Shaheen Scramble

[Talon]

Scramble with practice bombs attached..nice.

This is probably a 4 ship 3 In line up with 5-10 seconds delayed departure for each aircraft.

 

[Talon]

Thank you for confirming @Knuckles. Please help me to understand how 4 ship abreast is more riskier than the one I shared above (where your father is the slot man). Apparently, having a 4th plane rolling behind the first plane is more riskier.

No. 4 rolls on outer side of No. 3 and takes slot position after take off.

 

[airomerix]

Scramble with practice bombs attached..nice.

This is probably a 4 ship 3 In line up with 5-10 seconds delayed departure for each aircraft.

I second this.

Elephant walks do take place. It doesnt mean they take off simultaneously.

 

[AMRAAM]

No. 4 rolls on outer side of No. 3 and takes slot position after take off.

Please see from 3:17 to 3:22. Is this take-off less riskier than the 4 ship abreast (or the same).

 

[Talon]

Please see from 3:17 to 3:22. Is this take-off less riskier than the 4 ship abreast (or the same).

Paf fighters do not take off in such manner, even 2 ship tandem take offs are very rare.Only K8s and T37s do multi ship take offs.

The scene you are referring to is a 4 ship diamond flyby over a canal recorded from a helicopter.It has nothing to do with a take off.

 

[AMRAAM]

Thank you @Hodor for clarifying it. I misunderstood that canal as a tiny runway at some hilly/snowy area and assumed it as a take off. lol.

Now all other comments in this thread make sense to me.

Thanks again.

Paf fighters do not take off in such manner, even 2 ship tandem take offs are very rare.Only K8s and T37s do multi ship take offs.

The scene you are referring to is a 4 ship diamond flyby over a canal recorded from a helicopter.It has nothing to do with a take off.

 

[Windjammer]

@Windjammer

Looks like PAF was doing it with F-16s a long ago.

The images are taken from video footage of classic PAF song "Hawai fauj k auqab".

View attachment 656607 View attachment 656608

Dear, this is just formation flying like you witness on 23 March.
On topic, i know what i have seen, it may not be their regular exercise but has certainly been experimented but as the saying goes....You can't describe sunrise to a blind person....so let's just leave it at that.

 

[Raider 21]

Thank you for confirming @Knuckles. Please help me to understand how 4 ship abreast is more riskier than the one I shared above (where your father is the slot man). Apparently, having a 4th plane rolling behind the first plane is more riskier.

4 ship abreast formation takeoff? No runway has enough room for that. Unless they do it the Thunderbirds style with 3 in V and No. 4 trailing on the right

 

[litman]

No, it's not. F-16s are flown to their limits. Pilots in them are also pushed to their limits. This is the best way to get the maximum out of the bird. It is really annoying when people make claims they cannot back up.

One of our best pilots just died doing very risky moves over the federal capital, last year many F-16s were thrown at India's top fighters over Kashmir.

F-16s are flown abroad to take part in very intense DACM with foreign air forces.

This is not "risk averse" behaviour.

taking an air craft to ite limits during a training sortie or a mission is required for preparation of war. its risky but that risk is required PAF doesnt like to take unnecessary risks with the F-16s . watch this interview of kaser tufail and you will get about the attitude of the PAF regarding the F-16s

watch from 33: 20 onwards.
as far as taking the F-16 in aerobatics you are right PAF has been taking too much risk to the extent of foolishness i would say and they must have learnt their lessons now when they have lost one of the most capable jets in their fleet in an air show. months later i found out that the F-16 ADF which we bought from jordan are not BVR capable and the very first question that came to my mind was that why they didnt use this less capable air craft for air show purposes? why a fully BVR capable air craft which has the real ability to challenge any indian fighter was used in an air show and subsequently lost? it was a blunder and i am sure they will learn from their mistakes.

 

[syed_yusuf]

taking an air craft to ite limits during a training sortie or a mission is required for preparation of war. its risky but that risk is required PAF doesnt like to take unnecessary risks with the F-16s . watch this interview of kaser tufail and you will get about the attitude of the PAF regarding the F-16s

watch from 33: 20 onwards.
as far as taking the F-16 in aerobatics you are right PAF has been taking too much risk to the extent of foolishness i would say and they must have learnt their lessons now when they have lost one of the most capable jets in their fleet in an air show. months later i found out that the F-16 ADF which we bought from jordan are not BVR capable and the very first question that came to my mind was that why they didnt use this less capable air craft for air show purposes? why a fully BVR capable air craft which has the real ability to challenge any indian fighter was used in an air show and subsequently lost? it was a blunder and i am sure they will learn from their mistakes.

I am not too sure if adf is not bvr capable just adf means air defence fighter

 

[Raider 21]

taking an air craft to ite limits during a training sortie or a mission is required for preparation of war. its risky but that risk is required PAF doesnt like to take unnecessary risks with the F-16s . watch this interview of kaser tufail and you will get about the attitude of the PAF regarding the F-16s

watch from 33: 20 onwards.
as far as taking the F-16 in aerobatics you are right PAF has been taking too much risk to the extent of foolishness i would say and they must have learnt their lessons now when they have lost one of the most capable jets in their fleet in an air show. months later i found out that the F-16 ADF which we bought from jordan are not BVR capable and the very first question that came to my mind was that why they didnt use this less capable air craft for air show purposes? why a fully BVR capable air craft which has the real ability to challenge any indian fighter was used in an air show and subsequently lost? it was a blunder and i am sure they will learn from their mistakes.

They lost a jet during rehearsal that is normally executed safely most of the time by the assigned demo pilot. The pilot who was killed during that rehearsal made a mistake in his maneuver, many on the inside are saying that and it looked very obvious. He did have time to eject but his training and decisions came into question for a couple of seconds that led him to not only crashing but unfortunately killing him in the process. He proved once again that he's human, and that should be a testament to the PAF fanboys not to over-worship as the best in the profession have been killed.

It doesn't matter BVR or not BVR, a Viper is a Viper, it will fly like one if flown well and it can kill you if flown past its limits.

 

[airomerix]

taking an air craft to ite limits during a training sortie or a mission is required for preparation of war. its risky but that risk is required PAF doesnt like to take unnecessary risks with the F-16s . watch this interview of kaser tufail and you will get about the attitude of the PAF regarding the F-16s

watch from 33: 20 onwards.
as far as taking the F-16 in aerobatics you are right PAF has been taking too much risk to the extent of foolishness i would say and they must have learnt their lessons now when they have lost one of the most capable jets in their fleet in an air show. months later i found out that the F-16 ADF which we bought from jordan are not BVR capable and the very first question that came to my mind was that why they didnt use this less capable air craft for air show purposes? why a fully BVR capable air craft which has the real ability to challenge any indian fighter was used in an air show and subsequently lost? it was a blunder and i am sure they will learn from their mistakes.

Thanks for sharing this.

He spoke my mind about what I wrote earlier.

The guy you just quoted finds it fashionable to challenge every tom dick and harry on this forum. Probably portrays himself as someone who knows stuff when clearly he doesnt understand the subject and its complexity.

 

[litman]

I am not too sure if adf is not bvr capable just adf means air defence fighter

i also believed that but then somebody corrected me on this forum and then i got it checked through some sources and these jets are not BVR capable.

 

[Yasser76]

Thanks for sharing this.

He spoke my mind about what I wrote earlier.

The guy you just quoted finds it fashionable to challenge every tom dick and harry on this forum. Probably portrays himself as someone who knows stuff when clearly he doesnt understand the subject and its complexity.

Unsure why you seem to engage in personal attacks.

Firstly, yes, PAF pushes every plane to the limits, you do not get high quality Viper pilots by wrapping the planes in cotton wool. Do we take immense care of F-16s? Yes, of course. In the Tufail video it simply states the truth, that the F-16 is more closely supervised, which is natural with a high value asset. This is not the same as being "risk averse". If you are "risk averse" basically you do not employ a plane to it's full combat potential. You become like Saudi or Iraqi Air Force, not a cutting edge air force like PAF.

On a seperate note, now is third time I am asking you for evidence to back up your original statement

"PAF is very risk averse when it comes to F-16s."

You seem to have taken it personally that someone has pulled you up on a sweeping statement and rather then attack me, it may do you more good to debate properly and in a civilised manner.

You remind me of one of those "uncles" in a gathering of Pakistani males who seems to wallow in all the attention as he makes grand statements on current affairs with all the other males listening in intently but then gets angry when someone questions even a small part of his narrative.

 

[airomerix]

Unsure why you seem to engage in personal attacks.

Firstly, yes, PAF pushes every plane to the limits, you do not get high quality Viper pilots by wrapping the planes in cotton wool. Do we take immense care of F-16s? Yes, of course. In the Tufail video it simply states the truth, that the F-16 is more closely supervised, which is natural with a high value asset. This is not the same as being "risk averse". If you are "risk averse" basically you do not employ a plane to it's full combat potential. You become like Saudi or Iraqi Air Force, not a cutting edge air force like PAF.

On a seperate note, now is third time I am asking you for evidence to back up your original statement

"PAF is very risk averse when it comes to F-16s."

You seem to have taken it personally that someone has pulled you up on a sweeping statement and rather then attack me, it may do you more good to debate properly and in a civilised manner.

You remind me of one of those "uncles" in a gathering of Pakistani males who seems to wallow in all the attention as he makes grand statements on current affairs with all the other males listening in intently but then gets angry when someone questions even a small part of his narrative.

I would disregard your last paragraph since I'm least interested in your experiences with uncles.

As for my sweeping statement. Kaiser Tufail said it. It is more than enough.

You can fix your own interpretation here and there to save yourself but it doesnt change the fact, that F-16s close supervision does translate into risk mitigation. And no where did I say that F-16s are not employed to their full potential. Combat deployment and four ship take off's for showboarding are different things. The latter enhances the risks with no return. For example, frequent barrel rolls or canopy rolls by younger pilots are frowned upon on F-16s. As they contribute negatively towards airframe life. I will not be expanding on this further.

Now lets not drag this any longer. I made my point and Kaiser Tufail's statement is more than an 'evidence' for you. Learn to accept and move on.