RAFALE VS F-16 BLOCK52+

[nForce]

So in hind sight you are saying that the pride of IAF's fleet, the SU-30 is a product of the numerical mind sets. ?? !!
In any case whatever lies under the airframe, it's only as vital as the driver in the seat, the fact has been repeatedly proven.
And if there was compromise on quality, the PAF wouldn't have retired the still potent A-5s so early which incidentally were the only twin engine fighter jets in it's inventory.

I am referring to the era of Mig-17 and Mig-19s which were more like a flying jet engine coupled with guns and a pilot sitting on top of it.Also I am referring to the Soviet idea of having a large airforce which may not be technically vastly superior but will do the job flocking in large numbers.
The scenario has changed,and the Soviet Russian ideas too.Later they manufactured planes like Su-27 and Mig-29.

The A-5 is a really old plane of vintage era ,1950s/60s just like the Mirage 3/5.It is based on Mig-19 loosely.The PAF would have replaced them long time back only if it had a bigger and steady budget.

 

[Windjammer]

Its just a old habbit of bringing in "our fighters are better then theirs" and that is what he is pointing out....All he is saying is that fighter carrying the tricolour are also clocking 250 hours/annum...IN short they are not dummies you are going to fight with...so always making bug comments like our no matter what machine our fighters are sitting in they can just take down indians is not the right thing to beleive in...To me it is making lot of sense but as an adversary i would love if the same school of thought is prevailing in PAF....

Albeit the debate was on a set of wings the PAF has and the IAF yet doesn't. But if one is inclined to digress towards the overall scenario, then it must be noted that PAF being the smaller, has to train even harder to meet the challenges.

 

[deckingraj]

Albeit the debate was on a set of wings the PAF has and the IAF yet doesn't. But if one is inclined to digress towards the overall scenario, then it must be noted that PAF being the smaller, has to train even harder to meet the challenges.

No i am not interested in digressing to overall scenario....that is why there is no need to bring in our fighters are better than theirs...250 Hr/Annum is not a bad number by any stretch of imagination and is good to master the plane you are in...I am sure PAF would also be clocking something similar....but that's about it.....In short when you are comparing machines keep the pilot training out of it...because even a rookie pilot can take down an experienced one on a bad day of later...

 

[Bossman]

First of all i like the response...because there is sense of logic in it...However i am on purpose keeping my response on a lighter side because don't want to derail the discussion on Rafael vs Block 52 any further...



I am sorry but it is not on paper...we already haev 125+ MKI operations and they are on for an MLU(in shor a already a decade plus experience on them) apart from other plethora of things going on...That in itself is a serious threat.....Secondly with all due respect it takes a minimum of 4-5 years to master a plane and b/w if i am not wrong French avionics for JF-17 is still on hold and search is ongoing process, right??? In other words an ongoing process......b/w ballistic as well as cruise missiles are on both sides...In short my point that PAF has to work very very had to maintain her doctrine is no fanboy statement...

MKI is great plane on paper. It is very high mantainence requirements, very expensive to operate, there are hardly any domestiv overhaul facilities, engine are still being send to Russia overhaul. The sortie rate is very low. Don't make a big deal out of french avionics as the Chinese have come up with better solutions. The French avionics was just negotiating ploy with the Chinese. There are rumours of even a AESA on next gen JF17s. As far as working hard is concern, when did Pakistan did not have to work hard against India. For God sake you guys are 7 to 10 times bigger than us.

 

[notorious_eagle]

Don't get me wrong...in fact that's why i said one need's to look at his/her pocket...Had PAF the money i am pretty sure you will not go for short-cuts....but if you take comments of some members on the money part then it surely confuses the hell out of you...No organization purposefully do anything that is going to be detrimental for them....They make plans taking into account what the adversary is upto and do the needful...I am sure PAF has thought about all this...However if you have to face a bigger-richer adversary like India complemented(in a negative way) with lack of funds there is no rocket science to conclude that your hands get tied...I am sure PAF is doing the best she can do...Question is if that is enough....

I still fail to understand how the IAF is going to win hands down, i am yet to see a rational argument from an Indian poster regarding this topic. One very important factor you are forgetting, PAF will be on the defence and IAF will be on the offence, so the advantage is with the defence side. Its much more cheaper to acquire capabilities to deny air supremacy compare to acquiring capabilities to gain air supremacy. The only reason why the USAF can easily gain air supremacy anywhere in the world is because of the resources they can employ, and frankly speaking the IAF only has a fraction of those resources. I am open to ideas on how the IAF will gain air supremacy against PAF in a war that has a time duration of 72-96 hours, you are more than welcome to throw in your ideas.

 

[Skull and Bones]

Some ignorants will never acknowledge that AL-31Ps are being manufactured in India.

 

[VSS]

I still fail to understand how the IAF is going to win hands down, i am yet to see a rational argument from an Indian poster regarding this topic. One very important factor you are forgetting, PAF will be on the defence and IAF will be on the offence, so the advantage is with the defence side. Its much more cheaper to acquire capabilities to deny air supremacy compare to acquiring capabilities to gain air supremacy. The only reason why the USAF can easily gain air supremacy anywhere in the world is because of the resources they can employ, and frankly speaking the IAF only has a fraction of those resources. I am open to ideas on how the IAF will gain air supremacy against PAF in a war that has a time duration of 72-96 hours, you are more than welcome to throw in your ideas.

Do you want to say that PAF will never attack or retaliate again IAF bases?

 

[marcos98]

I still fail to understand how the IAF is going to win hands down, i am yet to see a rational argument from an Indian poster regarding this topic. One very important factor you are forgetting, PAF will be on the defence and IAF will be on the offence, so the advantage is with the defence side. Its much more cheaper to acquire capabilities to deny air supremacy compare to acquiring capabilities to gain air supremacy. The only reason why the USAF can easily gain air supremacy anywhere in the world is because of the resources they can employ, and frankly speaking the IAF only has a fraction of those resources. I am open to ideas on how the IAF will gain air supremacy against PAF in a war that has a time duration of 72-96 hours, you are more than welcome to throw in your ideas.

I am believer that in a full scale war , attrition and sustenance will determine the victor.
The economic might behind the forces will be a decisive factor in any scenario.
The quantitative edge that IAF had over PAF , through massive economic influx will see substantial Qualitative edge been acquired.
The combination of Su-30, rafale/typhoons and force multipliers will be a huge task for the PAF to overcome.

 

[Dazzler]

Standoff weapons will be used for this purpose along with other tools of engagement. Multiple factors are involved and only PAF and IAF know what strategy they will develop at any given situation. It is silly for us forumers to predict anything around this.

 

[notorious_eagle]

Do you want to say that PAF will never attack or retaliate again IAF bases?

PAF does not has to cross the border to attack IAF bases, this is not 65 or 71. There is a reason why PAF has invested heavily in stand off weapons, long range glide bombs and cruise missiles can easily do the job. One has to know their strengths and weaknesses, and PAF is well aware of the fact that air supremacy over the Indian skies is simply not possible.

I am believer that in a full scale war , attrition and sustenance will determine the victor.
The economic might behind the forces will be a decisive factor in any scenario.

Nodoubt, in a long static war India will prevail due to her superior resources. But all signs point to the fact that India does not wants to fight a long static war, it wants to fight a short war so what you are advocating is contrary to what the Indian Military Doctrine is. A long static war will ensure that nukes will be exchanged which is a BIG NO NO for the Indian side.

The quantitative edge that IAF had over PAF , through massive economic influx will see substantial Qualitative edge been acquired.
The combination of Su-30, rafale/typhoons and force multipliers will be a huge task for the PAF to overcome.

And what is so revolutionary about these aircrafts that makes it impossible for PAF to overcome them, you would have a point if the PAF was sitting static but it clearly is not. None of these aircrafts offer the capability that the Raptor does, thus PAF will light these aircrafts up long before they enter Pak Air Space, anything that can be seen is fair game. Both sides have roughly the same BVRAAM's and WVRAAM's, PAF has a slight advantage as it fields the AMRAAM which i believe is the best BVR Missile available in the market and if the PAF acquires the AIM9X which it certainly will, than PAF also fields the best WVR Missile. PAF is investing in the right technology, they are getting exactly the technology they need to deny India Air Supremacy, and anything less of Air Supremacy for the IAF is equivalent to a defeat.

 

[Dazzler]

I am believer that in a full scale war , attrition and sustenance will determine the victor.
The economic might behind the forces will be a decisive factor in any scenario.
The quantitative edge that IAF had over PAF , through massive economic influx will see substantial Qualitative edge been acquired.
The combination of Su-30, rafale/typhoons and force multipliers will be a huge task for the PAF to overcome.

PAF also has force multipliers buddy why you guys always forget that? Saab 2000, IL-78 RT, and last but not least, ZDK-03 AWACS so in terms of AWACS coverage with multiple types, PAF has the upper hand do not they?

 

[Luftwaffe]

Then we have to develop the targeting and fire control features either ourselves or with assistance -- and please spare us the "no one will help us" bit, it's a world of commercial concerns.

We all have been waiting on somebody will come to help us, until now no one but a blessing in disguise Turkey has a project otherwise there is no one out there.

pockets---empty and then inhouse development with empty pockets the inhouse work is also a costly business starting from scratch. This Inhouse development should have also started 2 decades ago.

People spare us I would take the word of Dassault Aviation above all (arm chair air force generals) who are trying to diss Rafale into being junk high cost.
Low operating costs

Get out in the real world, the real world is Rafale has been prove out to be the best in short you can list your cons against Rafale; Dassault Aviation has proven you all wrong, you people sitting over here on the Internet proving Dassault wrong go out there live in the reality and real world.

Remember you hypocrites in 90's you were the same people praising Mirage 2000s but when you lost out everything and went after F-7s TWICE Mirage suddenly became junk and not up to PAF's requirements.
Do you people remember desperate for a new high-tech combat aircrafts from 90's Pakistan had allocated Money for 40 Mirages and you went and settled for the F-7s so where did rest of the money go and then you people lie Pakistan has no money in the pockets. You think you know it all and people at EDAS and Dassault are fools. So wise guys you people are telling us that It is OK to get sanction prone equipment.
What PAF has done to French they are getting the pay back by the french that is why they won't give you bits and pieces for your Thunder they want better deal out of you they will not be fooled by what you did in 90's several times. Don't blame French hypocrisy runs so much with some people over here in a minute they downplay french equipment and in a moment they want French weapons for Thunders.

 

[deckingraj]

MKI is great plane on paper. It is very high mantainence requirements, very expensive to operate, there are hardly any domestiv overhaul facilities, engine are still being send to Russia overhaul. The sortie rate is very low. Don't make a big deal out of french avionics as the Chinese have come up with better solutions. The French avionics was just negotiating ploy with the Chinese. There are rumours of even a AESA on next gen JF17s. As far as working hard is concern, when did Pakistan did not have to work hard against India. For God sake you guys are 7 to 10 times bigger than us.

See that's why i said i will keep my response as trim as possible...We both have derailed the thread...Anyways i will not participate further....so with all due respect this would be my last response...


If you consider MKI's good on paper then that's all we are discussing here...There is no way we can find out unless we meet in the war about the actual think which i am sure both of us don't want...On various exercises with different Airforces MKI has got some great feedback...As far as french avionics a ploy for chinese than i am afriad i will not buy that argument...but again you may be right...

No doubt Pakistan had to work hard against the Indians but the situation is far more tough than what it was in the past...

- PAF has lost a decade due to sanctions...This was the time when India introduced BVR and MKI's in the region
- India geo-political weightage has increased manifolds...Our newly found economic might was never a factor in India-Pak equation
- Relations with Israel has brought in immence benefits
- Above all relations with US has improved greatly
- Last but not the least you are engaged in WOT and your economy which historically was at times growing at much better rate than India is now in shambles...

To conclude the situation has never been as bad as it was....If you are a reasonable person you will easily understand where i am coming from....

 

[deckingraj]

PAF is investing in the right technology, they are getting exactly the technology they need to deny India Air Supremacy, and anything less of Air Supremacy for the IAF is equivalent to a defeat.

Ignoring the rest of the comments because it is more of argumentative of whose best....Your assertion is totally wrong....If IAF is not able to get Air-Supremacy then it does not mean we got defeated....Even if we are able to support our troops in pockets and deny you any of that to your's we still end up as winner....

One more comment - PAF do need to cross border in case of a war for the same reason IAF will have to cross....Ballistic as well as cruise missiles are on both sides...if you are believing they don't need to then you are plane wrong...Anyhow let's get back to topic...

 

[MastanKhan]

I remember something similar being said the F-4 against the older migs..
and here there arent older migs.. but fairly well equipped jets.
Still.. skepticism is ... a personal choice.

Santro,

How are you? Well the difference in technology has added a multiplier effect never seen in the history of warfare ever before----so anyone who talks about the good old machines and compare them to the working of the current day techno wonders and analyse them on similiar footprints is making a big big error in assessment

The reader must remember---the better pilot analogy holds good for the first 12 hours of the conflict at the most----untill and unless the enemy is extremely stupid---it will change the rules of engagement to its benefit AND POSITION OF STRENGTH----which may be either through massive air strikes in larger number just to overwhelm the adversary----or through its longer arm of its shoot and scoot mindset of bvr contact----.

The fighter with less potent missiles and electronic package will lose----it is a comparison with taking a shot at 2000 yards with a .50 calibre barret---or 1000 yd shot with a .308----. This is pure and simple arithmatic.

Until and unless, your aircraft's weapon does not have the same reach as that of the enemy's aircraft---the engagement will be based on distances suitable to the opponent with longer range. Once the enemy starts dictating the rules of engagement and you are the one chasing to get engaged---that is not a good position to be in.