Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
my apologies Bhaijan99 was a skirmish 1500+ men vs 35000-40000 infantry,arty divisions n airforce...
And P.S its Al-Qaeda... not kaida.. so lol @ you.
Ps its Al-Qaeda,you are funny.
End of discussion.
No Sir, I do try to speak my mind, as my posts will show, but one must also be mindful of offending people too much. For example, certain topics and their discussions are not tolerated here, and, given the anti-Americanism that runs as an undercurrent.
Who cares, you're Canadian. Religion perhaps is someplace you should avoid, but when it comes to institutions; by all means be scathing(but constructive and not repetitive) in your critique.
I feel that in addition to completing the JF-17 fleet, we should create a dedicated CAS model from the K-8 or something like that. One of the forgotten lesson about Kargil is that our service arms should be able to work better together. That integration will serve dividends in efficiency, and that should be part of the PAF doctrine going forward.
No Sir, I do try to speak my mind, as my posts will show, but one must also be mindful of offending people too much. For example, certain topics and their discussions are not tolerated here, and, given the anti-Americanism that runs as an undercurrent, one should be careful. I am merely being mindful of not creating any headaches for the management team, that is all. Being offensive unnecessarily does not achieve anything and is counter-productive too.
Having said that Sir, let me just say that we cannot realistically hope to do any better than the Iraqis against USAF.
India, on the other hand, we can very likely deal with, quite effectively, in a short war. The only problem is that the next war is going to be economic and I think we are already losing that one.
Therefore, as is the topic of this thread, we need to have a clear idea of what PAF needs to do in order to best fit in with an overall strategy of national security including nuclear weapons. Right now we do not have that integration, in my view.
Why is that?(however that is dependent on how much the Army actually understands the limitations of our Air power.Till 2008 in my own personal experience many in the Army DO NOT to a dangerously delusional degree).
In light of the above, the PAF then has a basic statement of. Survive, Protect and Prevent vis-a-vis the eastern threat. Nowhere does it say attack.. Because unlike the IDF-AF( to whom some kurnails boast of being similar to due to the exploits of men like Saif-ul-Azam); The PAF does not face a generally incompetent enemy in air warfare and in terms of technological numbers is far outmatched. Thus, it has to be able to avoid getting caught into air combat with superior fighters and instead look to prevent the ground pounders from achieving its objectives.
How many times does one have to say it -- speak your mind - don't worry about who will and will not like it
Having the K-8 as a CAS jet may not be the best idea. Since the load it carries may not be adequate for the job at hand.
That being said, its payload may be increased with a larger engine and extra hardpoints.. but that requires investment for which there is little cash available.
Sirjee, tussi menoon marwaao gey!
We don't need a heavyweight for mopping up insurgents. Considering that some form of these operations is likely to continue well into the foreseeable future in our own territories, a suitably prepared K-8 would do splendidly. I would go further and suggest that a small fleet of Super Tucanos should be considered.
You need gunships for mopping up insurgents rather than armed K8's.
The gunships would be more effective, heavy gunships at that.
Who cares, you're Canadian. Religion perhaps is someplace you should avoid, but when it comes to institutions; by all means be scathing(but constructive and not repetitive) in your critique.
Yes, I realize that, but I think that Super Tucanos or K-8 are more realistically available to PAF. The gunships are the Army's domain.
Why is that?
One would assume that Kargil would have been a great wake up call for Pakistani Generals. They would have made an attempt to thoroughly understand airpower limitations in general and PAF's limitations in particular with almost mandatory great interest, see'ing that India manage what it did with aircrafts there.
Again.
This is surprising.
If there is one thing that Pakistan can be credited almost blindly is having a vast intelligence setup in India. Pakistan has very successfully used religion, cash and incentives of sorts create a well oiled intelligence gathering system.
How is it that the PA Generals would fail to notice that since 2000, India has started air exercises with half a dozen Western foreign airforces with a religious fervour.
There is one thing that India consistently lacked before then - deep exposure to the Western air forces..it was limited to Soviet demonstrations and Western theoretical strategies to create a hybrid.
And IAF has taken this exposure with open arms, constantly trying to learn and improve and forcing GoI to sanction more and more such exercises.
Infact it was the IAF which forced the GoI to give Singapore a permanent AFB in India..where the Singaporean Blk 52's are parked and IAF exercises and flies that plane with surprising regularity.
Whatever be the base before 2000, IAF has improved upon it leaps and bounds. A trained eye- the kind that Pakistan has - would be able to identify very important things.
How would PA have missed this? @Oscar
Yes, I realize that, but I think that Super Tucanos or K-8 are more realistically available to PAF. The gunships are the Army's domain.