervous reaction to the whole episode.

You believe that crap? I mean seriously? Post the entire post and replace the word Russia with Iran and we will atleast feel how crap the stories generally are. However, this has to be an extremely pathetic attempt of a fanboy. Have you any idea from how far the Aegis cruiser would have identified the SU-24??? Any idea, further still, from how far the SU would have been shot down in any actual event of hostility? Such an act would be considered hostile in any environment and the threat engaged accordingly, even if it meant F-22's!

While acknowledging the edge the US has over its opponents, what you have stated is simply not true.

There are a number of cases where US planes have been struck by Russian made BVR missiles (e.g. during the Golf war), even in cases where the advantage is skewed very strongly to one side, i.e. AWACS support vs no AWACS, best trained air force vs poorly trained air force, ECM support vs no ECM support.

I will not criticise your point but I would suggest avoiding making sweeping statements like these.

While I appreciate your post and attempt to educate me, I would be rather more comfortable with actual links that prove the contrary. I had made extensive research before I concluded what I did.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

You believe that crap? I mean seriously? Post the entire post and replace the word Russia with Iran and we will atleast feel how crap the stories generally are. However, this has to be an extremely pathetic attempt of a fanboy. Have you any idea from how far the Aegis cruiser would have identified the SU-24??? Any idea, further still, from how far the SU would have been shot down in any actual event of hostility? Such an act would be considered hostile in any environment and the threat engaged accordingly, even if it meant F-22's!

You have no idea what you are saying. Iran does not poses sophisticated Electronic warfare technology which Russia posses so your analogy does not make sense. Su-24 were equipped with jammers and EW suites which enabled it to buzz the USN aegis dozen of time without getting a lock on. The bear bombers that constantly violate Western airspace are "forced" to leave with a lock on while the SU-24 left at its own will.

 

[blain2]

is that the Mirage 5 all way to the left of the pic?

ROSE II Mirage.

 

[blain2]

The fact that this exercise was conducted at Shorkot should be obvious to all as to the lengths the PAF is going to avoid any complications in our relations with the Americans and the Chinese. Usually the most obvious place for this exercise to be conducted would have been Mushaf given that CCS is based out of there and its faculty is a key component in any large scale PAF wide or multi/bi-lateral exercise.

 

[GreenFalcon]

ROSE II Mirage.

Thanks

 

[Munir]

The fact that this exercise was conducted at Shorkot should be obvious to all as to the lengths the PAF is going to avoid any complications in our relations with the Americans and the Chinese. Usually the most obvious place for this exercise to be conducted would have been Mushaf given that CCS is based out of there and its faculty is a key component in any large scale PAF wide or multi/bi-lateral exercise.

Blain saheb,

48+ hardened hangars... What is based here? I watched the golf coarse... Looks like one huge bunker

Blain saheb,

48+ hardened hangars... What is based here? I watched the golf coarse... Looks like one huge bunker

And I see the nuclear storage facility there... Google cannot hide everything...

 

[blain2]

For fighters most likely. I do not think Air Force Strategic Command has that many IRBM/BM assets in service and they most likely would not be placed all at one place. The bulk of the strategic arsenal sits with the Army.

 

[Munir]

I travelled around the area and saw indeed army storages which could be only one thing. It is near the base on the right. And near the high way between two major cities... I very very important jungle was totally destroyed to build it there...

 

[Jguo]

While I appreciate your post and attempt to educate me, I would be rather more comfortable with actual links that prove the contrary. I had made extensive research before I concluded what I did.

I can't post links yet...but if you insist:

aces (fullstop) safarikovi (fullstop) org (/) victories (/) victories-iraq-gulf (fullstop) war (fullstop) pdf
Apart from the obvious on Wikipedia, you can find these records from a number of other US-based sources too.

I don't dispute the incidents are rare, but note that this is on top of the fact that the records are going to be biased in the Allies's favour because they won the war and they have control of the dissemination of information, as well as the environments that these fighters were operating in (stated in my last post - allied forces had absolute air superiority).

I would also like to raise another point to debunk your argument:

From :
Defence.pk's Exclusive Interview with a PAF topgun, Air Commodore (R) Kaiser Tufail
04 March 2014 (can't post links)

Q7: How would you rate the SD-10A Beyond Visual Range Air to Air Missile's operational performance against the Raytheon’s AIM-120C-5/7 AMRAAM which PAF has deployed on its F-16s?

Surprisingly, the SD-10 is no less in performance than the AIM-120C. (Details classified)

We all know the high opinion the PAF pilots have for US systems - and this is by someone who has significant experience with US AND Chinese based platforms.

So if we assume your argument is correct ('While the performance of AIM series is exceptional.'), then is the Chinese way ahead of Russian in BVR missile tech? Considering it has now been almost 25 years since the gulf war, I think the Russians would have made at least SOME improvements wouldn't you think?

 

[Mav3rick]

I can't post links yet...but if you insist:

aces (fullstop) safarikovi (fullstop) org (/) victories (/) victories-iraq-gulf (fullstop) war (fullstop) pdf
Apart from the obvious on Wikipedia, you can find these records from a number of other US-based sources too.

I don't dispute the incidents are rare, but note that this is on top of the fact that the records are going to be biased in the Allies's favour because they won the war and they have control of the dissemination of information, as well as the environments that these fighters were operating in (stated in my last post - allied forces had absolute air superiority).

So, I visited the link and downloaded the pdf document. All it does is list 6 engagements of Russian WVR missiles, of which most are seriously doubtful. It does not list a single engagement of Russian BVR missiles, as I had stated earlier.

As I had said earlier, I had done my research before posting what I did.

I would also like to raise another point to debunk your argument:

From :
Defence.pk's Exclusive Interview with a PAF topgun, Air Commodore (R) Kaiser Tufail
04 March 2014 (can't post links)



We all know the high opinion the PAF pilots have for US systems - and this is by someone who has significant experience with US AND Chinese based platforms.

So if we assume your argument is correct ('While the performance of AIM series is exceptional.'), then is the Chinese way ahead of Russian in BVR missile tech? Considering it has now been almost 25 years since the gulf war, I think the Russians would have made at least SOME improvements wouldn't you think?

SD-10 is primarily a Chinese missiles, with some guidance/assistance from Russia. And yes, the Russians would have made 'some' improvements over the years and I say some because they have been broke for a long time. Furthermore, by the same consideration, the western avionics and ECM/ECCM countermeasures would have matured beyond anything the Russians could have developed so far.

Finally, let me ask you this, have you ever considered why the Chinese never participated in any 5th generation Jet fighter development with the Russians while India is more then eager to do so? I am sure that you are aware of the cost offset that India provides to Russian defence industry, so what kept the Chinese out of such an investment? Think about it.

You have no idea what you are saying. Iran does not poses sophisticated Electronic warfare technology which Russia posses so your analogy does not make sense. Su-24 were equipped with jammers and EW suites which enabled it to buzz the USN aegis dozen of time without getting a lock on. The bear bombers that constantly violate Western airspace are "forced" to leave with a lock on while the SU-24 left at its own will.

Ah....my friend you failed to read the sarcasm in that post, didn't you. I mean we are so used to Iranian fanboys making such claims that a transformation from Russia to Iran would have made sense as then we could all have ignored the post and moved on, knowing how full of **** the Iranians really are in terms of boasting for their military achievements. However, the unbelievable nonsense, related to Russia, is kind of a new one for me.

 

[Jguo]

So, I visited the link and downloaded the pdf document. All it does is list 6 engagements of Russian WVR missiles, of which most are seriously doubtful. It does not list a single engagement of Russian BVR missiles, as I had stated earlier.

As I had said earlier, I had done my research before posting what I did.





SD-10 is primarily a Chinese missiles, with some guidance/assistance from Russia. And yes, the Russians would have made 'some' improvements over the years and I say some because they have been broke for a long time. Furthermore, by the same consideration, the western avionics and ECM/ECCM countermeasures would have matured beyond anything the Russians could have developed so far.

Finally, let me ask you this, have you ever considered why the Chinese never participated in any 5th generation Jet fighter development with the Russians while India is more then eager to do so? I am sure that you are aware of the cost offset that India provides to Russian defence industry, so what kept the Chinese out of such an investment? Think about it.



Ah....my friend you failed to read the sarcasm in that post, didn't you. I mean we are so used to Iranian fanboys making such claims that a transformation from Russia to Iran would have made sense as then we could all have ignored the post and moved on, knowing how full of **** the Iranians really are in terms of boasting for their military achievements. However, the unbelievable nonsense, related to Russia, is kind of a new one for me.

Read again, the R27R is a BVR missile.

You ask for links to support my claims and I have done so, while everything you've said is personal conjecture with no academic backup whatsoever.

We Chinese do not want to cooperate with Russia on 5th Generation development because we believe in self-sufficiency where possible, it has nothing to do with the performance of BVRAAMs. India would do the same if they could develop a 5th Gen by themselves within the same time frame.

It is clear now your aim is to make sweeping statements, try and argue a point without objectivity - people see what they want to see. I have other obvious points I could make, but I will no further reply to you.

 

[Manticore]

Pakistan and China have the long and strong brotherly relationship since more than past six decades. The long-standing ties between the two countries is not just limited to industrial cooperation, but is also seem in form of bilateral defence agreements and sharing joint military strategy.
PAF - PAFwallpapers Blog
Recently Exercise Shaheen-III was conducted between PAF and PLAAF at PAF Base Rafiqui. This was third exercise of this series initiated in 2011. Both air force’s aircraft performed head-to-head in simulated air combat and surface attack missions. Chinese AF team was also complemented by logistics support (including tanker trucks) for refueling of Chinese fighters.

The particiaption of Chinese J-10 Multirole fighters and J-7C aircraft provided both airforces the oppurtunity to improve specific skills and on Dissimilar Air Combat Training (DACT). Such exercise help air powers align their challenges vis–à–vis counter strategies, train and plan accordingly in changing threat environment.


Group Photo of Exercise Shaheen-III participant pilots and senior officers along with aircraft : Left to Right: Mirage-VEF (25 Sqn), J-7 (PLAAF), J-10 (PLAAF), F-7PG (17Sqn), JF-17 (16 Sqn).

Exercise completion shield handed over to DCS (Ops) PAF by Chinese counter part.


Pakistani and Chinese pilots group photo during Exercise Shaheen-II 2013, held in China. PLAAF J-10, J-7, JF-7, PAF F-7P and Mirage-IIIEA aircraft participated in the exercise.

 

[Mav3rick]

Read again, the R27R is a BVR missile.

Dude, you are not reading carefully. There is no evidence to prove that any of those BVR's hit any target at all, even the service history of entire generation of R-27's is full of failures.

You ask for links to support my claims and I have done so, while everything you've said is personal conjecture with no academic backup whatsoever.

I did say that it was my conclusion after my own personal research, or did I say anything to the contrary?

We Chinese do not want to cooperate with Russia on 5th Generation development because we believe in self-sufficiency where possible, it has nothing to do with the performance of BVRAAMs. India would do the same if they could develop a 5th Gen by themselves within the same time frame.

Well, its rather because the Chinese believe their 5th gen technology to be superior to anything the Russians could offer. It's merely pointing to the fact that Chinese may have things that are better then the Russian counterparts, SD-10 being 1 example. Besides, I am sure the Chinese have had a chance to inspect the AIM-120C5 thoroughly by now.

It is clear now your aim is to make sweeping statements, try and argue a point without objectivity - people see what they want to see. I have other obvious points I could make, but I will no further reply to you.

Yes please do not engage me any more, I do not want to be dragged in this nonsense argument.