US F-16's to Pak come with a 'no use against India in future' rider

[Guynextdoor]

Hey what about the F-16? It has had 339 class A crashes and the F-15 has had 140 class A crashes, if my math is correct that would be 479 crashes. I'm hoping the F-18 or F-16 wins the MRCA then i would laugh my butt off when the F-16 or F-18 recieves the nickname "flying coffin"

I'm sure after each crash you would pop in and make fun of F-16's or F-18's just like you have been doing with the old Migs.

Hell this is embarssing. It's not just the Paksitani's but the whole world that's laughing at us, including the country that's manufacturing it. Indian Guys we've gotta go witchhuntin some babus.

 

[dbc]

Hey what about the F-16? It has had 339 class A crashes and the F-15 has had 140 class A crashes, if my math is correct that would be 479 crashes. I'm hoping the F-18 or F-16 wins the MRCA then i would laugh my butt off when the F-16 or F-18 recieves the nickname "flying coffin"

Then I'm sure after each crash you would pop in and make some smart *** remark about how the F-16 or F-18 is junk, just like you have been profusely doing with the Migs.

..e tu ptldM3..?

Pilot error was determined as causative in 55% of all the mishaps. Pilot error was often associated with other non-pilot related causes. Channelized attention, loss of situational awareness, and spatial disorientation accounted for approximately 30% of the total pilot error causes found. Pilot demographics, flight hour/sortie profiles, and aircrew injuries are also listed. Fatalities occurred in 27% of the mishaps, with 97% of those involving pilot errors.

The F-16 mishap rate is twice the USAF average, this is expected because the F-16 is often flown fast and low. Low - Level high 'G' maneuvers often disorient or render the pilot unconscious and was found to be the leading cause of F-16 mishaps.

 

[ptldM3]

..e tu ptldM3..?



The F-16 mishap rate is twice the USAF average, this is expected because the F-16 is often flown fast and low. Low - Level high 'G' maneuvers often disorient or render the pilot unconscious and was found to be the leading cause of F-16 mishaps.

The same holds true for the Mig-21, around half of the crashes were due to pilot error and as well as other factors such as poor maintanace, bird strikes, poor quality replacemnt parts manufactured demestically ect.

If you took the time to explain some of the crashes of the F-16's and F-15's it would have only been fair to do the same for the Migs, dont you think? I mean, i have defended American aircraft many times. Just because i'm Russian doesn't mean i will be totally bias in favore of Russian aircraft, if a troll says something stupid about American aircraft i will not hesitate to shut them up.

 

[blain2]

After 10 pages of back and forth, let me put forward one issue. It runs counter to US interests for them to put kill switches on Pakistani F-16s. Rendering Pakistani F-16s inoperable in case of a war with India means that Pakistan would immediately go for its ultimate deterrence instead of trying to do what it must in the air. The US and the world for that matter would not want this escalation to happen and that too so rapidly.

So lets consider the overall imperative here. The US supplies conventional weapon systems to both sides because it wants a semblance of military balance to prevail. This is being done all over the world, however its nowhere as important as in South Asia between Pakistan and India. By supplying hardware to Pakistan, it does not mean that US will provide what Pakistan asks for and in numbers equal to India to match them, rather its enough to give a pause to the India side and give Pakistan enough room to put off escalating on the nuclear path.

If the US wants to render Pakistan's capability to defend herself useless, simply saying no to F-16s or other weapon systems of US origin would suffice. We would not be getting new build or surplus F-16s. However given that these systems are being released, this is being done with the realization that if Pakistan does not have a credible conventional deterrence, the alternate would be a lot worse.

 

[dbc]

If you took the time to explain some of the crashes of the F-16's and F-15's it would have only been fair to do the same for the Migs, dont you think?

Captain America is not worth the effort to be honest. I'm not sure why you felt compelled to stoop to his level. The Mig 21 commands a lot of respect and is highly regarded by military aviators. Captain Troll's attempts to sully the Mig-21's reputation reflects poorly upon his own knowledge, or lack there of.

 

[ptldM3]

Captain Troll is not worth the effort to be honest. I'm not sure why you felt compelled to stoop to his level. The Mig 21 commands a lot of respect and is highly regarded by military aviators. Captain Troll's attempts to sully the Mig-21's reputation reflects poorly upon his own knowledge, or lack there of.

I only brought up the F-15 and F-16 to show the reality of aviation and to show that Migs are not the only aircraft that crash, i also felt that Captain Troll needed to see both sides of the story because he post this Mig crap every day; i have mentioned on many occasions that the US built aircraft are very safe esspecially for the amount of hours flow. I had a brother that was a pilot that passed away in an aviation accident as well as a friend, so i take great offense when someone like Captain Troll relishes and salivates in the missfortune of other by turning it into a game of mockery. The flying coffin anology was probably in poor taste but i had to give the troll a taste of his own medicine, and i have zero regrets about it.

 

[zraver]

After 10 pages of back and forth, let me put forward one issue. It runs counter to US interests for them to put kill switches on Pakistani F-16s. Rendering Pakistani F-16s inoperable in case of a war with India means that Pakistan would immediately go for its ultimate deterrence instead of trying to do what it must in the air. The US and the world for that matter would not want this escalation to happen and that too so rapidly.

So lets consider the overall imperative here. The US supplies conventional weapon systems to both sides because it wants a semblance of military balance to prevail. This is being done all over the world, however its nowhere as important as in South Asia between Pakistan and India. By supplying hardware to Pakistan, it does not mean that US will provide what Pakistan asks for and in numbers equal to India to match them, rather its enough to give a pause to the India side and give Pakistan enough room to put off escalating on the nuclear path.

If the US wants to render Pakistan's capability to defend herself useless, simply saying no to F-16s or other weapon systems of US origin would suffice. We would not be getting new build or surplus F-16s. However given that these systems are being released, this is being done with the realization that if Pakistan does not have a credible conventional deterrence, the alternate would be a lot worse.

Very well reasoned, great post.

 

[forcetrip]

Seem like the F-16's do come with lots of strings attached. According to a tender document that was posted by the US Government seeking bids for protection of their operatives, American military personnel willl be posted at PAF base Shahbaz to keep an eye on the F-16 and to "monitor, assess and report PAF activities". They are clearly not there for maintainence and technical support as was claimed by the PAF but rather to keep an eye on us. See details here.

Yes they are there. They don't want other engineers tampering with them.

 

[S_O_C_O_M]

Seem like the F-16's do come with lots of strings attached. According to a tender document that was posted by the US Government seeking bids for protection of their operatives, American military personnel willl be posted at PAF base Shahbaz to keep an eye on the F-16 and to "monitor, assess and report PAF activities". They are clearly not there for maintainence and technical support as was claimed by the PAF but rather to keep an eye on us. See details here.

This is the most idiotic post here.

That website uses fictitious sources to back its false claims.

At least use the tiny brain of yours and try to discern that these statements and its sources (which do not validate these statements) came from an Afghan website.

 

[S_O_C_O_M]

After 10 pages of back and forth, let me put forward one issue. It runs counter to US interests for them to put kill switches on Pakistani F-16s. Rendering Pakistani F-16s inoperable in case of a war with India means that Pakistan would immediately go for its ultimate deterrence instead of trying to do what it must in the air. The US and the world for that matter would not want this escalation to happen and that too so rapidly.

So lets consider the overall imperative here. The US supplies conventional weapon systems to both sides because it wants a semblance of military balance to prevail. This is being done all over the world, however its nowhere as important as in South Asia between Pakistan and India. By supplying hardware to Pakistan, it does not mean that US will provide what Pakistan asks for and in numbers equal to India to match them, rather its enough to give a pause to the India side and give Pakistan enough room to put off escalating on the nuclear path.

If the US wants to render Pakistan's capability to defend herself useless, simply saying no to F-16s or other weapon systems of US origin would suffice. We would not be getting new build or surplus F-16s. However given that these systems are being released, this is being done with the realization that if Pakistan does not have a credible conventional deterrence, the alternate would be a lot worse.

Brilliantly articulated.

 

[S_O_C_O_M]

Dear,

I don't think US will ever put in Kill-Switches in FMS equipment. Think over this carefully and you will understand that Pakistan might lose a lot in that scenario, but US will turn out to be the biggest loser since the biggest export products of USA has been its military equipment for the last 2~3 decades.

If word got out that US made equipment was useless in war-time scenarios, more then a trillion dollar worth of military sales will be effected over a period of less than a decade. Do remember that only F35 foreign sales are proposed to be around 200+ billion dollars from 2015~2025, if we count in F16s, F15s, F18s, AH-1s, AH-64s, AWACs, their munition and supported equipment, Navy ships, Radars, Missile, Air defense equipment and Armored units, it will create a frenzy in buyer's market which will divert all trillions of dollars worth of arms money from USA to Europe, Russia and China, meaning decline of US arms industry and growth in their rival's.

Do you think US will ever do that ? just to punish a puny little no good country like Pakistan just to favor another no good Russian ally (from their perspective).

Its in their interest to keep India-Pakistan arming themselves with US equipment, creating jobs for their citizens at the expense of starving millions of our own. Its simple economic facts rather than complex political bickering.

Besides, if kill switches were indeed installed in US FMS equipment, how come Iranian F14s, F5s and AH-1 Cobras are still flying ?

Regards,
Sapper

Also brilliantly articulated.

 

[IceCold]

Captain Troll is not worth the effort to be honest. I'm not sure why you felt compelled to stoop to his level. The Mig 21 commands a lot of respect and is highly regarded by military aviators. Captain Troll's attempts to sully the Mig-21's reputation reflects poorly upon his own knowledge, or lack there of.

I only brought up the F-15 and F-16 to show the reality of aviation and to show that Migs are not the only aircraft that crash, i also felt that Captain Troll needed to see both sides of the story because he post this Mig crap every day; i have mentioned on many occasions that the US built aircraft are very safe esspecially for the amount of hours flow. I had a brother that was a pilot that passed away in an aviation accident as well as a friend, so i take great offense when someone like Captain Troll relishes and salivates in the missfortune of other by turning it into a game of mockery. The flying coffin anology was probably in poor taste but i had to give the troll a taste of his own medicine, and i have zero regrets about it.

You can disagree with somebody but you cant call him a troll. Thats the job of a mod only.
Here for your information

http://www.defence.pk/forums/forum-information/41367-troll-fatwas.html

 

[ambidex]

After 10 pages of back and forth, let me put forward one issue. It runs counter to US interests for them to put kill switches on Pakistani F-16s. Rendering Pakistani F-16s inoperable in case of a war with India means that Pakistan would immediately go for its ultimate deterrence instead of trying to do what it must in the air. The US and the world for that matter would not want this escalation to happen and that too so rapidly.

So lets consider the overall imperative here. The US supplies conventional weapon systems to both sides because it wants a semblance of military balance to prevail. This is being done all over the world, however its nowhere as important as in South Asia between Pakistan and India. By supplying hardware to Pakistan, it does not mean that US will provide what Pakistan asks for and in numbers equal to India to match them, rather its enough to give a pause to the India side and give Pakistan enough room to put off escalating on the nuclear path.

If the US wants to render Pakistan's capability to defend herself useless, simply saying no to F-16s or other weapon systems of US origin would suffice. We would not be getting new build or surplus F-16s. However given that these systems are being released, this is being done with the realization that if Pakistan does not have a credible conventional deterrence, the alternate would be a lot worse.

For how long Pakistan will blackmail USA to help maintain its conventional weapon balance against India.

How on earth only F-16 or lost credible conventional deterrence, which you have already lost though, will decide if Pakistan has to go for nuclear war straight away against India. Everyone but not you and your admirer knows the nuclear doctrine of Pakistan.

It is hard to digest for a Pakistani that Pakistani teeth are churned out by USA who wants to dictate south Asian security policies.

USA knows that today Pakistan is a mediocre military state who can not win a decisive war over Kashmir by both conventional and non conventional means against India but will certainly act proxy for china.

Furthermore USA has foreseeability to predict that Pakistan is over ambitious for its military aspiration cause India will never offend Pakistan's territories period.

No one is going to buy this time that India is Pakistan's enemy like they used to buy it before from Pakistan. The equations are changed and F16 saga is mere an Indicator for Pakistan to understand USA's sensitivities for WOT and to be honest about where she stands in this grand Asian game.

Typically for Pakistan it will take some time to adjust, however Pakistan can try its luck every where specially with china (Which Americans know very well) and is free to invest its hard earn money to gain parity against India for a would be head on war which will never occur.

Everyone is under pressure in this region but i am happy that war mongering Pakistan (who can bully of nuclear war on water, Kargil if India crosses LOC, and now F-16) is more effected and running around for other options.

 

[khurasaan1]

Seem like the F-16's do come with lots of strings attached. According to a tender document that was posted by the US Government seeking bids for protection of their operatives, American military personnel willl be posted at PAF base Shahbaz to keep an eye on the F-16 and to "monitor, assess and report PAF activities". They are clearly not there for maintainence and technical support as was claimed by the PAF but rather to keep an eye on us. See details here.

I believe u man..whatever u said .Plus they will be having lot of other work to do as well what i guess a smart man can visualize....

 

[ejaz007]

After 10 pages of back and forth, let me put forward one issue. It runs counter to US interests for them to put kill switches on Pakistani F-16s. Rendering Pakistani F-16s inoperable in case of a war with India means that Pakistan would immediately go for its ultimate deterrence instead of trying to do what it must in the air. The US and the world for that matter would not want this escalation to happen and that too so rapidly.

So lets consider the overall imperative here. The US supplies conventional weapon systems to both sides because it wants a semblance of military balance to prevail. This is being done all over the world, however its nowhere as important as in South Asia between Pakistan and India. By supplying hardware to Pakistan, it does not mean that US will provide what Pakistan asks for and in numbers equal to India to match them, rather its enough to give a pause to the India side and give Pakistan enough room to put off escalating on the nuclear path.

If the US wants to render Pakistan's capability to defend herself useless, simply saying no to F-16s or other weapon systems of US origin would suffice. We would not be getting new build or surplus F-16s. However given that these systems are being released, this is being done with the realization that if Pakistan does not have a credible conventional deterrence, the alternate would be a lot worse.

Excellent post. I hope now these highly intelligent intellectuals understand what shall happen if there are restriction attached with defense deals.