The 1965 Indo-Pak war

[Khajur]

"One point particularly noted by military observers is that in their frist advances the Indians did not use air power effectively to support their troops. by contrast, the Pakistanis, with sophisticated timing, swooped in on Ambala airfield and destroyed some 25 Indian planes just after they had landed and were sitting on the ground out of fuel and powerless to escape (NOTE: PAF has not claimed any IAF aircraft during it's attacks on Ambala due to non-availability of concrete evidence of damage in night bombing.)"

"By the end of the week, in fact, it was clear that the Pakistanis were more than holding their own."

Everett G. Martin,
General Editor, Newsweek
September 20, 1965.

wow,Newsweek reporting about an attack with specific no of IAF attritions about which even PAF itself wasnt willing to commit.

Three cheers cold war era professional jounalism.

 

[sensenreason]

well if you consider bombing "sand dunes", bushes, trees, etc as superiority over enemy then IAF did a really great job at that
99% of land assets during 65 war were located by indian border not afgan.

Given the superiority you mention of Pakistani forces to the Indian forces, I suggest Pakistan send home 500 k of its army as per the contention you need only 100k men to fight 1000k indians....Why waste money? Spend it on better things? Even better give it to India...Since your pilots and navy men are also the best..u could do the same with them too....

 

[Myth_buster_1]

wow,Newsweek reporting about an attack with specific no of IAF attritions about which even PAF itself wasnt willing to commit.

Three cheers cold war era professional jounalism.

like i said.... your comprehension level is really weak and that of a 6 year old kid.

did you read the bold part? AT NIGHT! yes... PAF did not claim any IAF AC due to NIGHT BOMBINGS! however the day time bombings were very successful!

 

[Myth_buster_1]

Given the superiority you mention of Pakistani forces to the Indian forces, I suggest Pakistan send home 500 k of its army as per the contention you need only 100k men to fight 1000k indians....Why waste money? Spend it on better things? Even better give it to India...Since your pilots and navy men are also the best..u could do the same with them too....

your good suggestion is on its way to pak GHQ.

 

[Khajur]

like i said.... your comprehension level is really weak and that of a 6 year old kid.

did you read the bold part? AT NIGHT! yes... PAF did not claim any IAF AC due to NIGHT BOMBINGS! however the day time bombings were very successful!

The qoute didnt give any hint any where that there were infact two raids ,one in the day and other in the night.

Anyway whatever sails ur boat.
I wont go for any further commenst...the thead is urs.

 

[Khajur]

Given the superiority you mention of Pakistani forces to the Indian forces, I suggest Pakistan send home 500 k of its army as per the contention you need only 100k men to fight 1000k indians....Why waste money? Spend it on better things? Even better give it to India...Since your pilots and navy men are also the best..u could do the same with them too....

He is constatly harping on the rhetoric that pakistan crushed multiple times bigger enemy with out zilch of knowledge about indian deployment .

India may had 800000 troops or many more hundred planes in IAF,but also had to keep major chunk of those troops and planes on the chinese front where it already faced an war just three yr before in 1962.

Its never the case that smaller pakistan was facing the full might of indian military machine.He wont accept this ground reality as it would hurt his fragile martial race sentiment.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

The qoute didnt give any hint any where that there were infact two raids ,one in the day and other in the night.

good... so finally you are thinking and realizing your bharat defeat in 65 war.
but like i said before.. your comprehension level is very weak.
read it again and again until you understand the subject.

"ATTACKS ON AMBALLA"

 

[toxic_pus]

huh? wha?
I am not sure what IAF was going to bomb in peshawar but buddy all PAF F-104s and B-57s were stationed in "Sargodha" now Masroor Air Base as seen in this photograph.

From an article by Gp Capt SULTAN M HALI

For the first week of operations when most missions against the northern Indian airfields originated from Peshawar...

From an article by Arshad Hussain

As major night operations program by the B-57s was conducted through Peshawar air base since 6th September...

As Peshawar and Risalpur air bases were also considered too vulnerable to IAF attacks during the nights. Therefore, Samungali and Mauripur air bases were also utilized for turn around.

So it seems, that B-57s were indeed stationed at Peshawar during the war and apparently, for some unknown reason, Peshawar was considered as 'too vulnerable to IAF attacks'. Wonder why?

and.... ???
Your air chief could no longer could no longer ensure the safety of Indian air space. what more humiliation could one get from such a small opponent.

Strange. PAF could maintain air superiority over Indian air space, but couldn't do so over its own air space.

btw our F-86s and B-57s conducted successful mission against IAF FOB and Main bases and inflicted heavy casualties on your side. remember the loss of entire Mig-21 fleet and

You still have to provide evidence of loss of 'entire Mig-21 fleet. Or did you forget that.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

From an article by Gp Capt SULTAN M HALI

From an article by Arshad Hussain


So it seems, that B-57s were indeed stationed at Peshawar during the war and apparently, for some unknown reason, Peshawar was considered as 'too vulnerable to IAF attacks'. Wonder why?

so what even if we did operate from peshawar? did IAF manage to create pakistan style attacks on indian air fields? did we lose like 10-15 planes in Peshawar? the answer is NO.

Strange. PAF could maintain air superiority over Indian air space, but couldn't do so over its own air space.

and you definition of "air superiority"?
did IAF inflicted more damage to PAF?
NOOO..

You still have to provide evidence of loss of 'entire Mig-21 fleet. Or did you forget that.

awww. so you are being deluded again?
now you show me a single picture of IAF Mig-21F-13 post 65 war. where did they all go?

 

[Myth_buster_1]

India may had 800000 troops or many more hundred planes in IAF,but also had to keep major chunk of those troops and planes on the chinese front where it already faced an war just three yr before in 1962.

do you have any credible proof to back up your claim or are you just being yourself?

 

[toxic_pus]

so what even if we did operate from peshawar? did IAF manage to create pakistan style attacks on indian air fields? did we lose like 10-15 planes in Peshawar? the answer is NO.

So we have learned a lot today, on our 'learn as we go along' program. Haven't we? That our B-57 did actually operate from Peshawar, that Peshawar was considered as 'too vulnerable to IAF attacks', that IAF did actually fly almost all through the breadth of Pakistan to reach Peshawar, that those stone age relic Canberras were able to fly back all the way from there without loosing a single one. Imagine what we will learn tomorrow. I shudder to think.

Now, the question you have posed is called shifting of goal post. Your claim was that PAF had kicked the 'butt' of IAF in air duel. Now that you have been shown that the so called buttkicking didn't actually leave too much of scar on IAF, you have now resorted to, who could register more kills in a single bomb run. I understand. To accept that those unescorted Canberras (no fighter in Indian inventory could fly that far and even Peshawar was at the fag end of Canberra's operational range) actually flew deep into Pak territory and get out of there, without any notable interception (there was only one attempt, as far as I can recollect), requires you to swallow too much of pride, particularly when it is becoming apparent that the one, who has actually been 'delusional' all this time, is none other than you.

I guess, I have made my case. I will leave it at that.

and you definition of "air superiority"?
did IAF inflicted more damage to PAF?
NOOO..

Another shift in goal post. 'Air superiority' is not always measured in terms of loss of air asset, but the ability to deny the enemy air assets to perform its functions and deter it from achieving its goals.

Clearly, even if we concede that PAF registered more kills than IAF, PAF had failed to restrict IAF in carrying out its ground support role.

awww. so you are being deluded again?
now you show me a single picture of IAF Mig-21F-13 post 65 war. where did they all go?

Is that the basis of your argument? That because you can't find a picture of IAF Mig-21F post 65 war, it conclusively proves that an entire Mig 21 fleet was destroyed.

Well, following your logic, I can't find the snap of Mr Neil Armstrongs underwear that he wore on his mission to moon. So should I conclude that he wore no underwear on that mission.

Absence of evidence, is not evidence of absence. Go figure.

 

[toxic_pus]

do you have any credible proof to back up your claim or are you just being yourself?

I am sure Khajur can reply from his sources. But from what I have got:

The balance of capabilities in 1965 was as follows. The Indian armed forces comprised 870,000 men in sixteen divisions as compared to Pakistan's 230,000 under eight divisions. Of the sixteen divisions, India had deployed two infantry divisions in Kashmir and eight along its border with Pakistan and the rest on the Chines border. Pakistan had a total of seven divisions confronting India in West Pakistan and one division in East Pakistan. India possessed two armored divisions, one each of Centurion and Sherman tanks; while Pakistan had one armored division with American built M-47/48 Patton tanks, and a few other regiments with M-4 Sherman tanks and M-24 Chaffee light tanks. In air capability, India held over 700 aircraft, mostly the French Mystere IVs, British Canberras and Hunters, and Indian-made Gnats. Pakistan had total of 280 aircraft that included 168 Sabres, and 12 F-104A Starfighters.

Asymmetric conflicts: war initiation by weaker powers by T.V.Paul, pg 107

Yes, India did have a numerical superiority, but not the degree that some would have us believe.

 

[Muradk]

So we have learned a lot today, on our 'learn as we go along' program. Haven't we? That our B-57 did actually operate from Peshawar, that Peshawar was considered as 'too vulnerable to IAF attacks', that IAF did actually fly almost all through the breadth of Pakistan to reach Peshawar, that those stone age relic Canberras were able to fly back all the way from there without loosing a single one. Imagine what we will learn tomorrow. I shudder to think.

Now, the question you have posed is called shifting of goal post. Your claim was that PAF had kicked the 'butt' of IAF in air duel. Now that you have been shown that the so called buttkicking didn't actually leave too much of scar on IAF, you have now resorted to, who could register more kills in a single bomb run. I understand. To accept that those unescorted Canberras (no fighter in Indian inventory could fly that far and even Peshawar was at the fag end of Canberra's operational range) actually flew deep into Pak territory and get out of there, without any notable interception (there was only one attempt, as far as I can recollect), requires you to swallow too much of pride, particularly when it is becoming apparent that the one, who has actually been 'delusional' all this time, is none other than you.

I guess, I have made my case. I will leave it at that.

Another shift in goal post. 'Air superiority' is not always measured in terms of loss of air asset, but the ability to deny the enemy air assets to perform its functions and deter it from achieving its goals.

Clearly, even if we concede that PAF registered more kills than IAF, PAF had failed to restrict IAF in carrying out its ground support role.


Is that the basis of your argument? That because you can't find a picture of IAF Mig-21F post 65 war, it conclusively proves that an entire Mig 21 fleet was destroyed.

Well, following your logic, I can't find the snap of Mr Neil Armstrongs underwear that he wore on his mission to moon. So should I conclude that he wore no underwear on that mission.

Absence of evidence, is not evidence of absence. Go figure.

B-57s operated form all Major bases including FOBs, It was like we has 20 bombers on monday and 2 on tuesday , We had a strategy which the IAF never could understand, India had there spies they reported every thing what landed where it landed so we said ok if you want to take a short at me I am taking off from Peshawar but landing in Sargodha or Karachi come and get me their and they used to take the bate.
I used to take of from Peshawar in a Saber attack land back at what every base was close to me. Several times I was the bate went in IAF air space they saw me got after me brought them to 3000ft and let the Saber at 20000ft take care of them.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

So we have learned a lot today, on our 'learn as we go along' program. Haven't we?

yep.. that PAF kicked IAF butt really hard.

That our B-57 did actually operate from Peshawar, that Peshawar was considered as 'too vulnerable to IAF attacks', that IAF did actually fly almost all through the breadth of Pakistan to reach Peshawar, that those stone age relic Canberras were able to fly back all the way from there without loosing a single one. Imagine what we will learn tomorrow. I shudder to think.

Wait i have learned today that you are a clueless boy. just to inform you... IAF flights over Peshawar were carried from "srinager", not all the way from punjab Provence. so another important lesson you have learned today.. and oh oh.. another lesson we are about to learn today is that IAF canberras were night time capable and were not venerable to "PAF Sabers" which mainly operated in day time as interceptors. unless you can prove me that IAF canberras at least destroyed 20 planes in Peshawar you need to STFU. you are jumping up and down as if entering your foe's air space in war time is some sort of victory.. lolz

I understand. To accept that those unescorted Canberras (no fighter in Indian inventory could fly that far and even Peshawar was at the fag end of Canberra's operational range) actually flew deep into Pak territory and get out of there, without any notable interception (there was only one attempt, as far as I can recollect), requires you to swallow too much of pride, particularly when it is becoming apparent that the one, who has actually been 'delusional' all this time, is none other than you.

wha??? calm down..
those canberras flew at night from srinager away from punjab which had most of the PAF planes stationed... and what did those canberras did to PAF? how many planes did they destroy other then few bombs drooped on highways.

Is that the basis of your argument? That because you can't find a picture of IAF Mig-21F post 65 war, it conclusively proves that an entire Mig 21 fleet was destroyed.

you are really clueless....
did those mig-21 operate in 71 war? just where they phuck did they go? what happened to them... or did they end up in IAF top secret facility and can not be disclosed?

Well, following your logic, I can't find the snap of Mr Neil Armstrongs underwear that he wore on his mission to moon. So should I conclude that he wore no underwear on that mission.

Absence of evidence, is not evidence of absence. Go figure.

no comments..

 

[toxic_pus]

B-57s operated form all Major bases including FOBs, It was like we has 20 bombers on monday and 2 on tuesday , We had a strategy which the IAF never could understand, India had there spies they reported every thing what landed where it landed so we said ok if you want to take a short at me I am taking off from Peshawar but landing in Sargodha or Karachi come and get me their and they used to take the bate.
I used to take of from Peshawar in a Saber attack land back at what every base was close to me. Several times I was the bate went in IAF air space they saw me got after me brought them to 3000ft and let the Saber at 20000ft take care of them.

I will take your word at face value. However, from Gp Capt Sultan M. Hali's article, which I had linked earlier, it seems, that he is suggesting, that the reason was primarily logistical and also due to threat perception

For the first week of operations when most missions against the northern Indian airfields originated from Peshawar, the centralized spares and servicing organization for the B-57s at Mauripur necessitated the bomber crew returning to their Karachi base at the conclusion of each night's mission. The northern bases were also considered too vulnerable to IAF attacks during the day.

Of course, it does make sense that one would not want to put all his eggs in one basket.