Potential Weaknesses of PAF and Possible Solutions

[yyetttt]

We need more BVR missiles and SAM is a good one too...

PAF has always handled IAF, and I am sure it can handle it again.

 

[muse]

Maybe we should revisit doctrine -- we read a lot about Pakistan and "Air Land" - Is Pakistan adopting Air land? if yes, has it created the infrastructure, the training, the assets -- we have been thinking in terms of holding an adversary off, has this policy paid dividends or has it contributed to insecurity?

 

[SQ8]

Maybe we should revisit doctrine -- we read a lot about Pakistan and "Air Land" - Is Pakistan adopting Air land? if yes, has it created the infrastructure, the training, the assets -- we have been thinking in terms of holding an adversary off, has this policy paid dividends or has it contributed to insecurity?

To a large extent..YES..
The Pakistan Airforce and PA are now much more integrated into a joint warfare concept than before. Tactics, Equipment and doctrine have been laid out at the highest levels and concepts tested in exercises such as "Azm-e-Nau".

However, as long as the PA holds the reins of power in Pakistan..i.e it continues to behave as the primary arm and considers the rest subordinate to it.. these doctrines come to naught.

 

[Windjammer]

^^^^^^^
That may have been a mindset of the yester years, but the current trend seems to acknowledge the fact that air power is the sword arm of the fighting force. The twice familiarisation sorties by COAS may be seen as photo sessions but it does conveys a message to the importance given by him to the role air force is playing.....lest one witnesses the airchief riding atop Al-Khalid or something.

 

[Viper0011.]

IAF will try and ground PAF by going after the infrastructure and the vice versa from ground as well as from air and even from sea (in case of India), India will have numerical advantage, technological advantage and advantage of size and depth. If India succeeds in delivering a hard and deep preemptive strike on PAF I believe all then PAF could do during the tenure of the war would be to defend itself

Ummm.....not sure where you get the per-emptive ideas from. India is not US. A big force yes but not US or Israel...in fact it can never be one. You simply don't have the infrastructure or $$$$ to be doing the 'pre-emptive' strikes at the level you just imagined. Both sides have plenty of Radar coverage & AEW&C systems plus immediate plans to launch offensive attacks while dealing with 'per-emptive' strikes.

But you realize the 'per-emptiveness' that you spoke off....would attempt to neutralize PAF/PA's infrastructure (as per your imagination), THUS, resulting in an immediate demarcation of the Red Lines Pakistan's been telling the US about. In India's case, the Red Lines means a threat to overall Pakistan's strategic assets = immediately cross the threshold that should never be crossed by any side. God forbid if that happens, there will be destruction on each side. Pakistan will lose a lot of land people and most of its economy (which is pretty fragile as is). India will lose land, people and their economy .... probably over half of its economy if parts of Bangalore, Mumbai and Calcutta are hit. So I am not sure if India wants to go back to being India of 1970's. India will lose 100* more than Pakistan due to economic hardship.

Having that said, a better debate and a friendly environment is necessary for both the countries and even on this forum. Irrespective of what country acquires what, it's a stalemate or MAD, that's the bottom line.
Half the people on each side are poor as hell. No war should be started. It'll be utter stupidity to start a war anywhere in the world. Things can be discussed and fixed with dialogues. For heaven's sake you both speak the same language too. Too shameful that you guys can't sit, drink tea, have cookies and yell at each other and fix your issues for people's betterness. Both the countries can benefit from each other a LOT if humanity prevails!!

 

[Viper0011.]

We need more BVR missiles and SAM is a good one too... [/QUOT

Yes, at least two strong layers of high speed, high altitude long range sams a little behind the botter able to engage incoming Indian aircraft in Indian airspace in case of a war.

A third layer of high altitude medium range sams before key cities / locations and a third layer with point defense sams. Not the bombings now happen through IR, GPS, Smart Munitions etc so this can be done from 50k feet. So no point defense sams with 15 k ceiling. Compliment by 360 degree ring & region / sector based radar coverage + AEW&C, 100 UAV's with BVR capability (much cheaper alternative), 250 JFT's with two bvr, two wvr bogies, 75 F 16 with Amraams, 70 J10B and / or J111B. This makes up a strong force for anyone to think twice before attempting an adventure.

 

[Farooqi1]

We need more BVR missiles and SAM is a good one too... [/QUOT

Yes, at least two strong layers of high speed, high altitude long range sams a little behind the botter able to engage incoming Indian aircraft in Indian airspace in case of a war.

A third layer of high altitude medium range sams before key cities / locations and a third layer with point defense sams. Not the bombings now happen through IR, GPS, Smart Munitions etc so this can be done from 50k feet. So no point defense sams with 15 k ceiling. Compliment by 360 degree ring & region / sector based radar coverage + AEW&C, 100 UAV's with BVR capability (much cheaper alternative), 250 JFT's with two bvr, two wvr bogies, 75 F 16 with Amraams, 70 J10B and / or J111B. This makes up a strong force for anyone to think twice before attempting an adventure.

Alot of posters are talking about SAMS. And I am geting this notion that we don't have enough SAMS deployed. Is there a hindrence obtaining them? I mean are we having difficulties buying them because we are under some sort of sanctions, shortage of funds etc? Somebody have the answer or info?

 

[SQ8]

shortage of funds etc?

Before the 2005 earthquake, there was a comprehensive plan based on a study to upgrade Pakistan's Air defense networks missile component. It involved the purchase of a number of medium and long range SAM's along with the purchase/development of an ABM system. There was also an RFQ for battalion level AD assets such as the Pantsir or Gepard for the PA.
Unfortunately, after the drain of funds following the quake and subsequent bad management; only a small section of the medium level SAM was purchased in the shape of the SPADA 2000 systems.

 

[Farooqi1]

We need more BVR missiles and SAM is a good one too...

PAF has always handled IAF, and I am sure it can handle it again.

You are right to some extent. But situation has cahnged since the last conflict of 1971. IAF now has Mig 29, M2K, SU 30 MKI and will have Rafales and on top of all of this their air defense systems and missiles.

 

[muse]

IAF now has Mig 29, M2K, SU 30 MKI and will have Rafales and on top of all of this their air defense systems and missiles.

And therefore.... the potential weakness of the PAF, are.....??? that it does not have MiG 29 MKI, Rafale????

///

 

[VelocuR]

You are right to some extent. But situation has cahnged since the last conflict of 1971. IAF now has Mig 29, M2K, SU 30 MKI and will have Rafales and on top of all of this their air defense systems and missiles.

The point is PAF is defensive with few equipments and IAF is offensive with massive offensives. Solution? Offensive didn't have chance to win against tough defensive.

 

[epinephrine]

^^^^^^^
That may have been a mindset of the yester years, but the current trend seems to acknowledge the fact that air power is the sword arm of the fighting force. The twice familiarisation sorties by COAS may be seen as photo sessions but it does conveys a message to the importance given by him to the role air force is playing.....lest one witnesses the airchief riding atop Al-Khalid or something.

there is always some difference b/w familiarisation n having fun.

You are right to some extent. But situation has cahnged since the last conflict of 1971. IAF now has Mig 29, M2K, SU 30 MKI and will have Rafales and on top of all of this their air defense systems and missiles.

we are also having F-16s C/D n MLU,jf-17,awacs,world's most fearsome bvr missiles of both US n chinese origin.J10 is in pipeline.nothing to worry abt

The point is PAF is defensive with few equipments and IAF is offensive with massive offensives. Solution? Offensive didn't have chance to win against tough defensive.

only a real war,which shouldn't happen,will tell which air force is offensive n which is defensive.

 

[S.Y.A]

SAMs, SAMs and more SAMs are what we require, oh and some good jets too, we need to build up an AF that can last at least a month before an enemy of IAF's size

 

[Jazzbot]

one question, does Pakistan have any program, for our own long range or medium range SAMs or Air defense systems, going on?

 

[Vritra]

Things can be discussed and fixed with dialogues. For heaven's sake you both speak the same language too. Too shameful that you guys can't sit, drink tea, have cookies and yell at each other and fix your issues for people's betterness. Both the countries can benefit from each other a LOT if humanity prevails!!

You're not too familiar with Indian culture and its proclaimed similarity with that of Pakistan, are you? Go anywhere to the South or the East and it becomes immediately clear that even the similarity of language is a moot point.

This isn't the type of animosity regularly fabricated by the NATO to justify wars in the middle-east; this isn't a sudden recognition of a threat in the other part of the world, despite decades of signs. It has a much deeper sociopolitical root, which people, despite their awareness of it, are unwilling/unable to look past.

We've been talking to each other about "getting together and having tea and cookies to talk about it" for a long time now. The problem is, neither side volunteers to set the kettle on the flame.

Funny joke, I'll give you that. We both do like our chai.

Yes, at least two strong layers of high speed, high altitude long range sams a little behind the botter able to engage incoming Indian aircraft in Indian airspace in case of a war.

This isn't aimed at you in particular, but a question in general: there seems to be a general assumption that SAM batteries of varying ranges placed along the border will somehow neutralize IAF air activity entirely. That IAF aircraft will fly blind over said SAM batteries. The likelihood of the IAF being so obtuse are fairly slim.

The heavy investment in missiles of a large variety is by design. So is the effort to maintain long range dedicated strike-fighters capable of performing S.E.A.D. Add to this that half of these SAM battery placements will occur within reach of Indian waters, effectively making them targets for sea-launched missiles, you're facing armed forces capable of a trifold attack on the same strip of placements.

The Cold Start doctrine, which people are so quick to dismiss, aims for enemy defences being taken down by every array of armed forces, and quickly at that. Yet, for some reason, people have misunderstood the Doctrine as a defensive strategy. As Major General Sabherwal said, "Wars are never won by defensive postures." And let the asinine assumption that the induction of one or two military techs will neutralize the Cold Start Doctrine fade away: it was a rather euphoric reaction to a successful missile test, nothing more.

Because it is rather benighted to assume that the Indian arena's defences will not factor in at all.

A third layer of high altitude medium range sams before key cities / locations and a third layer with point defense sams. Not the bombings now happen through IR, GPS, Smart Munitions etc so this can be done from 50k feet. So no point defense sams with 15 k ceiling. Compliment by 360 degree ring & region / sector based radar coverage + AEW&C, 100 UAV's with BVR capability (much cheaper alternative), 250 JFT's with two bvr, two wvr bogies, 75 F 16 with Amraams, 70 J10B and / or J111B. This makes up a strong force for anyone to think twice before attempting an adventure.

That suggestion entails a complete absence of PAF aircraft from the forward sectors of this theoretical invasion.

Consider this: the Cold Start doctrine aims for military installments, not for major cities. Yearly exercises are conducted, and revisions made, to refine the doctrine. Changes to Pakistani forces are made to counter obsolescence in tactics. Territory, sectors of invasions and areas for stratagem are mapped continiously. Every acquisition contributes to changes in the Doctrine, be it on the Pakistani side or the Indian side. Those "red lines" you, orangzaib, brought up, are demarked with a violation of nuclear and civilian assets, while the Indian forces would aim to take out Pakistan's ability to counter with an offensive push. Having aircraft protecting cities while country territory rapidly falls under Indian control would result in the cities becoming isolated fortresses.

Any manoeuver by Pakistan following this to push into Indian territory would only result in all out war, which would, as you've pointed out, only cause more grief. Though you've erroneously assigned a major share of that grief to India.


As far as the topic of discussion goes, the PAF has a fairly strong setup: major weakness I see is a lack of tangible support from the PN at the outset of war.