What's new

Why A Medium / Heavy Strike Aircraft For Defense of Pakistan?

CriticalThought

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Oct 10, 2016
Messages
7,094
Reaction score
13
Country
Pakistan
Location
Australia
Simple question: Do they even exist? Do we have any plans to acquire any? Once air-superiority is achieved, bombers would be an effective way to counter advancing strike corps. I wonder if any attention has been given to this aspect?
 
Simple question: Do they even exist? Do we have any plans to acquire any? Once air-superiority is achieved, bombers would be an effective way to counter advancing strike corps. I wonder if any attention has been given to this aspect?
You have answered yourself ... Air superiority was never in doctrine of PAF and thats the reason we never invested in dual engine or heaver platform ... Our doctrine is Air defence and area denial ... Bombers no where fits in that doctrine ... Thats why a short leged light weight fighter JF-17 is being given so much importance by providing all the latest goodies ... whereas low turn around time kept intact ...
 
Last edited:
You have answered yourself ... Air superiority was never in doctrine of PAF and thats the reason we never invested in dual engine of heaver platform ... Our doctrine is Air defence and area denial ... Bombers no where fits in that doctrine ... Thats why a short leged light weight fighter JF-17 is being given so much importance by providing all the latest goodies ... whereas low turn around time kept intact ...

I think we need to expand this doctrine to take into account Afghanistan. Except if friendly Taliban hold ground next to our border, I see a high probability of war with Afghanistan. And since we do not want another 70 years/4 wars scenario, it would be prudent to take the next war as excuse and go in to hold territory which we conveniently convert into an administered area like Kashmir with its own government, open movement across borders etc. Would solve most of our terrorism problems as well.
 
I think we need to expand this doctrine to take into account Afghanistan. Except if friendly Taliban hold ground next to our border, I see a high probability of war with Afghanistan. And since we do not want another 70 years/4 wars scenario, it would be prudent to take the next war as excuse and go in to hold territory which we conveniently convert into an administered area like Kashmir with its own government, open movement across borders etc. Would solve most of our terrorism problems as well.
Forays into Afghanistan are best avoided. The Pushtuns who are in majority in Afghanistan have never allowed a foreigner to rule them. Resource constraints will almost certainly result i another Ilaqa e Ghair in Afghanistan which will become a hub for arms and drugs. The COs of units responsible for monitori g the border aee the most richest people in the army for a reason. This means we will never be able to control the influx of these products from across the border
Therefore the only suggestion is to limit entry points across the border and mine and fence the rest of the border. Leave them to fight and sortcthemselves out in Afghanistan and only offer humanitarian support.
A
 
Forays into Afghanistan are best avoided. The Pushtuns who are in majority in Afghanistan have never allowed a foreigner to rule them. Resource constraints will almost certainly result i another Ilaqa e Ghair in Afghanistan which will become a hub for arms and drugs. The COs of units responsible for monitori g the border aee the most richest people in the army for a reason. This means we will never be able to control the influx of these products from across the border
Therefore the only suggestion is to limit entry points across the border and mine and fence the rest of the border. Leave them to fight and sortcthemselves out in Afghanistan and only offer humanitarian support.
A

Sir the Afghans are going to be used by one party or the other. We need to make sure the influence of Indian backed Afghans is as far away from our borders as possible.

The drug trade in Afghanistan has been curtailed previously. It took just one order from Mullah Umar to do so.

We are in a situation where the best defence is a preemptive offensive. If we believe India will not involve us in another war in Afghanistan, we are only deluding ourselves. As a matter of fact, India can make a fine example out of us of using the Hammer and Anvil approach. It will be sweet irony in the eyes of the Americans with whom Musharraf used to discuss 'Hammer and Anvil' over afternoon tea.

Our strategic asset is our Pashtun population here. We do not attack in order to conquer. We attack to hand over rule to the Pashtuns, and help in uniting the Pashtuns across the border. We then help them build an Islamic government, and an army and proper infrastructure.

The traitor Musharraf has given away our strategic advantage. We need to claim it back one way or the other.
 
Sir the Afghans are going to be used by one party or the other. We need to make sure the influence of Indian backed Afghans is as far away from our borders as possible.

The drug trade in Afghanistan has been curtailed previously. It took just one order from Mullah Umar to do so.

We are in a situation where the best defence is a preemptive offensive. If we believe India will not involve us in another war in Afghanistan, we are only deluding ourselves. As a matter of fact, India can make a fine example out of us of using the Hammer and Anvil approach. It will be sweet irony in the eyes of the Americans with whom Musharraf used to discuss 'Hammer and Anvil' over afternoon tea.

Our strategic asset is our Pashtun population here. We do not attack in order to conquer. We attack to hand over rule to the Pashtuns, and help in uniting the Pashtuns across the border. We then help them build an Islamic government, and an army and proper infrastructure.

The traitor Musharraf has given away our strategic advantage. We need to claim it back one way or the other.
Brother we can see the picture in that way as well however, the strategic gain we achieved by supporting taliban are far lesser than overall destruction of our society, culture and security in the form of kalashanov culture, terrorism, bomb blast, drugs, smuggling and proxy wars.

We need to understand that back at the time of cold days we could have elect semi-neutral by keeping enough relationship with Russia that not to motivate them to attack here while keeping enough incentives for west to keep investing our economy while being a mixed economy ...

We should learn now from China that best way to proper and develop yourself is not preemptive strike but to manage confilcts diploatically and have deterrents like nuclear weapons, stong border control and internal security ...

With nuclear weapons in our hand risk of external attack is minimum unless we are very weak from inside through terrorist and proxies ... India wants us to engage with Afghanistan and thats why they keep on putting bones in front of its dog ashraf ghanin to bark at us but we should act smartly to not to act but at the same time keep enough pressure both at India and Afghanistan to not to humiliate us publically which they are doing openly ...


On the topic of bombers,, first requirement is to establish a strong force of attack aircraft both for land and sea and then to invest on naval assets to safe coastal region as well as sea line of communication then we can go for offensive platform like bombers ... even in distant future I dont see happening that ...
 
Brother we can see the picture in that way as well however, the strategic gain we achieved by supporting taliban are far lesser than overall destruction of our society, culture and security in the form of kalashanov culture, terrorism, bomb blast, drugs, smuggling and proxy wars.

We need to understand that back at the time of cold days we could have elect semi-neutral by keeping enough relationship with Russia that not to motivate them to attack here while keeping enough incentives for west to keep investing our economy while being a mixed economy ...

We should learn now from China that best way to proper and develop yourself is not preemptive strike but to manage confilcts diploatically and have deterrents like nuclear weapons, stong border control and internal security ...

With nuclear weapons in our hand risk of external attack is minimum unless we are very weak from inside through terrorist and proxies ... India wants us to engage with Afghanistan and thats why they keep on putting bones in front of its dog ashraf ghanin to bark at us but we should act smartly to not to act but at the same time keep enough pressure both at India and Afghanistan to not to humiliate us publically which they are doing openly ...


On the topic of bombers,, first requirement is to establish a strong force of attack aircraft both for land and sea and then to invest on naval assets to safe coastal region as well as sea line of communication then we can go for offensive platform like bombers ... even in distant future I dont see happening that ...

Just for the record, I am not proposing starting a war, I am proposing using the next war as an excuse. Depending on India's appetite for playing Nuclear Roulette with us, the Hammer and Anvil may never materialize, but a war with Afghanistan is simply writing on the wall at this point. I guess my proposal for attack and hold will get vindicated then. Or, if we adopt a declared posture to attack and hold, the war may never happen, may being the operative word since the Afghans don't have much to lose.

Air superiority over Afghanistan is a settled question.

So, about those bombers...
 
Just for the record, I am not proposing starting a war, I am proposing using the next war as an excuse. Depending on India's appetite for playing Nuclear Roulette with us, the Hammer and Anvil may never materialize, but a war with Afghanistan is simply writing on the wall at this point. I guess my proposal for attack and hold will get vindicated then. Or, if we adopt a declared posture to attack and hold, the war may never happen, may being the operative word since the Afghans don't have much to lose.

Air superiority over Afghanistan is a settled question.

So, about those bombers...

Brother we need to get out of this pre-emptive strike mentality of US ... We can have our western border secure by having good relationship with Afhanistan rather than using fare factor ... Lets get out of mess in Afghanistan and tackle things diplomatically ... like after so much randi rona of do more by US,,, Pakistan has moved on with China and Russia ... a great move ... now US policy in Afghanistan is meaningless without we onbaord ...
 
Brother we need to get out of this pre-emptive strike mentality of US ... We can have our western border secure by having good relationship with Afhanistan rather than using fare factor ... Lets get out of mess in Afghanistan and tackle things diplomatically ... like after so much randi rona of do more by US,,, Pakistan has moved on with China and Russia ... a great move ... now US policy in Afghanistan is meaningless without we onbaord ...

Ignoring a material threat on our border and singing the lullaby of diplomacy would amount to criminal negligence. We may have sided with China and Russia, but in the end we will need to fight our own war, and protect our own interests. We need to get out of an ostrich like mentality and take the bull by its horns.
 
PAF have F-16s can be configured as bomb trucks, dedicated CAS and rotary wing aircraft can also do your bombing for you.

Bombers are a relic of the past anyway, only the big powers still maintain long range strategic bombers, the B-2 is occasionally flown around very publicly but just for military posturing, expensive stuff.
 
Ignoring a material threat on our border and singing the lullaby of diplomacy would amount to criminal negligence. We may have sided with China and Russia, but in the end we will need to fight our own war, and protect our own interests. We need to get out of an ostrich like mentality and take the bull by its horns.
Why are you assuming that only expensive goodies has the edge ... USA has all the expnsive goodies, bombers, armed drones, fighter aircraft but failed miserably in Afghanistan ...

If time came we have more than enough resources to cater Afghanistan but bombers are not required in any case as of now ....
 
Why are you assuming that only expensive goodies has the edge ... USA has all the expnsive goodies, bombers, armed drones, fighter aircraft but failed miserably in Afghanistan ...

If time came we have more than enough resources to cater Afghanistan but bombers are not required in any case as of now ....

That's fair enough. Everything has a time and rationale. We definitely don't have the budget to go on a shopping spree like some others. But, if we are in agreement that bombers can be useful in any theoretical scenario, can we please discuss the pros and cons of the various bomber options that may be available to us? Note I am not an expert in this area and I will myself learn a lot from it. Thanks.
 
A wrong perception and doctrine of PAF, back in 60s we do have bombers and as a preemptive measures PAF raided Indian airfields and destroy many aircraft on ground using US supplied bombers.

In those days fighter aircraft were much less expensive ... radar coverage was negligible ... In current scenario to have an air superiority on adversory like india is near to impossible ,,, even china could not have it untill arrival of J-20 ...

I also want to have raptor like aircraft in my arsenal but the fact of the day is we can't even have 1 to 1 match of f-16 and jf-17 against indias mki, mirrage and mig 29 whereas rafael is technoligically ahead of anything we had ....

doctrines are made as per available budgets ....
 
A wrong perception and doctrine of PAF, back in 60s we do have bombers and as a preemptive measures PAF raided Indian airfields and destroy many aircraft on ground using US supplied bombers.

Situation is totally changed now.PAF and IAF don't have dedicated advanced bombers.That role is being played with multlirole planes such as Su 30, F 16
 
Simple question: Do they even exist? Do we have any plans to acquire any? Once air-superiority is achieved, bombers would be an effective way to counter advancing strike corps. I wonder if any attention has been given to this aspect?
True bomber r only in Afghanistan use by USA even in Vietnam war USA b52 suffered heavy losses and why buy one long range bomber when a refueler can turn an entire squadron into bomber even power like France and UK follows same path and Russian and Chinese bomber capabilities r questionable

Simple question: Do they even exist? Do we have any plans to acquire any? Once air-superiority is achieved, bombers would be an effective way to counter advancing strike corps. I wonder if any attention has been given to this aspect?
In first Iraq war half of bombing campaigns were done by f16 and same was in Serbia unless u. Have stealh bomber useless in real war against strong for better to focus on multi stealth plane with range extension using air tanker
 
Back
Top Bottom