Punitive Air Strikes on Enemy Airbases and Our Options.

[FOOLS_NIGHTMARE]

PAF in the past wars of 1965 and 1971 surprised the enemy on many occasions by conducting daring air raids on their airbases and radar installations. The main targets were the Indian Airbases of Amritsar, Ambala, Agra, Awantipur, Bikaner, Halwara, Jodhpur, Jaisalmer, Pathankot, Bhuj, Srinagar and Uttarlai and air defence radars at Amritsar and Faridkot. The PAF's strikes were based on the strategy of pre-emptive neutralization of enemy air capability. However the heroic efforts of our pilots were compromised, because only a limited section of the PAF's strike capability was employed by our planners,thus enabling the enemy to regroup.

PAF has always implied the methodology that it has to strike the enemy first and hard.Hence the slogan/motto of "Kill the Enemy before it kills you".
With our limited resources available PAF must have a strategy at hand to NEUTRALIZE the enemy, prior to it taking any action.!!!Today PAFs task is more arduous than what its predecessors had. Can Army Strategic Forces Command collaborate and coordinate its missions with the PAF.? I think with the outbreak of hostilities Strategic force command will be our first strike option to soften the enemy airbases with non nuclear munitions.In this field Pakistan enjoys a vast qualitative and quantitative superiority over its enemy.

Although the enemy is constantly in the hunt for more powerful air defence systems,to date its still vulnerable.Hopefully we will soon find other alternatives like the Ababeel MIRV.

After the initial volley of Ballistic missiles our SOWs (H2 andH4),Cruise missiles,REK bombs, MARs and others can come into play to finish the designated targets.

Following Indian Airbases have undergone major upgrades recently
after their humiliation earlier this year and can be good targets.

We should not discount the role of Sea/submarine launched cruise/ballistic missiles,striking/neutralising enemy air bases. Getting support from sister services for a common goal will be a matter of pride for all Pakistanis. Next time when our motherland calls us ELIMINATION OF ALL ENEMY AIR ASSETS QUICKLY WILL BE THE GOAL.

 

[MIRauf]

A-200 / A-300 MLRS, Multiple salvo of 8 towards the S-400 sites, Which would mean that they will have to position it 200/250 KM away from the border or risk being taken out by much cheaper MLRS.

 

[FOOLS_NIGHTMARE]

A-200 / A-300 MLRS, Multiple salvo of 8 towards the S-400 sites, Which would mean that they will have to position it 200/250 KM away from the border or risk being taken out by much cheaper MLRS.

A good suggestion.

 

[Joe1351]

Did India win the war?
At least three independent authors believed India had an upper hand in the war:

• Retired American diplomat Dennis Kux: "Although both sides lost heavily in men and material, and neither gained a decisive military advantage, India had the better of the war. Delhi achieved its basic goal of thwarting Pakistan's attempt to seize Kashmir by force. Pakistan gained nothing from a conflict which it had instigated."
• English historian John Keay: "The war lasted barely a month. Pakistan made gains in the Rajasthan desert but its main push against India's Jammu-Srinagar road link was repulsed and Indian tanks advanced to within a sight of Lahore. Both sides claimed victory but India had most to celebrate."
• American author Stanley Wolpert: "The war ended in what appeared to be a draw when the embargo placed by Washington on US ammunition and replacements for both armies forced cessation of conflict before either side won a clear victory. India, however, was in a position to inflict grave damage to, if not capture, Pakistan's capital of the Punjab when the ceasefire was called, and controlled Kashmir's strategic Uri-Poonch bulge, much to [Pakistani president] Ayub's chagrin."

Did India win the war?
At least three independent authors believed India had an upper hand in the war:

• Retired American diplomat Dennis Kux: "Although both sides lost heavily in men and material, and neither gained a decisive military advantage, India had the better of the war. Delhi achieved its basic goal of thwarting Pakistan's attempt to seize Kashmir by force. Pakistan gained nothing from a conflict which it had instigated."
• English historian John Keay: "The war lasted barely a month. Pakistan made gains in the Rajasthan desert but its main push against India's Jammu-Srinagar road link was repulsed and Indian tanks advanced to within a sight of Lahore. Both sides claimed victory but India had most to celebrate."
• American author Stanley Wolpert: "The war ended in what appeared to be a draw when the embargo placed by Washington on US ammunition and replacements for both armies forced cessation of conflict before either side won a clear victory. India, however, was in a position to inflict grave damage to, if not capture, Pakistan's capital of the Punjab when the ceasefire was called, and controlled Kashmir's strategic Uri-Poonch bulge, much to [Pakistani president] Ayub's chagrin."

 

[Battle of Waterloo]

Airbases are pretty easy to rebuild. The US strike against Syria's T-4 airbase using 60+ cruise missiles did virtually zero damage; it was being used for military flights within a few hours! So, you should be able to repeat attacks to keep certain strategic airbases out of operation for a sustained period of time, rather than wasting such huge amounts of single-use BM/CMs to take out a large amount of airbases for only a few hours/days.

Such strikes can be useful to take out openly parked enemy jets though, but I don't know about India's use of bunkers etc.

 

[Mrc]

Use cruise missiles to eliminate whole of western and northern command in first hours .. This can be followed up by formal strikes with stand off weapons .. Iaf must not be allowed to play a role in any future conflict

 

[FOOLS_NIGHTMARE]

Did India win the war?
At least three independent authors believed India had an upper hand in the war:

• Retired American diplomat Dennis Kux: "Although both sides lost heavily in men and material, and neither gained a decisive military advantage, India had the better of the war. Delhi achieved its basic goal of thwarting Pakistan's attempt to seize Kashmir by force. Pakistan gained nothing from a conflict which it had instigated."
• English historian John Keay: "The war lasted barely a month. Pakistan made gains in the Rajasthan desert but its main push against India's Jammu-Srinagar road link was repulsed and Indian tanks advanced to within a sight of Lahore. Both sides claimed victory but India had most to celebrate."
• American author Stanley Wolpert: "The war ended in what appeared to be a draw when the embargo placed by Washington on US ammunition and replacements for both armies forced cessation of conflict before either side won a clear victory. India, however, was in a position to inflict grave damage to, if not capture, Pakistan's capital of the Punjab when the ceasefire was called, and controlled Kashmir's strategic Uri-Poonch bulge, much to [Pakistani president] Ayub's chagrin."

Did India win the war?
At least three independent authors believed India had an upper hand in the war:

• Retired American diplomat Dennis Kux: "Although both sides lost heavily in men and material, and neither gained a decisive military advantage, India had the better of the war. Delhi achieved its basic goal of thwarting Pakistan's attempt to seize Kashmir by force. Pakistan gained nothing from a conflict which it had instigated."
• English historian John Keay: "The war lasted barely a month. Pakistan made gains in the Rajasthan desert but its main push against India's Jammu-Srinagar road link was repulsed and Indian tanks advanced to within a sight of Lahore. Both sides claimed victory but India had most to celebrate."
• American author Stanley Wolpert: "The war ended in what appeared to be a draw when the embargo placed by Washington on US ammunition and replacements for both armies forced cessation of conflict before either side won a clear victory. India, however, was in a position to inflict grave damage to, if not capture, Pakistan's capital of the Punjab when the ceasefire was called, and controlled Kashmir's strategic Uri-Poonch bulge, much to [Pakistani president] Ayub's chagrin."

I think my friend this is an air force forum.

Use cruise missiles to eliminate whole of western and northern command in first hours .. This can be followed up by formal strikes with stand off weapons .. Iaf must not be allowed to play a role in any future conflict

Unlike the past wars this time no enemy air asset should come out intact.

 

[Sine Nomine]

Did India win the war?
At least three independent authors believed India had an upper hand in the war:

• Retired American diplomat Dennis Kux: "Although both sides lost heavily in men and material, and neither gained a decisive military advantage, India had the better of the war. Delhi achieved its basic goal of thwarting Pakistan's attempt to seize Kashmir by force. Pakistan gained nothing from a conflict which it had instigated."
• English historian John Keay: "The war lasted barely a month. Pakistan made gains in the Rajasthan desert but its main push against India's Jammu-Srinagar road link was repulsed and Indian tanks advanced to within a sight of Lahore. Both sides claimed victory but India had most to celebrate."
• American author Stanley Wolpert: "The war ended in what appeared to be a draw when the embargo placed by Washington on US ammunition and replacements for both armies forced cessation of conflict before either side won a clear victory. India, however, was in a position to inflict grave damage to, if not capture, Pakistan's capital of the Punjab when the ceasefire was called, and controlled Kashmir's strategic Uri-Poonch bulge, much to [Pakistani president] Ayub's chagrin."

Talk about air wars sun shine.

 

[FOOLS_NIGHTMARE]

Airbases are pretty easy to rebuild. The US strike against Syria's T-4 airbase using 60+ cruise missiles did virtually zero damage; it was being used for military flights within a few hours! So, you should be able to repeat attacks to keep certain strategic airbases out of operation for a sustained period of time, rather than wasting such huge amounts of single-use BM/CMs to take out a large amount of airbases for only a few hours/days.

Such strikes can be useful to take out openly parked enemy jets though, but I don't know about India's use of bunkers etc.

This is what i actually meant all air assets not the runways.

 

[Windjammer]

Albeit, PAF did carry out daring raids on many Indian Airfields and other military targets. Amongst many others the devastation of Mukerian Rail yards being very prominent. However the term pre-emptive is a misnomer since dogfights and artillery duels had already taken place in Eastern Sector in the last weeks of November before war started in Western Theatre on 3rd December.

Four Mirages Attacked Mukerian Rail Yards.

 

[FOOLS_NIGHTMARE]

Albeit, PAF did carry out daring raids on many Indian Airfields and other military targets. Amongst many others the devastation of Mukerian Rail yards being very prominent. However the term pre-emptive is a misnomer since dogfights and artillery duels had already taken place in Eastern Sector in the last weeks of November before war started in Western Theatre on 3rd December.

Four Mirages Attacked Mukerian Rail Yards.

I just pray to Allah may we witness the same feat in our life times as our elders witnessed.

 

[MIRauf]

CM are much more expensive then the MLRS, use the CM for high value hardened targets, for soft targets use the MLRS.

One can use MLRS to deploy mines, main target taxiway and or Runways, rinse and repeat to keep denial of use in effect.

 

[Pakistani Fighter]

I just pray to Allah may we witness the same feat in our life times as our elders witnessed.

You want war? Lol current PM wont

 

[Arsalan 345]

I think we all understand the present situation.situation during 65 and 71 was changed but now situation supports india.first of all we have to go too deep which we can't because of indian air defense systems.quality and quantity is on indian side.we can't outnumber them.creating air dominance in a particular sector is different from creating air dominance in an all out war.
After s-400 induction,things will become more complicated.they have Sams everywhere so going deep inside India is not possible.yes we can attack targets using air launched weapons but remember,they also have similar systems.sams on large quantity on indian side makes things complicated for us.balakot is an example of lack of sams.we must create a network of Sams just like india.it will be a good battle if both have large number of sams.

Pakistan should invest money for weapons which can penetrate deep inside India otherwise targeting Jammu and indian Punjab will not bring results.they will regroup again just like before.we should think tactically.

I think targeting India with too much sams on their side is not easy.it is a difficult task but if you map the terrain,you can Target anything and we need sophisticated satellites for this purpose.we should better invest in long range cruise missiles and satellites.

 

[Kaniska]

Informative thread..Hope to see quality post with statergic input from analysts.