Possible steps to counter the rising threat from IAF ?

[ALPHYN]

i dont think PAF will buy J-10s. not have enough money

 

[Storm Force]

Master Khan

PAF does not have superior fighters.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

I believe PAF need atleast 300 fighters.Due to massive increase in cost of aircraft(a 5th gen plane costing 2-4 times a 4rth gen one's original price)i don't think PAF will be able to maintain its desired 400-450 aircraft fleet.They need atleast 200 standard aircraft cheap like thunder and 100 cutting edge( now f-16) later a 5th gen design.The gaps appearing in air defence network due to decline in number of aircraft should be made good with cheaper SAMs of all ranges in layered deployment to cover the areas not protected by fighters.

 

[Pfpilot]

The quality vs. quantity debate misses an important consideration: they both require a massive amount of funds. We, Pakistanis, have often found solace in the idea that we may not have the numbers, but we have quality. That quality was a direct result of the era in which the PAF was aided by the US; a quality borne out of the tremendous advances of the US scientific and manufacturing capability that produced top of the line aircraft. Quantity and quality are both relative to the adversary they are judged in relation to. We no longer have quality, because we no longer live in a world where the clash of communism and capitalism defines allegiances. The IAF has access to the same aircraft and training as us. The US would gladly sell India any and all aircraft regardless of what the PAF operates. What really differentiates the two air forces then, is the funding which their respective governments allocate to them. In the end, the answer to the debate of quantity vs. quality is a luxury afforded to those who are flush with cash. It is a decision made based on the threat perception, ideology, and the relative strengths of each nation. But to actually pursue one of quantity or quality, the PAF would need funds to either procure more expensive aircraft which are categorically superior to those operated by the IAF in small numbers or would need funds to procure a large enough number of less capable and less expensive aircraft to overwhelm IAF resources. We, as of today, cannot do either. In which case, the question isn't of quantity vs. quality in its absolute sense, but how much quality are we willing to sacrifice to procure enough aircraft so that they can withstand the IAF onslaught in as many strategically and tactically important locations as possible.

 

[PolarAir]

Quality or Quantity - What's better for PAF?

Please express your views. Thanks

Quality. Compared to India, smaller population means fewer pilots and smaller economy means fewer planes. So quality of coz.

 

[Storm Force]

The quality vs. quantity debate misses an important consideration: they both require a massive amount of funds. We, Pakistanis, have often found solace in the idea that we may not have the numbers, but we have quality. That quality was a direct result of the era in which the PAF was aided by the US; a quality borne out of the tremendous advances of the US scientific and manufacturing capability that produced top of the line aircraft. Quantity and quality are both relative to the adversary they are judged in relation to. We no longer have quality, because we no longer live in a world where the clash of communism and capitalism defines allegiances. The IAF has access to the same aircraft and training as us. The US would gladly sell India any and all aircraft regardless of what the PAF operates. What really differentiates the two air forces then, is the funding which their respective governments allocate to them. In the end, the answer to the debate of quantity vs. quality is a luxury afforded to those who are flush with cash. It is a decision made based on the threat perception, ideology, and the relative strengths of each nation. But to actually pursue one of quantity or quality, the PAF would need funds to either procure more expensive aircraft which are categorically superior to those operated by the IAF in small numbers or would need funds to procure a large enough number of less capable and less expensive aircraft to overwhelm IAF resources. We, as of today, cannot do either. In which case, the question isn't of quantity vs. quality in its absolute sense, but how much quality are we willing to sacrifice to procure enough aircraft so that they can withstand the IAF onslaught in as many strategically and tactically important locations as possible.

PFPILOT one of the most sensible posts i have ever seen in years in this forum.

 

[fatman17]

PAF budget is 20 front line squadrons or ~400 combat aircraft. at least 7-10 squadrons should be high-tech aircraft (~200). the balance would be 3rd gen aircraft used for point defence (F-7P&PG), night -strike (Mirage-ROSE).
currently PAF is struggling to meet the above requirement. it has 76 F-16s including the Jordan numbers. so there seems to be a deficit of about 24 here.
if the J-10B/FC-20 deal would have come through (with chinese engine), then 40 hi-tech aircraft would improve the PAF numbers but this deal is dead for the near future.
PAF has 49 of the newer JF-17's in service with another 50 to be delivered. this program is beset with financial delays but it is expected that the numbers required here will be available in about 2-3 years.
at the low tech or support level (point defence) any combination of F-7, F-PG and Mirage-III/V can deliver the required numbers at this time.

 

[Storm Force]

Fatman RE COMMENT

PAF budget is 20 front line squadrons or ~400 combat aircraft. at least 7-10 squadrons should be high-tech aircraft (~200). the

What you/PAF considers hitech is relative to different countries ie F16/52/ JF17 block1/2 MAY SEEM HITECH to PAF

But to Israel saudi Japan France RAF Germany or UAE they are not hitech but stanndard mid tech fighters.

Also

Because PAF is outnumbeered 3-1 in 4th generation fighters by IAF the PAF equalevant 4TH generation fighter has to be marginally superior to the SU30MKI, upgraded mirage2000-5/ mig29k/smt.

My question is the Thunder or MLU F16 superior to the mki which accunts for 200 fighters in IAF today.

 

[fatman17]

Fatman RE COMMENT
What you/PAF considers hitech is relative to different countries ie F16/52/ JF17 block1/2 MAY SEEM HITECH to PAF

But to Israel saudi Japan France RAF Germany or UAE they are not hitech but stanndard mid tech fighters.

Also

Because PAF is outnumbeered 3-1 in 4th generation fighters by IAF the PAF equalevant 4TH generation fighter has to be marginally superior to the SU30MKI, upgraded mirage2000-5/ mig29k/smt.

My question is the Thunder or MLU F16 superior to the mki which accunts for 200 fighters in IAF today.

superiority comes both from the aircraft and pilot training. a F-16 flown by a well trained pilot should hold its own v. a SU30MKI or others of such type. if we get caught up in numbers, then IAF has the advantage, always had. PAF has held them at bay bcuz of its pilot training standards and mastery of the aircraft they have. we would love to have more numbers but we just cant. thats the reality.

for us a JFT is 2-3 times superior in capability that a mirage or F-7 in our inventory.

 

[Storm Force]

PAF had pilot advantage in the 1960S & 1970s when pakistan was aligned to USA and the west AND india was firmly in russian bloc.

Pakistan has open access to western methods training and hardware ie sabres from USA and mirage from france
sidewinder missles.

india had soviet doctrine and mig21s and british legacy fighters like hunters mix of british and russian training.

TODAY the IAF and india the country has very strong relations with just about every major nation USA ISRAEL FRANCE and RUSSIA.

They even train and have F16/52 permantly based in india KALKUNDIA air base from singapore. air force.

EverYbody can see the regular excecises the IAF SU30MKI are aving with RAF french and USA and the F16 pilotys from singapore.

I am certain with five or six times the budget of PAF the indian pilot spends more flight hours annually.

TRAINING WISE THE IAF is as good as any in the world

 

[MilSpec]

PAF had pilot advantage in the 1960S & 1970s when pakistan was aligned to USA and the west AND india was firmly in russian bloc.

Pakistan has open access to western methods training and hardware ie sabres from USA and mirage from france
sidewinder missles.

india had soviet doctrine and mig21s and british legacy fighters like hunters mix of british and russian training.

TODAY the IAF and india the country has very strong relations with just about every major nation USA ISRAEL FRANCE and RUSSIA.

They even train and have F16/52 permantly based in india KALKUNDIA air base from singapore. air force.

EverYbody can see the regular excecises the IAF SU30MKI are aving with RAF french and USA and the F16 pilotys from singapore.

I am certain with five or six times the budget of PAF the indian pilot spends more flight hours annually.

TRAINING WISE THE IAF is as good as any in the world

Respectfully I would beg to differ in some of the points:

1. Qualitative superiority as of alignment to US is concerned w.r.t PAF over IAF is a mostly a myth and true for a very very short period.

2. Indian Air Force's training methodology is Indian, not russian, not British, not even a mix of russo-brit, but purely Indian. We base our acd based on our level of threat perception, enemy capabilities, geography and platform capability.

3. Indian airforce's Achilles heel in my personal opinion has been lack of trainers, and i'll timed conflicts. Also nature of warfare that we are subjected to often lends us offensive roles, thus increasing our losses which is mis-interpreted as lack of pilot skill, which on contrary is a great testament to the offensive strength of IAF.

 

[Black Eagle 90]

PAF does need just to invest more on JF-17s program even in the start to add all the state of the art capability even from Block-I and also made its dual seat aircraft. Producing 100-110 JF-17s from each Block and make it 300++ JF-17s in total replacing Mirages, A-5C and F-7P/PGs and keep the fleet of 80+ F-16s.

 

[Mugwop]

What about stealth?

 

[fatman17]

PAF had pilot advantage in the 1960S & 1970s when pakistan was aligned to USA and the west AND india was firmly in russian bloc.

Pakistan has open access to western methods training and hardware ie sabres from USA and mirage from france
sidewinder missles.

india had soviet doctrine and mig21s and british legacy fighters like hunters mix of british and russian training.

TODAY the IAF and india the country has very strong relations with just about every major nation USA ISRAEL FRANCE and RUSSIA.

They even train and have F16/52 permantly based in india KALKUNDIA air base from singapore. air force.

EverYbody can see the regular excecises the IAF SU30MKI are aving with RAF french and USA and the F16 pilotys from singapore.

I am certain with five or six times the budget of PAF the indian pilot spends more flight hours annually.

TRAINING WISE THE IAF is as good as any in the world

you'll be surprised its almost the same...!

 

[sancho]

superiority comes both from the aircraft and pilot training. a F-16 flown by a well trained pilot should hold its own v. a SU30MKI or others of such type.

The pilot however is only well trained to the technical limits of it's fighter! A well trained F16 MLU pilot that is limited to AIM 9M, will still find itself in the inferior position against a more maneuverable fighter, with a better WVR missile (lesson the western forces learned after pitting their fighters against Mig 29s with R73).
The same pilot in the same fighter, limited to an active radar as the only sensor for detection, will find itself in the inferior position against fighters with modern passiv sensors too, let alone with more advanced radars.

Of course training is important, but it only adds to an advantage when you roughly have the same technical capabilities.