What's new

The Folly of The German Air Force

Gets you facts right it entered service in 1979 like F-16s so its 4th gen bird and with modern day avionics its beast in strike role and can handle threats if latest EW suit is installed or pods are used.
thank you sir for correcting me sir but we have least chanced to get those bird, better option will be JH-7AB or J-116 sir
 
.
thank you sir for correcting me sir but we have least chanced to get those bird, better option will be JH-7AB or J-116 sir

I don't know why people bring JH-7 into discussion which is even rejected by PN, a guy told me its obsolete and sending someone in it against enemy is just plane murder.
 
.
Remember how it took them to get Su-35s and what was reported in the media.
But sir currently there is no news on S-400 purchase form China if you have please share us thank you

I don't know why people bring JH-7 into discussion which is even rejected by PN, a guy told me its obsolete and sending someone in it against enemy is just plane murder.
Ok sir but what about J-16
 
.
UAVS aren't cheap, but yeah you can overwhelm or trick modern SAMS

check out this video


a single pantsir has 12 missiles and 700 rounds of 30mm

let's say each missile has 100% hit rate that's 12 UAV gone then let's say it takes 100 30mm to kill one UAV that's another 7 so it's take 19 UAV to overwhelm a single pantsir, and there are going to multiple protecting S-400

then you gotta take into account India has other SAM systems that can shoot down UAVs and missiles

Why S-400 & Pantsir was unable to takeout Tomahawk CMs?

Pakistan is good in tactical UAVs and should develop Harpy type suicide UAVs for SEAD/DEAD role and they should be good in that role and cheap to built in large numbers.

But sir currently there is no news on S-400 purchase form China if you have please share us thank you


Ok sir but what about J-16

It depends if we can make Russia, to allow sale of those.
 
.
Why S-400 & Pantsir was unable to takeout Tomahawk CMs?

Pakistan is good in tactical UAVs and should develop Harpy type suicide UAVs for SEAD/DEAD role and they should be good in that role and cheap to built in large numbers.



It depends if we can make Russia, to allow sale of those.

we warned Russia of the attack. they had no reason to waste expensive missiles.

Pantsir wasn't protecting this airbase?? I don't think
 
.
We are not a Blue Water Navy
We are not a Air Superiority Airforce
We refuse to make our own Engines for Tanks
We go against Terrorist on Western frontier , on foot instead of 150+ Helicopter fleet
Strategic Bombers , are not needed as it would hurt feelings of other nations
Our Space sattelite can just be sent on someone else's Rocket
Engines , hell we will just order some why bother to make one


hmmm sums it up

Any thing that starts with the terminology "Strategic ------" our planners worry less about buying and more about finding excuses to shelf that idea
Very true.
From Institutions to weapons..this fact is evident. May be our planners don't want to develop or earn, rather borrow and buy.
And in this environment, body of our country has developed many many diseases.
 
.
@AZADPAKISTAN2009 @MastanKhan

Just wan't to add in a few points here.

Neither India or Pakistan possess strategic/ large strike bombers in the sub-continent. This might be due to the short ranges involved. Islamabad to New Delhi 700kms, this is small compared to Berlin-Moscow which is 1600kms or Berlin-London which is 1100kms. Back in WW2 planes did not have the ranges they do today thus fighter bombers like Su-30 or F-16 can cover distances with ease what planes back then couldn't. Thus in order to reach targets at those distances, large bombers were necessary something which is not the case today.

Also, seeing modern A2/AD scenarios with the HQ-16 and the SPYDER systems, smaller multi-role aircraft may have greater survivability than large bombers. Large strike aircraft cannot defend themselves and need fighter escort. Neither India nor Pakistan have enough planes to send large flotillas of aircraft on bombing raids without leaving open gaps in the front line.

In the case of Indo-Pak the range potential of large strike bombers such as B-52 or Tu-22 can only be realized if Pakistan attempts to bomb Andaman and Nicobar or India attempts to bomb Shanghai. But lets be honest, neither IAF or PAF can pull off these missions. Its not possible for the IAF to fly all across defended Chinese airspace or defended Pakistani airspace and neither is it possible for PAF to fly all across defended Indian airspace. Thus the main selling point of modern strategic bombers - intercontinental range - will go unused.

In my opinion IAF and PAF are on the right track pursuing fleets of multi-role aircraft. Even in the future, armed drones such as Burraq/Wing Loong and HeronTP/ Predator B/C will be more advantageous to either than strategic bombers.

Sorry if this has already been discussed before (I'm new here) but I would like to hear you guys' opinions on my points above.

Well said bro:tup: we both have an alternative BM @The Eagle , @Horus, @Deino , @Bilal Khan (Quwa) , @Bilal Khan 777 this post needs at least 2 positive ratings
Thanks.[/QUOTE]

Very true.
From Institutions to weapons..this fact is evident. May be our planners don't want to develop or earn, rather borrow and buy.
And in this environment, body of our country has developed many many diseases.
WE are closeting step to step in that direction bro, their is no shortcut in weapon development:pakistan:
 
.
well buy a 100 JH-7B if you want deep strike.

JH-7%2BChinese%2BFighter-Bomber.jpg
jh 7b is a mere bomb truck cannot defend itself in war scenario meanwhile heavy jets like J16 or J11b are more suitable for small country like Pak and may be in near future Fc31
 
.
we warned Russia of the attack. they had no reason to waste expensive missiles.

Pantsir wasn't protecting this airbase?? I don't think

But there was a pic which showed a truck similar to Pantsir destroyed by US strike.
 
.
A nice video but with a very flawed analysis. Strategic bombing would not have done much in bringing Britain on its knees, its main sources of materials were in the colonies, while US could provide any amounts of war materials which Britain needed. Frankly, there is now a lot of material pointing towards that Hitler was never serious in invading Britain and ground offensive preparations as well as Luftwaffe attacks were just a cover for Warmacht preparation for war on the eastern front.

But battle of Britain laid bare the fallacy of the concept of a twin-engined fighter bomber for all to see. For longer range fighter escorts Luftwaffe had developed and inducted Me-110 as Me-109 was shorter ranged and even intended to use it as a fighter-bomber. In that age of gun based VWR combat, Me-110 proved in-adequate against lighter and more agile Spitfires. This resulted in far more losses for Luftwaffe for bombers as well as fighter escorts and even forced it to send Me-109s over the channel.

The same thing re-ocurred with American daylight bombing campaigns in start as well, fighter escorts in shape of twin engined P-38s were unable to handle the Me-109s, this changed with the arrival of long ranged single engined Mustangs. In fact, Mustangs arrival is considered the pivotal factor which changed fortunes of US day light strategic bombing campaigns.
 
.
Just to add to the conversation,


Germany really lost due to British having decoded their secret code machines and invention of Radars.
Even if they had invented the Bombers, they would have still been shot once in British Territories

It was really a Technological difference (Radars) which altered the air battle

However, the importance of Strategic fast , high altitude bomber can't be understated
We see Russia and China both have mandate to keep bombers in their fleet

Enemies can be close or sometimes at some distance , realities change globally
To not prepare for unexpected is just making the force 1 Dimensional

  • The radar tech was UFO tech for its time

  • Once the encrypted codes were decoded by captured code machines , British ground Anti air already were prepared for incoming Raids , which destroyed German contingency in Air

This idea has branched into concepts of Early Warning AWAC planes to furtner enhance awareness , and battle landescape viewing 3D imaging and global view of battlefield

  • AWACs
  • Stealth
  • Advance range SAMs (an extension of early warning and defence)
Are are expansion of that idealogy which started to evolve around WW2 time


The high altitude Bombers China/Russia have are still quite applicable
 
Last edited:
.
I don't know why people bring JH-7 into discussion which is even rejected by PN, a guy told me its obsolete and sending someone in it against enemy is just plane murder.

Hi,

Tell that Jackass in the PN that the chinese naval wing will launch these aircraft against the U S assets and that is the best naval assets that they have at this time that is fully operational and full deployment status.

jh 7b is a mere bomb truck cannot defend itself in war scenario meanwhile heavy jets like J16 or J11b are more suitable for small country like Pak and may be in near future Fc31

Hi,

Before making comments like these---it is better to ask---.

On strike missions---the strike aircraft are defense less---. They are just carrying their air to surface load---.

FC31 has nothing in common with the J11 / J16.

I don't think Russia will sell any modern aircraft to Pakistan.

I wonder how Pakistan will handle India air defenses especially the S-400??

you need something like the Aardvark that can get low and has legs.

Hi,

These kids are clueless to what you are saying---. Unless it does not do 9 G's and stand on its tail when going up---these kids think that the plane is worthless.

They have no comprehension about the utility of an aircraft like the Aardvark.
 
.
If Germany had 1,000 B-17s and B-29s they would have beat Russia.

none of their bombers had the legs to hit Russia war industry beyond the Urals.
Remember the weather condition?the coldest winter in the decade.
Don't u think maintaining a supply on different fronts was a difficult thing???
I m not rejecting this bomber theory but it was not the only factor of Nazi defeat.
 
.
I think only viable strategic bomber these days is B2 spirit....caz its stealth...

Others are sitting ducks...includin b52

Yes we need a dedicated strike aircraft
 
.
Hi,

Tell that Jackass in the PN that the chinese naval wing will launch these aircraft against the U S assets and that is the best naval assets that they have at this time that is fully operational and full deployment status.



Hi,

Before making comments like these---it is better to ask---.

On strike missions---the strike aircraft are defense less---. They are just carrying their air to surface load---.

FC31 has nothing in common with the J11 / J16.



Hi,

These kids are clueless to what you are saying---. Unless it does not do 9 G's and stand on its tail when going up---these kids think that the plane is worthless.

They have no comprehension about the utility of an aircraft like the Aardvark.

That guy is very well trained by top institutions and he is not alone who say that also don't compare PN with PLAN as later have many air, sea and undersea assets to provide support to JH7 strike package which PN can not do.
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom