The Atlantique Incident.

[niaz]

Since the thread 'SHUHADA of PAKISTAN NAVAL AVIATION' has been closed. I have opened this thread.

Here is the story according to: https://military.wikia.org/wiki/Atlantique_incident).
It is not my opinion, I am simply quoting it for the members to read about how the end game was played out. Since I had difficulty in pasting the contents suggest referring to the link if the text appears incoherent.

Quote

The Atlantique Incident was an event in which a Pakistan Navy's Naval Air Arm Breguet Atlantique patrol plane, carrying 16 people on board, was shot down by the Indian Air Force for alleged violation of airspace. The episode took place in Rann of
Kutch on 10 August 1999, just a month after the Kargil War, creating a tense atmosphere between India and Pakistan.

Foreign diplomats based in Pakistan and escorted to the site by the Pakistani Army noted that the plane may have crossed the border. However, the Islamabad based diplomats said that they also believe that India's reaction was unjustified. Pakistan later lodged a compensation claim at the International Court of Justice, accusing India for the incident, but the court dismissed the case, ruling that the court had no jurisdiction in this matter.

Confrontation
The French-built naval plane Breguet Atlantique (Breguet Br.1150 Atlantique) plane, flight Atlantic-91, c/n 33, of 29 Squadron was one of Pakistan Navy's frontline aircraft, used primarily for patrol and reconnaissance. Atlantic-91 left Mehran (Sindh province) Naval base at 9:15 am. Indian Air Force ground radar picked up the flight path of the plane approaching the International Border.Two IAF MiG-21 interceptor aircraft of No.45 Squadron, from the Indian airbase at Naliya in the Kutch region, were soon scrambled by the Indian Air Force. After a series of manoeuvres—and a conflicting version of events from both sides—the two jets were given clearance to shoot down the Pakistani plane. At 11:17 am IST (10:47 am PST), nearly two hours after takeoff from Pakistan, the Atlantique was intercepted and an infrared homing R-60 air-to-air missile was fired at it by Squadron Leader P.K. Bundela, hitting the engine on the port side of the plane. This resulted in the aircraft losing control and spiraling towards a crash at approximately 1100 hours PST and approximate location 23°54′N 68°16′E / 23.9°N 68.267°E, killing all 16 on board the Atlantic-91, including five officers of the Pakistan Navy.

Claims and counterclaims

The region in Kutch, (marked in red) where the incident took place

The event immediately sparked claims and counter-claims by both nations. Pakistan claimed that the plane was unarmed and the and there was no violation of Indian airspace. the debris was found on Pakistan's side of the border. According to the official Pakistan version of events, the plane was on routine training mission inside Pakistan air space. The Pakistani prime minister stated during the funeral service of the airmen that the shooting was a barbaric act.


Enlarged map of the region showing Sir Creek and Kori Creek area where the plane was shot down and wreckage was found

The Indian Air force, however, claimed that the aeroplane did not respond to international protocol and that the plane acted in a "hostile" manner, adding that the debris of a downed aircraft could fall over a wide radius. Indian sources also state that
Pakistani Information Minister, Mushahid Hussein, was initially quoted saying that the aircraft was on a surveillance mission. India also accused that the plane violated 1991 agreement where no military aircraft is supposed to come anywhere near 10 km from the border (although Pakistan claimed the Atlantique wasn't a combat aircraft). Indian experts also questioned why a training mission was being done so close to the international border since all air forces clearly demarcate training areas for flight, which are located well away from the borders.

According to them, the Pakistani claim was untenable since the primary role of the Atlantique is for operations over the sea and that to carry out a training flight over land deep inside foreign territory was an indication of its use in a surveillance role. India displayed part of the wreckage of the Pakistani naval aircraft at New Delhi airport the next day. Pakistan however, stated that the wreckage was removed from its side of the border by Indian helicopters.

While Pakistan said that the plane was unarmed and the debris was within Pakistani territory, India maintained that warnings had been given to the Atlantique and that its flight trajectory meant it could have fallen on either side of the border. According to the Indian version of events, the MiGs tried to escort it to a nearby Indian base, when the Pakistani aircraft turned abruptly and tried to make a dash for the border; it was only then that it was fired upon. India claimed that the debris was found in a radius of 2 km on either side of the border and that the intrusion took place 10 km inside the Kori Creek, which is Indian territory. Pakistan requested that the matter be taken up in the UN. Indian officials blamed that there had been previous violations in the area and pointed out that in the previous year a Pakistani unmanned surveillance aircraft had intruded 150 km inside the Indian border, coming close to the Bhuj air base before the IAF spotted it and brought it down with several missiles.

Indian analysts state "flare-ups" in the Rann of Kutch region were routine, and despite bilateral agreements, both Indian and Pakistan had conducted air intrusions in the past. Thus, the fact that the Atlantique was shot down, despite coming close to the Indian border, came as a surprise.

Indian officials add that Pakistan military aircraft had violated Indian airspace at least 50 times since January 1999, showing videotapes of Pakistani Atlantique buzzing or flying provocatively near the Indian Navy's warships in the Indian Ocean. Some Indian analysts stated that the Atlantique was nearly destroyed in 1983 on a similar encounter and noted other close encounters and violations from Pakistani naval planes

Some experts stated that the Atlantique was probably conducting a "probe" on India's air defence system, mainly the radar equipment in the border area; however, they advised that it was not part of any planned aggressive military action by Pakistan. Foreign diplomats who visited the crash site noted that the plane "may have strayed into restricted space", and that Islamabad was unable to explain why it was flying so close to the border; they however added that India's reaction to the incident was not justified. Many countries, the permanent members of the UN Security Council, as well as the western media questioned the wisdom behind Pakistan's decision to fly military aircraft so close to the Indian border.


Rise in tensions

On the day following the attack, an IAF helicopter carrying journalists to the site of the attack was attacked by the Pakistan Army with a surface-to-air missile. Pakistani officials asserted that two Indian jets had intruded into Pakistani airspace near the Atlantique wreckage site, along the border between the Indian state of Gujarat and Pakistan's Sindh Province, and were then fired upon by Pakistan. International and Indian television journalists travelling in the chopper said the aircraft shook severely and a flash appeared in the air, suggesting a missile had been fired at it. The IAF thus aborted their mission to display Atlantique wreckage on Indian soil.

Following this, and the rising tensions in the area coupled by the fact that the Sir Creek was a disputed territory, both the countries' militaries near the Rann of Kutch and nearby were put on high alert. Pakistan sent a company of soldiers, equipped with both infrared homing shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles, to the site near the border. Coming barely weeks after the Kargil Conflict where both nuclear armed countries fought


LawsuitEdit

The International Court of Justice dismissed Pakistan's case on the grounds that the court did not have jurisdiction.

On 21 September 1999, Pakistan lodged a compensation claim at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague, accusing India of shooting down an unarmed aircraft. Pakistan sought about US$60 million in reparations from India and compensation for the victims' families. India's attorney general, citing an exemption it filed in 1974 to exclude disputes between India and other Commonwealth States, and disputes covered by multi-lateral treaties. In the buildup to the case, India also contended that Pakistan had violated the 1991 bilateral agreement between Pakistan and India on air violations, which states: "Combat aircraft (including, Bombers, Reconnaissance aircraft, Jet military trainers and Armed helicopters) will not fly within 10 km of each other’s airspace including Air Defense Identification Zone."

On 21 June 2000, the 16-judge Bench headed by Gilbert Guillaume of France ruled—with a 14–2 verdict—upholding India's submission that the court had no jurisdiction in this matter. Pakistan's claims were dropped, without recourse to appeal, and the outcome was seen as a decision highly favourable.


Aftermath

The next day, Pakistan fired missiles on one of the three helicopters carrying journalists into the region. Pakistan said that it fired on Indian fighter jets that were escorting the helicopters and had come inside Pakistani territory.

In India, the incident made the two MiG-21s into instant heroes. On 8 October 2000, the prestigious Squadron Leader P.K. Bundela. The medal was also awarded to Wing Commander V.S. Sharma

The downing of the Pakistani aircraft came at a particularly bad juncture for the Pakistani prime minister, Nawaz Sharif, who was already under attack from politicians for ordering a withdrawal of its troops from Kargil. Two months later he was deposed in a bloodless coup d'état by Gen. Pervez Musharraf.

Unquote.

 

[Windjammer]

This article was written while IAF Squadron Leader Bundela was recovering in hospital after suffering injury during an ejection that went wrong....he subsequently died some six months later.

Three years ago, squadron

leader P K Bundela shot down a Pakistani Atlantique surveillance plane when it crossed into the Indian air space in Gujarat. But today, he is fighting for his own life after ejecting from a MiG-21.​

Despite two major surgeries, the 32-year-old fighter pilot is paralysed neck down. Doctors at the Military Command hospital in Pune say that the only reason Bundela is still alive is because he simply refuses to give up.

"There is always hope. Even now he is in a state of spinal shock. We can give a period of up to two to three years in which he can improve. But these things take time," said Colonel A K Dubey, the doctor treating Squadron leader Bundela.

Bundela became a national hero when on August 10, 1999 he became the only IAF pilot to have shot down a Pakistani aircraft since the 1971 war.

His last flight as a fighter pilot was on April 4 this year -- ironically on the same variant of the MiG he flew in 1999. But this time the engine of the MiG-21 stalled while he was flying at a

supersonic speed.

The ejection process too was not clean and he struck a part of the cockpit as he exited the aircraft, which resulted in serious spinal cord injuries.

Bundela's crash and a subsequent MiG-21 crash in Jallandhar in May in which seven people were killed on the ground prompted the Air Force to temporarily halt training operations.

All these MiGs have since been cleared for full service. Squadron leader P K Bundela may have lived, but more than 40 trained and qualified fighter pilots have been killed in the last decade while flying MiG-21s.

However, the top brass of the Air Force refuses to accept the aircraft is outdated, poorly manufactured and prone to disaster.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

This article was written while IAF Squadron Leader Bundela was recovering in hospital after suffering injury during an ejection that went wrong....he subsequently died some six months later.

Three years ago, squadron

leader P K Bundela shot down a Pakistani Atlantique surveillance plane when it crossed into the Indian air space in Gujarat. But today, he is fighting for his own life after ejecting from a MiG-21.​

Despite two major surgeries, the 32-year-old fighter pilot is paralysed neck down. Doctors at the Military Command hospital in Pune say that the only reason Bundela is still alive is because he simply refuses to give up.

"There is always hope. Even now he is in a state of spinal shock. We can give a period of up to two to three years in which he can improve. But these things take time," said Colonel A K Dubey, the doctor treating Squadron leader Bundela.

Bundela became a national hero when on August 10, 1999 he became the only IAF pilot to have shot down a Pakistani aircraft since the 1971 war.

His last flight as a fighter pilot was on April 4 this year -- ironically on the same variant of the MiG he flew in 1999. But this time the engine of the MiG-21 stalled while he was flying at a

supersonic speed.

The ejection process too was not clean and he struck a part of the cockpit as he exited the aircraft, which resulted in serious spinal cord injuries.

Bundela's crash and a subsequent MiG-21 crash in Jallandhar in May in which seven people were killed on the ground prompted the Air Force to temporarily halt training operations.

All these MiGs have since been cleared for full service. Squadron leader P K Bundela may have lived, but more than 40 trained and qualified fighter pilots have been killed in the last decade while flying MiG-21s.

However, the top brass of the Air Force refuses to accept the aircraft is outdated, poorly manufactured and prone to disaster.

some justice in the end. the coward was following orders but his death was very fitting.

Indians were peed off due to losing two of their fighter jets in Kargil war and it was just a matter of time they were going to avenge this. they did what any cheap or opportunist enemy must do there is nothing fair in war. PAF must have known better and provided PN air cover where possible and PN air wing must have conducted its flights with safety in mind.

since 27 Feb 19 thrashing Indians have been on the look out for a cheap opportunity and I wont be surprised if they even try to shoot down a passenger plane of Pakistan. with that mindset there is no excuse to be complacent.

 

[Windjammer]

some justice in the end. the coward was following orders but his death was very fitting.

Indians were peed off due to losing two of their fighter jets in Kargil war and it was just a matter of time they were going to avenge this. they did what any cheap or opportunist enemy must do there is nothing fair in war. PAF must have known better and provided PN air cover where possible and PN air wing must have conducted its flights with safety in mind.

since 27 Feb 19 thrashing Indians have been on the look out for a cheap opportunity and I wont be surprised if they even try to shoot down a passenger plane of Pakistan. with that mindset there is no excuse to be complacent.

They Indians were quick to attack a slow moving unarmed aircraft the size of an airliner but we all saw how they fair when faced by the PAF and through sheer panic score own bullseye. The same fear and panic caused them to lose two more jets during the same period after the above incident.

In August 1999, Indian .Pakistan hostilities were at a peak, a PN Atlantique aircraft had been shot down by India and the tension on the borders was described as at at knife edge. There were constant air patrols, each side was monitoring the other around the clock resulting in aircraft being constantly scrambled. One of these resulted in two IAF MiG-21s being scrambled from an airfield in Indian occupied Kashmir, in the heat of the moment, while baring down the runway, No 2 MiG got caught in the leaders slipstream and began losing control and it's pilot proceeded to eject, the Indian air controller watching panicked and gave the call for eject without referring to No2, the MiG leader who was by this time airborne assumed that the call is for him so he also promptly proceeded to eject.
Whether an air violation by the PAF materialized on that day or not but it certainly caused the IAF the loss of two aircraft....some sources describe it as the cheapest kill of the conflict.

18th August 1999

Indian A. F. MiG-21Bis Srinagar AFB Take Off from Srinagar AFB No.2 in a two aircraft take off. Pilot was too close to No.1 and lost control in the slipstream and crashed after take off. ATC called out for him to eject. No1 in the formation responded to the wrong call and ejected Flying Officer G S Dhindsar

18th August 1999

Indian A. F. MiG-21Bis Srinagar AFB. Take Off from Srinagar AFB No.1 in a two aircraft take off. Responded to a misguided 'Eject' Call given by the ATC to Flying Officer Dhindsar who was the No.2 Flight Lieutenant K S Deswal

 

[PakFactor]

Question I have the PN plane that was shot down, was their no evacuation orders or anything parachute to safety? Or was the plane close to civilian area and wanted to avoid it falling down.

From the Indian side it was a cowardly act

 

[Ivan]

Any proof of warnings found in the black box?

 

[MM_Haider]

Indians are such a coward nation.. always go after innocents... and unarmed people .. this plane was unarmed..

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

@Telescopic Sight
Your thread topic is open again

 

[blueazure]

the coward who shot the unarmed atlantique died a horrible death with a spinal injury

rotting in hell as we speak

 

[Falcon26]

Since the thread 'SHUHADA of PAKISTAN NAVAL AVIATION' has been closed. I have opened this thread.

Here is the story according to: https://military.wikia.org/wiki/Atlantique_incident).
It is not my opinion, I am simply quoting it for the members to read about how the end game was played out. Since I had difficulty in pasting the contents suggest referring to the link if the text appears incoherent.

Quote

The Atlantique Incident was an event in which a Pakistan Navy's Naval Air Arm Breguet Atlantique patrol plane, carrying 16 people on board, was shot down by the Indian Air Force for alleged violation of airspace. The episode took place in Rann of
Kutch on 10 August 1999, just a month after the Kargil War, creating a tense atmosphere between India and Pakistan.

Foreign diplomats based in Pakistan and escorted to the site by the Pakistani Army noted that the plane may have crossed the border. However, the Islamabad based diplomats said that they also believe that India's reaction was unjustified. Pakistan later lodged a compensation claim at the International Court of Justice, accusing India for the incident, but the court dismissed the case, ruling that the court had no jurisdiction in this matter.

Confrontation
The French-built naval plane Breguet Atlantique (Breguet Br.1150 Atlantique) plane, flight Atlantic-91, c/n 33, of 29 Squadron was one of Pakistan Navy's frontline aircraft, used primarily for patrol and reconnaissance. Atlantic-91 left Mehran (Sindh province) Naval base at 9:15 am. Indian Air Force ground radar picked up the flight path of the plane approaching the International Border.Two IAF MiG-21 interceptor aircraft of No.45 Squadron, from the Indian airbase at Naliya in the Kutch region, were soon scrambled by the Indian Air Force. After a series of manoeuvres—and a conflicting version of events from both sides—the two jets were given clearance to shoot down the Pakistani plane. At 11:17 am IST (10:47 am PST), nearly two hours after takeoff from Pakistan, the Atlantique was intercepted and an infrared homing R-60 air-to-air missile was fired at it by Squadron Leader P.K. Bundela, hitting the engine on the port side of the plane. This resulted in the aircraft losing control and spiraling towards a crash at approximately 1100 hours PST and approximate location 23°54′N 68°16′E / 23.9°N 68.267°E, killing all 16 on board the Atlantic-91, including five officers of the Pakistan Navy.

Claims and counterclaims

The region in Kutch, (marked in red) where the incident took place

The event immediately sparked claims and counter-claims by both nations. Pakistan claimed that the plane was unarmed and the and there was no violation of Indian airspace. the debris was found on Pakistan's side of the border. According to the official Pakistan version of events, the plane was on routine training mission inside Pakistan air space. The Pakistani prime minister stated during the funeral service of the airmen that the shooting was a barbaric act.


Enlarged map of the region showing Sir Creek and Kori Creek area where the plane was shot down and wreckage was found

The Indian Air force, however, claimed that the aeroplane did not respond to international protocol and that the plane acted in a "hostile" manner, adding that the debris of a downed aircraft could fall over a wide radius. Indian sources also state that
Pakistani Information Minister, Mushahid Hussein, was initially quoted saying that the aircraft was on a surveillance mission. India also accused that the plane violated 1991 agreement where no military aircraft is supposed to come anywhere near 10 km from the border (although Pakistan claimed the Atlantique wasn't a combat aircraft). Indian experts also questioned why a training mission was being done so close to the international border since all air forces clearly demarcate training areas for flight, which are located well away from the borders.

According to them, the Pakistani claim was untenable since the primary role of the Atlantique is for operations over the sea and that to carry out a training flight over land deep inside foreign territory was an indication of its use in a surveillance role. India displayed part of the wreckage of the Pakistani naval aircraft at New Delhi airport the next day. Pakistan however, stated that the wreckage was removed from its side of the border by Indian helicopters.

While Pakistan said that the plane was unarmed and the debris was within Pakistani territory, India maintained that warnings had been given to the Atlantique and that its flight trajectory meant it could have fallen on either side of the border. According to the Indian version of events, the MiGs tried to escort it to a nearby Indian base, when the Pakistani aircraft turned abruptly and tried to make a dash for the border; it was only then that it was fired upon. India claimed that the debris was found in a radius of 2 km on either side of the border and that the intrusion took place 10 km inside the Kori Creek, which is Indian territory. Pakistan requested that the matter be taken up in the UN. Indian officials blamed that there had been previous violations in the area and pointed out that in the previous year a Pakistani unmanned surveillance aircraft had intruded 150 km inside the Indian border, coming close to the Bhuj air base before the IAF spotted it and brought it down with several missiles.

Indian analysts state "flare-ups" in the Rann of Kutch region were routine, and despite bilateral agreements, both Indian and Pakistan had conducted air intrusions in the past. Thus, the fact that the Atlantique was shot down, despite coming close to the Indian border, came as a surprise.

Indian officials add that Pakistan military aircraft had violated Indian airspace at least 50 times since January 1999, showing videotapes of Pakistani Atlantique buzzing or flying provocatively near the Indian Navy's warships in the Indian Ocean. Some Indian analysts stated that the Atlantique was nearly destroyed in 1983 on a similar encounter and noted other close encounters and violations from Pakistani naval planes

Some experts stated that the Atlantique was probably conducting a "probe" on India's air defence system, mainly the radar equipment in the border area; however, they advised that it was not part of any planned aggressive military action by Pakistan. Foreign diplomats who visited the crash site noted that the plane "may have strayed into restricted space", and that Islamabad was unable to explain why it was flying so close to the border; they however added that India's reaction to the incident was not justified. Many countries, the permanent members of the UN Security Council, as well as the western media questioned the wisdom behind Pakistan's decision to fly military aircraft so close to the Indian border.


Rise in tensions

On the day following the attack, an IAF helicopter carrying journalists to the site of the attack was attacked by the Pakistan Army with a surface-to-air missile. Pakistani officials asserted that two Indian jets had intruded into Pakistani airspace near the Atlantique wreckage site, along the border between the Indian state of Gujarat and Pakistan's Sindh Province, and were then fired upon by Pakistan. International and Indian television journalists travelling in the chopper said the aircraft shook severely and a flash appeared in the air, suggesting a missile had been fired at it. The IAF thus aborted their mission to display Atlantique wreckage on Indian soil.

Following this, and the rising tensions in the area coupled by the fact that the Sir Creek was a disputed territory, both the countries' militaries near the Rann of Kutch and nearby were put on high alert. Pakistan sent a company of soldiers, equipped with both infrared homing shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles, to the site near the border. Coming barely weeks after the Kargil Conflict where both nuclear armed countries fought


LawsuitEdit

The International Court of Justice dismissed Pakistan's case on the grounds that the court did not have jurisdiction.

On 21 September 1999, Pakistan lodged a compensation claim at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague, accusing India of shooting down an unarmed aircraft. Pakistan sought about US$60 million in reparations from India and compensation for the victims' families. India's attorney general, citing an exemption it filed in 1974 to exclude disputes between India and other Commonwealth States, and disputes covered by multi-lateral treaties. In the buildup to the case, India also contended that Pakistan had violated the 1991 bilateral agreement between Pakistan and India on air violations, which states: "Combat aircraft (including, Bombers, Reconnaissance aircraft, Jet military trainers and Armed helicopters) will not fly within 10 km of each other’s airspace including Air Defense Identification Zone."

On 21 June 2000, the 16-judge Bench headed by Gilbert Guillaume of France ruled—with a 14–2 verdict—upholding India's submission that the court had no jurisdiction in this matter. Pakistan's claims were dropped, without recourse to appeal, and the outcome was seen as a decision highly favourable.


Aftermath

The next day, Pakistan fired missiles on one of the three helicopters carrying journalists into the region. Pakistan said that it fired on Indian fighter jets that were escorting the helicopters and had come inside Pakistani territory.

In India, the incident made the two MiG-21s into instant heroes. On 8 October 2000, the prestigious Squadron Leader P.K. Bundela. The medal was also awarded to Wing Commander V.S. Sharma

The downing of the Pakistani aircraft came at a particularly bad juncture for the Pakistani prime minister, Nawaz Sharif, who was already under attack from politicians for ordering a withdrawal of its troops from Kargil. Two months later he was deposed in a bloodless coup d'état by Gen. Pervez Musharraf.

Unquote.

Why does Pakistan keep losing at every international court? I am yet to see Pakistan win a single case. Is it an issue of bad preparations or there’s another hand involved. If so, why does Pakistan keep accepting on going to these courts when India has number of times successfully rejected the court’s jurisdiction. For example, Pakistan accepted the court’a jurisdiction when it could have cited this particular case and rejected the court’s jurisdiction.

 

[Areesh]

@Telescopic Sight
Your thread topic is open again

Still won't help the loser with the humiliation IAF got last year in February

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Question I have the PN plane that was shot down, was their no evacuation orders or anything parachute to safety? Or was the plane close to civilian area and wanted to avoid it falling down.

From the Indian side it was a cowardly act

I am not aware if the plane has parachute facility or a plane hit by a missile has enough time or stability to allow the crew to bail out at all.
question about blackbox is valid.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Why does Pakistan keep losing at every international court? I am yet to see Pakistan win a single case. Is it an issue of bad preparations or there’s another hand involved. If so, why does Pakistan keep accepting on going to these courts when India has number of times successfully rejected the court’s jurisdiction. For example, Pakistan accepted the court’a jurisdiction when it could have cited this particular case and rejected the court’s jurisdiction.

these courts are a sham, their judges are from countries that have economic interests with India.
rest is Indian lobby and diplomacy that turns the ruling in its favor. Pakistan will never ever win a case even if its written on paper that violation can be mediated and guaranteed. money rules rest is all just stories.

 

[Joe Shearer]

@Irfan Baloch
@PakFactor
@MM_Haider
@blueazure
@Falcon26
@Areesh

No nation has a monopoly of virtue, no nation has a monopoly of mindless cruelty.

I read the earlier thread with increasing distress at the remarks and comments; the thread was thankfully closed by @The Eagle, and I ignored his closing remarks and those of @SQ8, both figures whom I respect very highly, as occasioned by the malice of the OP.

@niaz Sahib's post above reaffirmed the veneration I bear the man, and my reverence for his moral courage.

For those of you who have commented, I ask you to read the account below. Another pilot did what Bundela was ordered to do; he was not Indian. He shot down a civilian plane, not one with military markings; he shot down the plane far outside his own territory, not on the border. Try, if you can, to retain some humanity in your posts, if not in your feelings.

Pak Pilot's Remorse for 1965 Shooting of Indian Plane

ISLAMABAD / REZAUL H LASKAR


Almost half-a-century after he shot down an Indian civilian aircraft carrying the then Chief Minister of Gujarat, a Pakistan Air Force pilot has apologised to the daughter of the pilot of the downed plane, saying he was "not a trigger-happy person" and this happened in the line of duty during the 1965 war.

Qais Hussain was a rookie Flying Officer during the 1965 war when he shot down the Beechcraft piloted by distinguished ex-Indian Air Force pilot Jehangir Engineer.

Besides Engineer and the then Gujarat Chief Minister Balwantrai Mehta, the Chief Minister's wife Sarojben Mehta, three members of his personal staff, a crew member and a reporter of the Gujarat Samachar were killed in the incident.

Hussain, who wrote an e-mail to Engineer's daughter, decided to explain his side of the story after PAF officer-turned-blogger Kaiser Tufail researched the incident and concluded that Pakistani officials had wrongly surmised that the Indian aircraft was on a surveillance mission.

"We were at war at the time and the initial impression after I shot down the aircraft was that we had been able to eliminate a new front. We were all very happy and I got a pat on the back from my colleagues," Hussain, 70, told PTI.

Referring to the incident of September 19, 1965, Hussain said: "This happened at about 4 pm. At 7 pm, All India Radio announced the aircraft that was shot down was carrying the Chief Minister and our mood became very sombre. We all repented what had happened but the event fell by the wayside."

After Air Commodore (Retd) Kaiser Tufail researched the incident and wrote a piece on it for his blog in April, Hussain said he was spurred to convey his condolences to the families of those who died when he shot down the Beechcraft.

"I thought it was better late than never. I'm happy to have been able to do something. I wanted to say that I was not a trigger-happy person and this happened in the confusion of war," he said.

Thanks to the efforts of Naveed Riaz, a Lahore-based businessman and aviation enthusiast, and Indian military aviation expert Jagan Pillarisetti, Hussain got the email address of Jehangir 'Jungoo' Engineer's daughter Farida Singh and wrote to her on August 5.

"If an opportunity ever arises that I could meet you face to face to condole the death of your father 46 years back, I would grab it with both hands. I would highly appreciate if you please convey my feelings to the other members of your family, who were equally hurt by the untimely departure of Jungoo to the next world," Hussain wrote in his email.

He explained he had acted only after he was ordered to shoot down the Indian aircraft by his controller, who had mistakenly concluded that the Beechcraft was on a surveillance mission.

"Your father spotted my presence immediately and he started climbing and waggling his wings seeking mercy. Instead of firing at him at first sight, I relayed to my controller that I had intercepted an eight-seat transport aircraft (guessing by the four side windows) and wanted further instructions to deal with it," Hussain wrote in his email.

"At the same time, I was hoping that I would be called back without firing a shot. There was a lapse of three to four long minutes before I was given clear orders to shoot the aircraft," wrote Hussain, who left the PAF three years after the incident.

 

[PakFactor]

@Irfan Baloch
@PakFactor
@MM_Haider
@blueazure
@Falcon26
@Areesh

No nation has a monopoly of virtue, no nation has a monopoly of mindless cruelty.

I read the earlier thread with increasing distress at the remarks and comments; the thread was thankfully closed by @The Eagle, and I ignored his closing remarks and those of @SQ8, both figures whom I respect very highly, as occasioned by the malice of the OP.

@niaz Sahib's post above reaffirmed the veneration I bear the man, and my reverence for his moral courage.

For those of you who have commented, I ask you to read the account below. Another pilot did what Bundela was ordered to do; he was not Indian. He shot down a civilian plane, not one with military markings; he shot down the plane far outside his own territory, not on the border. Try, if you can, to retain some humanity in your posts, if not in your feelings.

Pak Pilot's Remorse for 1965 Shooting of Indian Plane

ISLAMABAD / REZAUL H LASKAR


Almost half-a-century after he shot down an Indian civilian aircraft carrying the then Chief Minister of Gujarat, a Pakistan Air Force pilot has apologised to the daughter of the pilot of the downed plane, saying he was "not a trigger-happy person" and this happened in the line of duty during the 1965 war.

Qais Hussain was a rookie Flying Officer during the 1965 war when he shot down the Beechcraft piloted by distinguished ex-Indian Air Force pilot Jehangir Engineer.

Besides Engineer and the then Gujarat Chief Minister Balwantrai Mehta, the Chief Minister's wife Sarojben Mehta, three members of his personal staff, a crew member and a reporter of the Gujarat Samachar were killed in the incident.

Hussain, who wrote an e-mail to Engineer's daughter, decided to explain his side of the story after PAF officer-turned-blogger Kaiser Tufail researched the incident and concluded that Pakistani officials had wrongly surmised that the Indian aircraft was on a surveillance mission.

"We were at war at the time and the initial impression after I shot down the aircraft was that we had been able to eliminate a new front. We were all very happy and I got a pat on the back from my colleagues," Hussain, 70, told PTI.

Referring to the incident of September 19, 1965, Hussain said: "This happened at about 4 pm. At 7 pm, All India Radio announced the aircraft that was shot down was carrying the Chief Minister and our mood became very sombre. We all repented what had happened but the event fell by the wayside."

After Air Commodore (Retd) Kaiser Tufail researched the incident and wrote a piece on it for his blog in April, Hussain said he was spurred to convey his condolences to the families of those who died when he shot down the Beechcraft.

"I thought it was better late than never. I'm happy to have been able to do something. I wanted to say that I was not a trigger-happy person and this happened in the confusion of war," he said.

Thanks to the efforts of Naveed Riaz, a Lahore-based businessman and aviation enthusiast, and Indian military aviation expert Jagan Pillarisetti, Hussain got the email address of Jehangir 'Jungoo' Engineer's daughter Farida Singh and wrote to her on August 5.

"If an opportunity ever arises that I could meet you face to face to condole the death of your father 46 years back, I would grab it with both hands. I would highly appreciate if you please convey my feelings to the other members of your family, who were equally hurt by the untimely departure of Jungoo to the next world," Hussain wrote in his email.

He explained he had acted only after he was ordered to shoot down the Indian aircraft by his controller, who had mistakenly concluded that the Beechcraft was on a surveillance mission.

"Your father spotted my presence immediately and he started climbing and waggling his wings seeking mercy. Instead of firing at him at first sight, I relayed to my controller that I had intercepted an eight-seat transport aircraft (guessing by the four side windows) and wanted further instructions to deal with it," Hussain wrote in his email.

"At the same time, I was hoping that I would be called back without firing a shot. There was a lapse of three to four long minutes before I was given clear orders to shoot the aircraft," wrote Hussain, who left the PAF three years after the incident.

Its a tragic situation to be in. However I don’t see any record of Hussain being awarded and being paraded around unlike those who shot down the PN plane. What Hussain did was during a fog of war situation whereas the other their was no conflict and feels as more of a revenge.