What's new

When a single strike reduced IAF by 30%

Cant say anything about 71 as it was a decisive indian victory however the rest all ended with ceasefires and among them 65 is unique and i would credit pakistan of having the upper hand at the end
Reasons:
1. Indian aim: take control of lahore and immediately win the war
Pakistani aim: defend lahore
Result: pakistan successfully defended lahore


2. Indian aim: take control of sialkot to have the upper hand in kashmir side and make pakistan surrender
Pakistani aim: defend sialkot
Result: sialkot successfully defended with heroics by pak jawans unmatched eg lying down infront of indian tanks and blowing them
History Fail, Pakistan launched the offensive in operation Gibraltor began as localised infitration to take kashmir, and as usual threat perception of pakistani army planners was completely wrong. What was planned to be a locally contained skirmish was turned into a all out war with India knocking on pakistani doors in lahore. Taking Lahore was never an Indian objective.

1965 was a pakistani offensive, where Pakistan tried to attack and defeat India, where it ended up of defending it's own territory... if that is a victory i wish pakistan many such victories!!

:lol: won the war? You mean the war that Pakistan launched to capture Kashmir and declared itself as victorious by successfully defending lahore ?
I wish them many such successes
 
History Fail, Pakistan launched the offensive in operation Gibraltor began as localised infitration to take kashmir, and as usual threat perception of pakistani army planners was completely wrong. What was planned to be a locally contained skirmish was turned into a all out war with India knocking on pakistani doors in lahore. Taking Lahore was never an Indian objective.

1965 was a pakistani offensive, where Pakistan tried to attack and defeat India, where it ended up of defending it's own territory... if that is a victory i wish pakistan many such victories!!

Well i ask you who started the conventional war? The international border was crossed by india and that to late at night ie against all international laws and taking lahore was an objective to negotiate for azad kashmir or at max making us accept loc as the international border
 
Well i ask you who started the conventional war? The international border was crossed by india and that to late at night ie against all international laws and taking lahore was an objective to negotiate for azad kashmir or at max making us accept loc as the international border
Well by Operation Gibraltor, you were in clear violation of the UNSC Resolution on kashmir, and thus initiated the conventional war. Once attacked by foreign aggression we reserve the right to retaliate in any form or measure deemed fit....
 
Well i ask you who started the conventional war? The international border was crossed by india and that to late at night ie against all international laws and taking lahore was an objective to negotiate for azad kashmir or at max making us accept loc as the international border
what do you mean conventional war? The 25000 Pakistani soldiers advancing into Kashmir was not an act of war ? That too without Uniform ? Talk about being against International laws. Unfortunately Pakistani strategy against India has always been thru the path of terrorism (though it was not called such in those days). The same was tried in Kargil when Pakistan sent in its soldiers and then refused to acknowledge them as such and allowed them to be slaughtered without any backup support. Declared or not, both were equally an act of war. In both cases, Pakistan tried to hide behind excuses by disowning its soldiers and their dead bodies. But the truth anyway came out.
 
Cant say anything about 71 as it was a decisive indian victory however the rest all ended with ceasefires and among them 65 is unique and i would credit pakistan of having the upper hand at the end
Reasons:
1. Indian aim: take control of lahore and immediately win the war
Pakistani aim: defend lahore
Result: pakistan successfully defended lahore

2. Indian aim: take control of sialkot to have the upper hand in kashmir side and make pakistan surrender
Pakistani aim: defend sialkot
Result: sialkot successfully defended with heroics by pak jawans unmatched eg lying down infront of indian tanks and blowing them

3. Indian aim: take kasur so have the upper hand in the negotiations
Pakistani aim: defend kasur
Result: kasur successfully defended

Historians and so called neutral sources put india ahead by facts like india reached the outskirts of lahore and sialkot but the fact is lahore is a couple of km from the border and still india couldnt take it and also india was on the offence and we were on the defence and even with that we still took 540 sq miles of indian territory

4. Air war decisive pakistan victory even with indian claims
Ind claims: pak planes lost: 43
Ind planes lost: 75
Pak claims: pak planes lost: 18
Ind planes lost: 110

Pakistan won
Pakistan zindabad


Indian aim was to counter operations of Pakistani Military in Kashmir with offense in Punjab sector. That's all, which India did. The message was clear, don't look at Kashmir, otherwise, Punjab will be gone out of Pakistan's hand and consecutively Kashmir also. As operation Gibraltar and grand slam failed brutally.
 
Last edited:
Operation ‘Grand Slam’ was launched in the early hours of 1st September 1965. Audacious as the plan was, it took the Indians by complete surprise. A Pak Army force consisting of an infantry division and two armoured regiments, along with extensive artillery support, started the attack on Indian positions. Outnumbered and out-gunned, Brig Man Mohan Singh, Commander 191 Infantry Brigade, was faced with a critical situation and he frantically called for air support. By the time the request got an ultimate approval from the Ministry of Defence in Delhi, it was late in the afternoon.

Pathankot was the nearest airbase in the zone of conflict. It housed three squadrons including two with Mystère IVs – Nos 3 and 31 – and one with Vampires – No 45. Under command of an enthusiastic and energetic Sqn Ldr Sudesh K Dahar, No 45 Sqn had recently moved from Pune in anticipation of the hostilities. The Vampires had been armed and waiting on the tarmac since morning. Three missions had been planned and on receipt of orders, the first formation of four aircraft took off at 1650 hrs (PST) with Dahar leading.

The grim situation on the ground found the Vampires at work immediately. Much has been made of their success by the IAF, but Maj Gen G S Sandhu was not impressed; in his book History of Indian Cavalry, he recounts how the first Vampire strike of four “leisurely proceeded to destroy three AMX-13 tanks of India’s own 20 Lancers, plus the only recovery vehicle and the only ammunition vehicle available during this hard-pressed fight. The second flight attacked Indian infantry and gun positions, blowing up several ammunition vehicles.” 3 Mahar is also said to have shared the ignominy at the hands of IAF. Any pretension as to the success of Dahar’s mission was quashed when Flt Lt S V Pathak was hit by ground fire1. He however managed to stagger across to friendly territory before carrying out a remarkable bail-out, as the early vintage Vampires were not equipped with ejection seats.

At Sargodha, the main PAF airbase, Air Defence Alert duties were being shared by different F-86 Sabre squadrons. The exuberance and excitement of the pilots was exemplified by nobody better than Flt Lt Imtiaz A Bhatti of No 15 Sqn who, having completed his 0400-1200 hrs shift, pleaded to stay on for the second half, hoping to get an opportunity of flying a coveted combat sortie. With him on alert was PAF’s highly regarded and popular Sqn Ldr Sarfaraz Ahmad Rafiqui, the Squadron Commander of No 5 Sqn. Rafiqui’s happy-go-lucky style belied a thoroughly sound professional standing amongst PAF’s elite group of pilots. A gifted flier, he had bagged the ‘Atcherly Trophy’ for the Best Pilot as a cadet in the Flying College at Risalpur. He continued with a string of above average reports in his Advanced Flying Course as well as the Fighter Weapons Instructors’ Course, both done in USA. He again showed his prowess as a superb fighter pilot by topping the course at PAF’s Fighter Leaders’ School. After yet another course at RAF’s prestigious Fighter Combat School, he ended up piling a unique assortment of highly rated qualifications that served him (and the PAF) in good stead. As an exchange pilot in UK, he flew Hunters for two years. His credentials looked good; it remained to be seen if he was equally impressive in actual combat.

As the pilots ‘scrambled’ in response to the buzz on Sargodha hot line shortly before 1700 hrs (PST), it seemed certain that Rafiqui’s flair and Bhatti’s fervour would come together in a lethal combination. Within minutes, the Sabres took-off and were directed by Sakesar radar to head 060º and climb to an altitude of 20’000 ft or ‘Angels 20’, in radar jargon. Reaching the area, the radar controller set them up in a racetrack pattern in Sialkot-Chamb direction, ten miles from the border. It wasn’t long before they were ‘vectored’ to Chamb, where the second formation of four Vampires led by Flt Lt A K Bhagwagar was busy in the fray. The Sabres descended and started a visual search not only for the attacking aircraft, but also for the PAF C-in-C who was reported to be making an on-site assessment of the battle in a T-37. To say that consequences of fratricide would have been grave would be an under-statement!


Bhatti was the first to spot two Vampires crossing 3-4,000 ft underneath and the sooner he informed his leader, Rafiqui immediately acknowledged, “Contact, going for them.” Bhatti set about clearing tails while Rafiqui stalked his prey. Just then, Bhatti spotted two more aircraft a mile away, which he mistook for Canberras in the glare of the low evening sun; in fact these were Vampires from Dahar’s formation on the way out after completing their mission. As Bhatti was about to seek his leader’s permission to go for the pair, he saw another two Vampires trying to get behind Rafiqui. Almost instinctively, Bhatti broke off, positioned behind these two and in no time had one of them in his gunsight; but before Bhatti could shoot, he had to have Rafiqui out of his line of fire.

Rafiqui meanwhile, had despatched one of the Vampires with a blazing volley from the lethal 0.5” Browning six-shooter (actually six guns) and was chasing the other. At this stage, the Vampire on whom Bhatti had trained his guns was closing in on Rafiqui and the situation was getting perilous. “Break left,” yelled Bhatti, but Rafiqui managed to make short work of the second one before reacting just in time. Rafiqui then readjusted on the wing of Bhatti who got busy with his quarry. While Rafiqui cleared tails, Bhatti did an equally fast trigger job. One Vampire nosed over into the ground, which was not too far below; the other, smoking and badly damaged, ducked into the trees. It’s bewildered pilot, Flg Off Sondhi staggered back to tell the horrifying tale. The less fortunate Flt Lts A K Bhagwagar, V M Joshi and S Bharadwaj went down with their Vampires in full view of the horrified Indian troops.


Also watching the dogfight was Pakistani Brig Amjad A K Choudhry, Commander Corps Artillery. He reminisced in his book September ’65 – Before and After, “When we saw the bombers from our command post, we were apprehensive because our tanks and infantry surrounding Chamb were in the open, in close formations and were very vulnerable to air attack. The bombers went into action and came low to drop their bombs. Before they could do much damage, there was a flash in the air on top of these bombers and before we could comprehend what had happened, the Indian bombers came down in three columns of smoke.” Suggestion of Divine intervention aside, Choudhry correctly mentions the number of Vampires that fell in the dogfight, an issue that has been mired in some confusion over the years.

Back at Pathankot, the first three Vampires landed, then a singleton came in and finally, another four Vampires landed. Those on the ground thought that the lone Vampire was actually a straggler from the first formation, the four Vampires were of the second formation and, four more were yet to come. When Flt Lt Farokh J Mehta and his wingmen removed their oxygen masks, the Engineering Officer was shocked to discover that three of the second formation were missing. “He had this horrified look on his face,” Mehta recollected. Providentially, Mehta had changed places with Bhagwagar on the latter’s request, being the more experienced to lead the last formation in poor lighting conditions. He ruefully remembered how a badly shaken Sondhi narrated details of the dogfight to the crest-fallen squadron mates.

When Air Marshal M Nur Khan, who had landed at Sargodha after his recce sortie, summoned Rafiqui and Bhatti, nobody was sure if it was for a dressing down for starting an air war. Shoot-to-kill orders had not yet been issued and Rafiqui felt somewhat apprehensive, though he re-assured Bhatti that he alone would take the flak from the C-in-C. “Well done my boys,” was the reply from the man who was never in doubt about how the PAF should have responded.

This single engagement resulted in a windfall of strategic dimensions for the PAF. The shocked and demoralised IAF immediately withdrew about 80 Vampires, together with over 50 Ouragons, from front-line service.

The IAF was effectively reduced in combat strength by nearly 30% in one deadly stroke, thanks to Rafiqui and Bhatti’s marksmanship. Both were awarded a Sitara-i-Jur’at each. As for Sqn Ldr Dahar, he made up for his dampened enthusiasm with a display of considerable fortitude; it earned him a consolation Vir Chakra.

The+first+combat.jpg

30% reduced in single strike, only Chuck Norris can do that. :laugh:
 
Neutral assessments

There have been several neutral assessments of the losses incurred by both India and Pakistan during the war.

Most of these assessments agree that India had the upper hand over Pakistan when ceasefire was declared.

Some of the neutral assessments are mentioned below —

  • According to the Library of Congress Country Studies conducted by the Federal Research Division of the United States –

The war was militarily inconclusive; each side held prisoners and some territory belonging to the other. Losses were relatively heavy—on the Pakistani side, twenty aircraft, 200 tanks, and 3,800 troops. Pakistan's army had been able to withstand Indian pressure, but a continuation of the fighting would only have led to further losses and ultimate defeat for Pakistan. Most Pakistanis, schooled in the belief of their own martial prowess, refused to accept the possibility of their country's military defeat by "Hindu India" and were, instead, quick to blame their failure to attain their military aims on what they considered to be the ineptitude of Ayub Khan and his government.

  • TIME magazine reported that India held 690 mi2 of Pakistan territory while Pakistan held 250 mi2 of Indian territory in Kashmir and Rajasthan. Additionally, Pakistan had lost almost half its armour temporarily. The article further elaborates,

Severely mauled by the larger Indian armed forces, Pakistan could continue the fight only by teaming up with Red China and turning its back on the U.N.

  • Devin T. Hagerty wrote in his book "South Asia in world politics" –

The invading Indian forces outfought their Pakistani counterparts and halted their attack on the outskirts of Lahore, Pakistan's second-largest city. By the time United Nations intervened on September 22, Pakistan had suffered a clear defeat.

  • In his book "National identity and geopolitical visions", Gertjan Dijkink writes –

The superior Indian forces, however, won a decisive victory and the army could have even marched on into Pakistani territory had external pressure not forced both combatants to cease their war efforts.

  • An excerpt from Stanley Wolpert's India, summarizing the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965,

In three weeks the second Indo-Pak War ended in what appeared to be a draw when the embargo placed by Washington on U.S. ammunition and replacements for both armies forced cessation of conflict before either side won a clear victory. India, however, was in a position to inflict grave damage to, if not capture, Pakistan's capital of the Punjab when the cease-fire was called, and controlled Kashmir's strategic Uri-Poonch bulge, much to Ayub's chagrin.

  • In his book titled The greater game: India's race with destiny and China, David Van Praagh wrote –

India won the war. It gained 1,840 km2 (710 sq mi) of Pakistani territory: 640 km2 (250 sq mi) in Azad Kashmir, Pakistan's portion of the state; 460 km2 (180 sq mi) of the Sailkot sector; 380 km2 (150 sq mi) far to the south of Sindh; and most critical, 360 km2 (140 sq mi) on the Lahore front. Pakistan took 540 km2 (210 sq mi) of Indian territory: 490 km2 (190 sq mi) in the Chhamb sector and 50 km2 (19 sq mi) around Khem Karan.

  • Dennis Kux's "India and the United States estranged democracies" also provides a summary of the war,

Although both sides lost heavily in men and material, and neither gained a decisive military advantage, India had the better of the war. New Delhi achieved its basic goal of thwarting Pakistan's attempt to seize Kashmir by force. Pakistan gained nothing from a conflict which it had instigated.

  • BBC reported that the war served game changer in Pakistani politics,

The defeat in the 1965 war led to the army's invincibility being challenged by an increasingly vocal opposition. This became a surge after his protege, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, deserted him and established the Pakistan People's Party.

  • "A region in turmoil: South Asian conflicts since 1947" by Robert Johnson mentions –

India's strategic aims were modest – it aimed to deny Pakistani Army victory, although it ended up in possession of 720 square miles (1,900 km2) of Pakistani territory for the loss of just 220 square miles (570 km2) of its own

  • An excerpt from William M. Carpenter and David G. Wiencek's "Asian security handbook: terrorism and the new security environment"[80] –

A brief but furious 1965 war with India began with a covert Pakistani thrust across the Kashmiri cease-fire line and ended up with the city of Lahore threatened with encirclement by Indian Army. Another UN-sponsored cease-fire left borders unchanged, but Pakistan's vulnerability had again been exposed.

  • English historian John Keay's "India: A History" provides a summary of the 1965 war –

The 1965 Indo-Pak war lasted barely a month. Pakistan made gains in the Rajasthan desert but its main push against India's Jammu-Srinagar road link was repulsed and Indian tanks advanced to within a sight of Lahore. Both sides claimed victory but India had most to celebrate.

  • Uk Heo and Shale Asher Horowitz write in their book "Conflict in Asia: Korea, China-Taiwan, and India-Pakistan" –

Again India appeared, logistically at least, to be in a superior position but neither side was able to mobilize enough strength to gain a decisive victory.

  • In its October 1965 issue, the TIME magazine quoted a Western official assessing the consequences of the war —

Now it's apparent to everybody that India is going to emerge as an Asian power in its own right.

  • In his book "War in the modern world since 1815", noted war historian Jeremy Black said that —

though Pakistan "lost heavily" during the 1965 war, India's hasty decision to call for negotiations prevented further considerable damage to the Pakistan Armed Forces. He elaborates India's chief of army staff urged negotiations on the ground that they were running out ammunition and their number of tanks had become seriously depleted. In fact, the army had used less than 15% of its ammunition compared to Pakistan, which had consumed closer to 80 percent and India had double the number of serviceable tanks.

  • In his book "Mainsprings of Indian and Pakistani foreign policies", S.M. Burke writes —

After the Indo-Pakistani war of 1965 the balance of military power had decisively shifted in favor of India. Pakistan had found it difficult to replace the heavy equipment lost during that conflict while her adversary, despite her economic and political problems, had been determinedly building up her strength.

  • Rasul Bux Rais, a Pakistani political analyst wrote] –

The 1965 war with India proved that Pakistan could neither break the formidable Indian defenses in a blitzkrieg fashion nor could she sustain an all-out conflict for long.


PWNED:laughcry:
 
I think reduce the IAF by a single strike by 50% is possible.

I have to say, I am a little angry about India.

If India can not see MH370, a boeing 777, I mean, is there any military plane has bigger RCS? Ruin the whole IAF by one strick is not mission impossible.

Your profile picture says a lot about your thoughts running your brain.
 
History Fail, Pakistan launched the offensive in operation Gibraltor began as localised infitration to take kashmir, and as usual threat perception of pakistani army planners was completely wrong. What was planned to be a locally contained skirmish was turned into a all out war with India knocking on pakistani doors in lahore. Taking Lahore was never an Indian objective.

1965 was a pakistani offensive, where Pakistan tried to attack and defeat India, where it ended up of defending it's own territory... if that is a victory i wish pakistan many such victories!!


I wish them many such successes


Why would one want too loose a holiday????
 
people here need to learn difference between battle and war.....evry tom windy nd harry is poping with tank battle news but no one has a proof of war victory
happy defence day anyways :D

After three weeks of warfare both countries agreed to a UN-sponsored ceasefire.
In January 1966 they met at Tashkent and signed a declaration agreeing to resolve their dispute by peaceful means. They also agreed to withdraw to their pre-August positions.

It meant Pakistan retained control of the northern third of the state while India held the larger, southern and eastern section.

BBC ON THIS DAY | 6 | 1965: Indian Army invades W Pakistan
 
Last edited:
For a nation that took on valiantly a much larger foe, i would say it's well deserved. We do not back down from challenge. We do not let bullies in the region define our interests. That's how it has been and that's how it will remain.

We like to poke the big bear, without fear and intimidation.

I wonder if the same bigger foe can do that to someone it's own size, if not someone much bigger.

The same big foe has to bring India vs Pakistan in every thread, every news journalism etc to 'Feel better'

So for us it might be a feel good week or month, for you it's feel good 24/7

Feel good or shame?

Hah!

Not valiantly but foolishly. Pak didn't succeed in any of its objectives. It was a coward attack by Pak without declaring the war formally and it was the failure of intelligence from Indian side also, but still I'm glade that India managed to cut the aggressor's nose with the blunt knife.
 
Interestingly Pakistan in its whole history, has never attacked India openly.

  • 1947 - terrorist attack by sending tribals in to Kashmir (though technically, it was not an attack on India). Objectives partially met
  • 1965 - again sending non uniformed terrorists in to Kashmir. The Kashmiri citizens only busted the sham and informed IA. Mission failed and PA had to in turn defend Lahore from getting captured by India
  • 1998 - Again non uniformed terrorists sent to capture the Indian territory, who later turned out to be Pakistani soldiers. Pakistan's objective of cutting of Siachen and doing the land grab post a cease fire stalemate failed at the cost of 4000+ Pakistani men (Terrorists and soldiers as per admission of Pakistani Prime Minister of the time). Not only that, Internationally, severe diplomatic blowback. and start of India - USA relationship.

India on the other hand has initiated hostilities only once, in 1971. And we all know how that went ;)
 
Pakistan sends in terrorists and paratroopers into Kashmir to capture it. Starts 1965 war.

Due to local tip off, India finds out and takes care of the that. Pakistan launches a legit massive assault on Kashmir starting a full scale war.

India sends a counter assault to relieve pressure on Kashmir. Pakistan falls back from Kashmir all together and defends Punjab's capital.

Pakistan didnt get Kashmir and India took more territory, but Pakistan for the most part defends Punjab, somehow Pakistan "won" this war.:smart:


On the other hand, Pakistan sends air raids to relieve pressure on East Pakistan starting full scale war. (1971)

But India completes the objective of liberating East Pakistan.

If 65 never happened, E. Pakistan might still be E. Pakistan.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom