Potential Weaknesses of PAF and Possible Solutions

[Jazzbot]

Ok, I am not an airspace guy, however, I have a simple question. PAF's entire focus is on defending our airspace during a conflict with IAF, so this means, their plans will be entering our airspace and we'll be encountering them inside our territory.

Don't you think it is a bad thing to have enemy plans entering freely into our airspace and we have to fight them inside our own territory. Why not try to take war into their own backyard, or at least try to focus on something which will stop them from even intruding in our country? I mean, deployment of such equipment which will give enemy very hard time entering in our airspace at first, and then if some plans succeed to intrude, they'll then have to face our fighter jets which will be waiting for any such intruders, loaded with BVR with full support of ground and awacas etc..

Please elaborate.

 

[Manticore]

Ok, I am not an airspace guy, however, I have a simple question. PAF's entire focus is on defending our airspace during a conflict with IAF, so this means, their plans will be entering our airspace and we'll be encountering them inside our territory.

Don't you think it is a bad thing to have enemy plans entering freely into our airspace and we have to fight them inside our own territory. Why not try to take war into their own backyard, or at least try to focus on something which will stop them from even intruding in our country? I mean, deployment of such equipment which will give enemy very hard time entering in our airspace at first, and then if some plans succeed to intrude, they'll then have to face our fighter jets which will be waiting for any such intruders, loaded with BVR with full support of ground and awacas etc..

Please elaborate.

This would be the ideal condition -- we need enough j10/f16s to take the battle on the other side , which might be used in providing cover to the 2nd gen fighters at the moment--- this can be done by getting j10 , and inducting jf17 blk2/3 for second line roles ---

Integrate the mar1, c802 , ls6 , ra'ad to cut short our damages in offensive missions -- air refuellers will help our single engined fleet -- awacs have also been inducted

three types of UAV that the Chinese have put in service, J-6 UAV UAV J-7 and CK-1

The Chinese have also transformed the very old J-6 in UAV Air-Sol



The actual ''generation gap'' will take place when pakfa gets inducted

 

[PakShaheen79]

Biggest weakness ... hmmm .... Let me state this bluntly ... It is lack of any Power projection capability. And it is due to both numerical and qualitative disadvantages vis-a-vis India. For that to achieve. Pakistan will have to achieve two critical imperatives first

- Recover Economy
- Change the mindset of defense strategy. Give the Air Power its due place in over all national security strategy.

Once these two done, things will start changing apace and till that happen, let's hope there would be no war with anyone!

 

[MiG-21]

So approximately 250 fighter aircrafts loaded with BVRs and supported by AWACS/AEW&C will be facing Indian thrust into Pakistan.

How did you come to the 250 figure? If you are taking about the future then ok. As of now, PAF only has 18 F-16Block52 plus less than 10(?) upgraded MLU F-16, which are confirmed to be BVR capable. Has the BVR been fully integrated into JF-17 and given operational clearance? PAF Mirage-3 and F-7 does not have BVR. Mirage-5 does not even have a radar, let alone a BVR.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Don't you think it is a bad thing to have enemy plans entering freely into our airspace and we have to fight them inside our own territory. Why not try to take war into their own backyard, or at least try to focus on something which will stop them from even intruding in our country?

thats the focus of the thread, find weaknesses and propose solution.
you done both there

I mean, deployment of such equipment which will give enemy very hard time entering in our airspace at first, and then if some plans succeed to intrude, they'll then have to face our fighter jets which will be waiting for any such intruders, loaded with BVR with full support of ground and awacas etc..

Please elaborate.

now you are actually supporting the "bad thing" and giving examples on how to defend within our country against such attacks.

preventing + countering aggression


well done you answered your questions.
nothing more to elaborate there.

 

[The Great One]

Given the economic condition of both the countries, don't you guys think that having a doctrine that requires taking the war into India is too much for PAF which is already resource stricken and can barely manage a few F-16 along with FC-1 for free.

 

[Safriz]

Pakistan should look into these.. For airborne surveillance,Target detection and tracking

These can fly higher than 100,000 feet,can be made of Composite material for low radar observability.....
Can stay airborne for weeks as they charge battery during day for flight at night...
Can be a good solution for detecting stealth planes and passive surveillance of airspace by Optical / Infra red cameras..
These can carry over 40KG payload which is enough for much equipment to be carried onboard...
A grid of such planes flying around can successful detect and track stealth planes

This one can fly ay 15Km..Thats higher than the reach of SAMs

 

[IceCold]

I would use the word shortcoming and this is where i believe PAF falls short of its rivial:
1) Our single engine doctrine, which though cost effective puts us at a disadvantage when it comes to deep strike within the enemy territory.
2) Lack of a high altitude SAM system which would also provide the bases for our first ABM with limited capability
3) Our enemy has joined in the Russian 5th generation program, where exactly do we fall in this race?

But to be honest do we have the economy to support all of the above but then again i also think in case a conflict arises, will our enemy show any constraint just because our economy was bad and we could not afford to field proper units against them. They will use every available resource to cripple the PAF and if PAF gets crippled, it means we will lose air control and no country can win a war after loosing its air control.

 

[PakShaheen79]

Self -Delete --- Double Post

 

[Irfan Baloch]

I guess you are recommending moving PAF above Army in terms of resource allocation (strength, men, material, deployment nad involvement)

Army will resist. loosing its top position. but there is way to work around it. boast and promote its own aviation branch thus relieving some pressure from PAF. for a start CAS & CAP where friendly troops are deployed or engaged.

times have changed. Airborne warfare (manned / unmaned crafts, missiles) are the decider of the current conflicts. I totally agree with you on our single engine, Multirole doctrine also being a hindrance. the opposite of power projection as you put it.
if Army doesnt let go some of its funds then train it to boost its air wing. then PAF can relieve some of its assets from baby sitting the army (for argument sake) and apply it for its primary purpose (the airwar).


in the end its the availability of funds and resources that will decide what can be actually achieved and what will remain an idea.
yup the economy.


the best bet is the most effective and efficient use of available funds. reduce wastes and plan better for the best acquisition and application of men and machines to fill the gaps. catch 22 is the limited funds and thats not unique to Pakistan every nation has this issue and its a common economic fact. wants are unlimited and means are limited. manage it better and reap rewards.

 

[Darth Vader]

we are always crying about economy We just have to get rde of corrupt govt 1st thing to do Coming to 2nd best offense is best defense we cant just fight within in our Territory i had a feelng till next 100 years we gone keep match our f 16s to every other air craft well thats not possible we have to see the truth How can our F16s OR JF 17s fight with a stealth fighter we cant if some 1 says we gone upgrade jf but wht war goes on we need a extra punch f 16 and jf are good But We need More em not saying we should get 100 of stealth fighters but atleast a few which gives us our edge on india

 

[epinephrine]

I would use the word shortcoming and this is where i believe PAF falls short of its rivial:
1) Our single engine doctrine, which though cost effective puts us at a disadvantage when it comes to deep strike within the enemy territory.
2) Lack of a high altitude SAM system which would also provide the bases for our first ABM with limited capability
3) Our enemy has joined in the Russian 5th generation program, where exactly do we fall in this race?

But to be honest do we have the economy to support all of the above but then again i also think in case a conflict arises, will our enemy show any constraint just because our economy was bad and we could not afford to field proper units against them. They will use every available resource to cripple the PAF and if PAF gets crippled, it means we will lose air control and no country can win a war after loosing its air control.

i dont know y everybody is so much in love with twin engined jets here.if we get twin engined jets we will never be able to penetrate deep into indian territory till we completely take over enemy SAMs and radars.twin engined jets are more easily detectable as compare to smaller single engined jets.indian twin engined jets will only be able to reach till baluchistan from eastern side till they shot down all of our awacs ,sam sites and radar sites which is impossible.

yes india is going for a 5th gen jet but when they will get 1st opertional sqn of stealth jets??not before 2020.till that time we may also get stealth jets from china.everybody knows how things work in india n their planning.manufacturing a light wt fighter for 30 years.millions of funds went into their politicians pockets n the plane is still not opertaional n when it will be opertaional it will be outdated.

we are always crying about economy We just have to get rde of corrupt govt 1st thing to do Coming to 2nd best offense is best defense we cant just fight within in our Territory i had a feelng till next 100 years we gone keep match our f 16s to every other air craft well thats not possible we have to see the truth How can our F16s OR JF 17s fight with a stealth fighter we cant if some 1 says we gone upgrade jf but wht war goes on we need a extra punch f 16 and jf are good But We need More em not saying we should get 100 of stealth fighters but atleast a few which gives us our edge on india

USA is the only country flying stealth jets right now.rest of the world is still waiting for much delayed F-35.india n russia are waiting for PAKFA n china n pak for J20.most of the countries get their hands on their stealth jets most probably b/w 2018-2020 n that too in limited numbers so we dont need 100 stealth jets tomorrow n its not possible as well.so its the 4th gen jets playing the key role in air war for most of the nations till 2025-2030

How did you come to the 250 figure? If you are taking about the future then ok. As of now, PAF only has 18 F-16Block52 plus less than 10(?) upgraded MLU F-16, which are confirmed to be BVR capable. Has the BVR been fully integrated into JF-17 and given operational clearance? PAF Mirage-3 and F-7 does not have BVR. Mirage-5 does not even have a radar, let alone a BVR.

r u on drugs or having withdrawl symptoms or both??

the only weakness in PAF right now is the absence of long ranged SAMs in numbers .otherwise with a combination of awacs,bvr capable fighters and ballistic missiles we can easily defend ourselves form any indian aggression n hit anywhere in india as well.in case of a war paf will be in better postion if it strikes first n hard on FOBs n missiles going for deeper bases simultaneously.

 

[epinephrine]

Ok, I am not an airspace guy, however, I have a simple question. PAF's entire focus is on defending our airspace during a conflict with IAF, so this means, their plans will be entering our airspace and we'll be encountering them inside our territory.

Don't you think it is a bad thing to have enemy plans entering freely into our airspace and we have to fight them inside our own territory. Why not try to take war into their own backyard, or at least try to focus on something which will stop them from even intruding in our country? I mean, deployment of such equipment which will give enemy very hard time entering in our airspace at first, and then if some plans succeed to intrude, they'll then have to face our fighter jets which will be waiting for any such intruders, loaded with BVR with full support of ground and awacas etc..

Please elaborate.

PAF has always struck first n hard in both the past wars.every counrty projects her armed forces as a defensive force it doesn't mean that they dont have any plans and strategy for any offensive into enemy territory.but for attack u always need better equipment.during the sanctions era from 1990-2005 PAF couldnt add anything to its inventory so PAF had to be on backfoot against the growing IAF but after the induction of new jets n equipment n when the gap b/w IAF n PAF is at historic low PAF has full capability for any offensive.

 

[Farooqi1]

I would use the word shortcoming and this is where i believe PAF falls short of its rivial:
1) Our single engine doctrine, which though cost effective puts us at a disadvantage when it comes to deep strike within the enemy territory.
2) Lack of a high altitude SAM system which would also provide the bases for our first ABM with limited capability
3) Our enemy has joined in the Russian 5th generation program, where exactly do we fall in this race?

But to be honest do we have the economy to support all of the above but then again i also think in case a conflict arises, will our enemy show any constraint just because our economy was bad and we could not afford to field proper units against them. They will use every available resource to cripple the PAF and if PAF gets crippled, it means we will lose air control and no country can win a war after loosing its air control.

Well put Ice-Cold. Single engine doctrine I believe is not even cost effective.

 

[IceCold]

I guess you are recommending moving PAF above Army in terms of resource allocation (strength, men, material, deployment nad involvement)

Army will resist. loosing its top position. but there is way to work around it. boast and promote its own aviation branch thus relieving some pressure from PAF. for a start CAS & CAP where friendly troops are deployed or engaged.

times have changed. Airborne warfare (manned / unmaned crafts, missiles) are the decider of the current conflicts. I totally agree with you on our single engine, Multirole doctrine also being a hindrance. the opposite of power projection as you put it.
if Army doesnt let go some of its funds then train it to boost its air wing. then PAF can relieve some of its assets from baby sitting the army (for argument sake) and apply it for its primary purpose (the airwar).


in the end its the availability of funds and resources that will decide what can be actually achieved and what will remain an idea.
yup the economy.


the best bet is the most effective and efficient use of available funds. reduce wastes and plan better for the best acquisition and application of men and machines to fill the gaps. catch 22 is the limited funds and thats not unique to Pakistan every nation has this issue and its a common economic fact. wants are unlimited and means are limited. manage it better and reap rewards.

Sir i believe your post is in response to mine. Yes i do believe that the air force should be put above followed by the navy and then the army. Modern warfare have significantly changed and as you mentioned the future lies with manned and unmanned aircraft's. The reason i put Navy above army is because navies role should not be just seen as a coastal defense, but it is rather responsible for keeping your sea lanes open in case of war which in turn fuels your economy. If enemy chokes your lines, you will loose war even before it began.
IMO we have neglected both the airforce and navy for far too long. Its high time we tell the army to take the back seat, the future warfare lies on air and naval defense.

Well put Ice-Cold. Single engine doctrine I believe is not even cost effective.

Its cost effective from maintenance point of view only. If we look at the bigger picture, the things we have to sacrifice based on this doctrine, i'll agree its not.