Bratva
PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
![](/styles/default/xenforo/ranks/General.jpg)
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2010
- Messages
- 13,832
- Reaction score
- 67
- Country
- Location
Can you explain this?
Babur and Ra'ad providing deep strike capabilities with pin point accuracy without the loss of any valuable asset
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.
Can you explain this?
But what did you mean by the deep strike capability of the SPD forces?
SPD as such has no 'deep strike capability' of it's own. It only has the nuclear warhead. The deep strike transporter is with the ASFC and other such commands. Alot of people interchange the roles of ASFC and SPD. Although SPD is technically under ASFC< but it has nothing to do with the deployment and launch of the missiles as such.
A few moments before launch, an SPD officer comes and attaches the warhead. Before and after that moment, the missile and preparation is all done by ASFC units.
Just thought that this needed clearing up.
Now since we have ascertained the roles of ASFC and SPD, let's look at the commands of the three forces under the ASFC. PAF and PA have the well established nuclear commands, the naval command is very nascent. So the PAF can't really be secluded from the nuclear strike option.
Taliban did. to America n PakistanYou have the most important muscle power of all(nukes).
All the rest is just for show,who is ever going to attack a nuclear power.
I wouldnt worry about the military force,economy and stability is more important.
With all the minerals you have,you could be a G20 country within no time.
@Oscar Sir, before we talk about what the PAF should be, let us start by constructing the mission statement for PAF, as that will determine how to best provide for it.
I think that PAF should be geared towards a short term defensive posture with the ability to defend our domestic skies, as an adjunct to the deep strike capability provided by the SPD forces.
We are looking at policy debate then.. Im not sure if that will stay objective on this particular thread.
The current PAF mission seems to be focused more along those lines with the secondary objective to provide effective CAS to the Army in its operations.....................
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. Basically, it has to look to put a at least a 2:1 force in key areas where it can and aim to avoid getting into brawls with escorts and instead look to force strike aircraft like the Mirage ,Jaguar or later Rafale to engage them in Air combat.. in which they will be forced to jettison their weapons. So while it would mean losing one or two fighters in this goal.. it would also mean that the enemy achieved nothing at all either(nothing frustrates pilots and commanders more than having to abort a mission or not completing objectives). This also means that both sides will focus on playing to their key strengths(sounds very motivational but that is the reality) .
Now, lets look to the other threat/friend/ally/enemy/F-1,H-1B Visa/AID/CSF etc ..
Here, the PAF is facing a threat that literally wrote the book on air combat. This force is a hundred years ahead of the PAF in the words of the PAF. Their tactics in air combat even in small tactical groups is VERY well refined and designed specifically to handle countries like Pakistan. In such a scenario where there is the chance of direct attack by this force against the PAF the best option is to disperse and look to harass air operations while being whittled away. At best this means creating kill boxes in co-ordination with surface to air defences and hoping that they fall for it.
In WVR combat there may be a chance but that involves setting up ambushes using terrain(which it self is risky for pilots as terrain has a tendency to make pilots meet it).. or other imaginative techniques. In such a case, the PAF must focus on survival and survival alone. Hit as much as possible while trying best(even if it means hiding aircraft out in certain places in Balochistan for the rest of the conflict) to fight another day.
In a short term attack, such as that of OBL raid(even though it was apparently in cohesion).. the best option is to swarm the area and be ready for an exchange ratio of 1:5. However, that does have a chance of deterring any such operation from continuing.
Sir, I can agree with your description of the role with regards to India, but not the scenarios that you describe about any potential entanglement with US air power, as that is simply too lop-sided to even contemplate intelligently.
Having said that, even with India, we need to bolster our defensive posture to be able to provide CAS as needed and rely more on our nuclear deterrence to release up precious resources for use elsewhere. For example, what the PAF should add is something like Warthog/Frogfoot equivalents, and helicopters instead of more air superiority jets.
Well, here is the problem.. There is no clear policy on that.
When do nukes fly? what is the level of loss we are looking at to let nukes fly and literally end South Asian lives on a massive scale?
The Americans and the Russians have their nukes all ready to go. Which means that both sides know that at any point it could/would lead to nuclear Armageddon. In our case, our nukes roam separately from our missile for security and diplomatic reasons. So where does one order our nukes to be mated with the missiles.. what if our missiles are taken out. What if us mating the warheads sends signals which instead of being interpreted as a move to ceasefire land us being hit by a surprise massive strike?
A better solution would be to simply not make a statement that this criteria being met means that our nukes fly. Which also means that we get our nukes mated to the warheads at all times. Hence the enemy knows that if it presses the button we do the same within minutes of them doing so. Only then is a credible MAD threat maintained. In our case that is not so.
As for the USAF vs PAF scenario.. lopsided and doomed as it is. It is still debatable to the degree on what the PAF must do to minimize how much of it is destroyed. The Iraqis tried burying their planes.. I think we can do better.
As for any hypothetical USAF/PAF scenario, I will simply choose to not go there for fear of saying something that will not be liked at all by the membership here.
Are you here for being popular? Pardon me but that is very self serving. I don't look to make popular posts(if they are, then that is not my intention)just say what needs to be said so should you. Plus you are anonymous, you could be anybody, from anywhere.
Taliban?Taliban did. to America n Pakistan
![]()
Taliban?
How did they attack America and Pakistan?
Taliban is a country?
Taliban got attacked in Afghanistan,get your facts right.
Serious answers,no hollywood stories pls.
The ''Kargil war'' was ended by diplomacy(an armed conflict hard to call it a war)serious answers:
kargil indo-pak war 1999
Taliban was controlling afgan,like a govt back then, wen it attacked WTC.so u. can day afgan attacked America. I had at right fact. u failed to understand![]()
The ''Kargil'' war was ended by diplomacy(an armed conflict hard to call it a war)
No,the Taliban got attacked by NATO after the WTC(which was an terrorist action by Al-Caida)
![]()
seriously are u joking? kargil not a war??
you must be living in a cave then.PS its al-kaida![]()