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

[SQ8]

@WebMaster Need to have MK's post headline this thread and discussion.. That will allow for a good healthy content rather than just a new discussion for a question asked by another member.

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

If we read about the major battles in history---the results would show how the winner manipulated its forces thru the enemy flanks---if the strikes hurt the flanks bad---the center would begin to crumble---because it cannot hold its position when its sides are cut open---.

Julius Ceasar was once fighting a war against a very strong german tribe---he was being crushed on the front face to face conflict---to survive and win---he chose the enemy's weakest link---its baggage wagons.

He turned a rank of his military on the german tribe's baggage train---which included the families of the warriors---so when the german tribal army saw their womenfolk and children massacred---they broke rank to protect their families---thus giving Ceasar the opportunity to strike hard and deep in the center---make a breakthru and crush the enemy---.

If he would not have done that---nobody would know who Julius Ceasar was---because he would have died in the battle field that day---.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

A question being discussed is that why does Pakistan not have medium to heavy strike aircraft when it is facing an enemy 5 times its size---.

Why are some of the aircraft in the inventory of the Paf not proportionately similar in size and performance to those of the enemy aircraft---?

Why are there no aircraft in Paf's inventory matching the enemy's tier 1 aircraft?

Why is it that the enemy that is 5 times larger---has tier 1 aircraft that are carrying a load of 5 times more BVR missiles than our tier aicraft---is more mobile and nimble---carries a stronger and more powerful radar and yet the Paf is trying to make believe that their little birdie will devour the enemy's massive bird of prey.

50 years ago--a good strike aircraft could carry 5000 lbs---now the similar aircraft in service carries around 20000 + lbs of weapons load---.

In the past---where the aircraft had dedicated roles---today there are aircraft that perform their duties in multiple specialized roles according to the need.

In the past where you needed to drop 50000 lbs to do the damage---today---you can do it with a 1000---2000 lb weapon---.

If we look at pakistan's geography in relation to its primary enemy----it is very unique---. From the frontal position---it makes it impossible for deep strike missions, but when taking into consideration the flanks---the one bordering the water is the most deadly and do the worst damage to the enemy.

The enemy has a long long flank open on the sea / ocean front---which means that every city on that front is vulnerable to standoff weapons strike---which also means that due to open space available to Paf---the enemy will have to move a larger number of its assets to protect a vaster number of assets from its primary face to face position from the main border.

Incidently---the enemy also have limited resources to protect all its assets in a strong and prudent manner for its seaside cities down the coast line.

So---if we can do the similar damage with a 2000 lb weapon---then why is there a need for a heavy strike aircraft.

The reason being---that as the heavy aircraft can fly farther with a heavier load---it can hit EXTREMELY IMPORTANT targets that have never felt any threat of war before---. These targets are the very wealthy and affluent areas that may dictate and determine the time of war---but are in no way ready to take the casualties of war---.

A strike in these areas would create massive panic and chaos---the fear of death and destruction will create uncertainty amongst the masses---tactical strikes at crucial points will bring the metropolis city life to a stand still---and when a metropolis city life comes to a stand still---it means that its death bell has been rung---.

The first to leave are the rich with their money---when rushing to exit in emergency---it creates opportunities for accidents---accidents create traffic stoppage---traffic stoppage stops emergency operations---stoppage and lack of of emergency operations creates unrest in the area---and the creation of unrest in the area is what the primary purpose of the deep strike mission.

This unrest will turn into small street fight---that will turn into larger street fights---small fires will result and will turn into larger fires---and as the emergency units are bogged down due to stoppage of traffic---each area will become the center of chaos and anarchy---and this will spread like wild fire thru out the metropolis---.

@Khafee @Indus Falcon @war&peace

That sound like planning for committing war crimes...
Attacking purely civilian targets is banned.
Discussing how to do it on a military forum is a kind of proof that any such attacks are not mistakes.

 

[Khafee]

PAF & PN have an inherent need for heavy strike aircrafts, but financial issues held them back. Now that PAF has gotten into the real estate business, it will be interesting to see how they will spend this money.

Secondly, my understanding is that PA did not feel they required them, and having BM &CM capability was enough. To ignore PA's say in PAF's purchases would be naive at best.

You once said "having something out in the open is sometimes deterrent enough for the enemy." In the Indo-Pak context I think this very much holds true. Vajpayee's statement before and after Pakistan's nuclear tests are testament to that.

At this crucial juncture in time, where nations are going nuts, its is important that proper steps be taken ASAP, in order to prevent misadventures. Time and again the Pakistani establishment has hidden it's true capabilities, they should go on the offensive and let their enemy know what they are truly capable of.

Just two examples:

1) The ability to launch SLCM's - which has resulted in the latest sanctions. It would have been better IMO that they would have come out and said so. Even without the public announcement they got sanctioned, so what was the point of hiding it?

2) Long Range Twins - No longer a luxury, but a necessity. Not only for offensive capabilities but defensive as well. The ability to loiter, and wait in your own airspace, without the need of IFR, is something that no one can deny.

 

[MastanKhan]

That sound like planning for committing war crimes...
Attacking purely civilian targets is banned.
Discussing how to do it on a military forum is a kind of proof that any such attacks are not mistakes.

Hi,

Cardinal---you are mistaken again---it is not targeting civilian targets---. The civilians will be a casualty of their own positioning---living farther away from war---they will not be ready for the damage of war---like a bridge and roadways destroyed---massive explosions---burning fuel dumps---destruction of electric supply---.

So---nowhere the civilians are targeted---.

Again---why use your assets to attack the enemy flanks---because of our geography---our main border is face to face---and with a larger enemy presence---it would be very difficult to hold the enemy across the border---.

With deep strike capability of the Paf on the flanks---the enemy will be forced to move its many a major assets from the main source of attack and divert its resources to protect its more vulnerable areas---.

Another major effect of the strikes on the flanks would be the overall moral of the enemy fighting force---wher many of them came to fight---certain that their hometown would be very far away from war and nothing would happen---and once the news came about of heavy strikes and resulting chaos---many a soldier will turn rank and run away to protect their homes---.

The result of deep strikes would be like the California wildfires---or the australian bush fires----that once started would create a massive amount of damage to man---property and nature---.

The economy of the enemy heavily depends on foreign investments---and as foreign investments bring massive amount of foreign exchange into the country that is in turn used to buy massive weapons to destroy pakistan----that in turn means that foreign investments are taking part in the destruction of pakistan---thus their assets also become the targets of opportunity as well---they become as legitimate military targets---.

The reader must understand---that the presence of a heavy strike aircraft in Paf colors would be a blessing for pakistan---because the enemy---knowing of the consequences---by default would change gears and would calm down its poisonous rhetoric against our state---and step back from a position of aggression.

It is because of a lack of this major weapons system that the enemy is acting very aggressive---but once it knows that we have it and knows its UNPREDICTABLE strike capability---it will step back because it does not want its vulnerable and valuable assets to be threatened.

So---basically---a heavy strike aircraft would bring the enemy a step closer to peace.

 

[Khafee]

Hi,

If we read about the major battles in history---the results would show how the winner manipulated its forces thru the enemy flanks---if the strikes hurt the flanks bad---the center would begin to crumble---because it cannot hold its position when its sides are cut open---.

An article was written by a member on "Flank Attacks" and everyone went nuts, I sipped my Cappuccino and enjoyed how people were showing themselves to be clueless, about the oldest tactic in military history.

 

[Ghostwhowalks]

the Post by @MastanKhan assumes that the Indian Defense planners are either juvenile or in a perpetual comatose state.

You are completely ignoring a critical aspect- AWACS. the moment a Pakistani heavy bomber is airborne, the Indian Awacs will detect and track it. Now, if the bomber is flying over the Arabian sea, it is safe to assume that it will be sans fighter escort since no current PAF fighter has the legs for such an escort mission. Given that, all the Indian awacs needs to do is to vector in a couple of SU30s towards the bomber and it will be a turkey shoot for the Indians.

 

[Jammer]

A question being discussed is that why does Pakistan not have medium to heavy strike aircraft when it is facing an enemy 5 times its size---.

Why are some of the aircraft in the inventory of the Paf not proportionately similar in size and performance to those of the enemy aircraft---?

Why are there no aircraft in Paf's inventory matching the enemy's tier 1 aircraft?

Why is it that the enemy that is 5 times larger---has tier 1 aircraft that are carrying a load of 5 times more BVR missiles than our tier aicraft---is more mobile and nimble---carries a stronger and more powerful radar and yet the Paf is trying to make believe that their little birdie will devour the enemy's massive bird of prey.

50 years ago--a good strike aircraft could carry 5000 lbs---now the similar aircraft in service carries around 20000 + lbs of weapons load---.

In the past---where the aircraft had dedicated roles---today there are aircraft that perform their duties in multiple specialized roles according to the need.

In the past where you needed to drop 50000 lbs to do the damage---today---you can do it with a 1000---2000 lb weapon---.

If we look at pakistan's geography in relation to its primary enemy----it is very unique---. From the frontal position---it makes it impossible for deep strike missions, but when taking into consideration the flanks---the one bordering the water is the most deadly and do the worst damage to the enemy.

The enemy has a long long flank open on the sea / ocean front---which means that every city on that front is vulnerable to standoff weapons strike---which also means that due to open space available to Paf---the enemy will have to move a larger number of its assets to protect a vaster number of assets from its primary face to face position from the main border.

Incidently---the enemy also have limited resources to protect all its assets in a strong and prudent manner for its seaside cities down the coast line.

So---if we can do the similar damage with a 2000 lb weapon---then why is there a need for a heavy strike aircraft.

The reason being---that as the heavy aircraft can fly farther with a heavier load---it can hit EXTREMELY IMPORTANT targets that have never felt any threat of war before---. These targets are the very wealthy and affluent areas that may dictate and determine the time of war---but are in no way ready to take the casualties of war---.

A strike in these areas would create massive panic and chaos---the fear of death and destruction will create uncertainty amongst the masses---tactical strikes at crucial points will bring the metropolis city life to a stand still---and when a metropolis city life comes to a stand still---it means that its death bell has been rung---.

The first to leave are the rich with their money---when rushing to exit in emergency---it creates opportunities for accidents---accidents create traffic stoppage---traffic stoppage stops emergency operations---stoppage and lack of of emergency operations creates unrest in the area---and the creation of unrest in the area is what the primary purpose of the deep strike mission.

This unrest will turn into small street fight---that will turn into larger street fights---small fires will result and will turn into larger fires---and as the emergency units are bogged down due to stoppage of traffic---each area will become the center of chaos and anarchy---and this will spread like wild fire thru out the metropolis---.

@Khafee @Indus Falcon @war&peace

Most people growing up in Pakistan in the 70's remember the stories of Sheikh Chilly, one famous one is where he finds an egg. Instead of eating the egg he dreams of waiting for it to hatch, selling the chicken and buying two male and female chicks, who will grow to lay more eggs, imagining more chickens will follow, ultimately he fantasized owning hundreds of poultry farms and becoming incredibly wealthy, as he was thinking this he tripped and the egg fell out of his hands. The scenario laid out above is similar to a Sheikh Chiliyan fantasy.
The PAF's job with its limited resources and facing an enemy 10 times its size is to deny airspace to the enemy (which would be a huge achievement), and this includes tactical strikes against "enemy installations and strategic targets" to the extent that it makes the bad man slow down (maybe not stop). The PAF nor IAF is stupid enough to specifically target civilians (not talking about collateral damage). This kind of free for all reckless behavior among two nuclear powered nations already at a razors edge embroiled in conventional warfare might actually lead to the unthinkable. This possibility would force the international community to take action against the said nuclear powered country who's attacking civilians and then guess what, you will face an attempt at being provided "freedom" to your country courtesy the allied nations (primarily the entire west). Possibly China will help extract you out of some of the mess up to the point it does not infringe on its overall interests, but in the meanwhile it would hurt and yes it would leave a mark.

 

[MastanKhan]

the Post by @MastanKhan assumes that the Indian Defense planners are either juvenile or in a perpetual comatose state.

You are completely ignoring a critical aspect- AWACS. the moment a Pakistani heavy bomber is airborne, the Indian Awacs will detect and track it. Now, if the bomber is flying over the Arabian sea, it is safe to assume that it will be sans fighter escort since no current PAF fighter has the legs for such an escort mission. Given that, all the Indian awacs needs to do is to vector in a couple of SU30s towards the bomber and it will be a turkey shoot for the Indians.

Hi,

When you assume---you make an a-ss of yourself---. I have not mentioned heavy bomber---but a hvy strike aircraft and no---the indians would not know if it lifted of from dalbandin and kept in low flight---exited over gwadar area in low flight.

It will have its protection escort for a certain distance---and while the escort engages the enemy---it will find ways to slip in---it only needs to launch its assets from some 200-250 miles from the coastling---and suppose if by some act of magic---the air force gets air launch version of Babur cruise missile---it can launch it from 500 miles away.

In a war---the enemy gets to vote as well---weak as they might be----buddy---never forget this american proverb---.

Most people growing up in Pakistan in the 70's remember the stories of Sheikh Chilly, one famous one is where he finds an egg. Instead of eating the egg he dreams of waiting for it to hatch, selling the chicken and buying two male and female chicks, who will grow to lay more eggs, imagining more chickens will follow, ultimately he fantasized owning hundreds of poultry farms and becoming incredibly wealthy, as he was thinking this he tripped and the egg fell out of his hands. The scenario laid out above is similar to a Sheikh Chiliyan fantasy.
The PAF's job with its limited resources and facing an enemy 10 times its size is to deny airspace to the enemy (which would be a huge achievement), and this includes tactical strikes against "enemy installations and strategic targets" to the extent that it makes the bad man slow down (maybe not stop). The PAF nor IAF is stupid enough to specifically target civilians (not talking about collateral damage). This kind of free for all reckless behavior among two nuclear powered nations already at a razors edge embroiled in conventional warfare might actually lead to the unthinkable. This possibility would force the international community to take action against the said nuclear powered country who's attacking civilians and then guess what, you will face an attempt at being provided "freedom" to your country courtesy the allied nations (primarily the entire west). Possibly China will help extract you out of some of the mess up to the point it does not infringe on its overall interests, but in the meanwhile it would hurt and yes it would leave a mark.

Hi,

Stop being silly---if you cannot contribute in the context of the discussion---it is better to stay away.

I have never stated to target civilian targets---. I am talking about military importance targets.

@WebMaster Need to have MK's post headline this thread and discussion.. That will allow for a good healthy content rather than just a new discussion for a question asked by another member.

Hi,

You should have left it alone my man---.

 

[Khafee]

the Post by @MastanKhan assumes that the Indian Defense planners are either juvenile or in a perpetual comatose state.

You are completely ignoring a critical aspect- AWACS. the moment a Pakistani heavy bomber is airborne, the Indian Awacs will detect and track it. Now, if the bomber is flying over the Arabian sea, it is safe to assume that it will be sans fighter escort since no current PAF fighter has the legs for such an escort mission. Given that, all the Indian awacs needs to do is to vector in a couple of SU30s towards the bomber and it will be a turkey shoot for the Indians.

Well let's not get into how smart Indian planners are.

Secondly, why would the heavy bombers be "Sans fighter escort" ? It would be stupid to assume that escorts or decoys would not be present, but can be expected from you.

As to Su30's, best not to beat your chest too much about them false flagger:
http://in.rbth.com/blogs/2015/06/04/why_the_indian_air_force_has_a_high_crash_rate_43501
http://www.hindustantimes.com/india...viceability/story-CUNvrCuhWdK0w4J6jVecIK.html
http://rstv.nic.in/india-grounds-sukhoi-30-fleet-safety-checks.html

 

[SQ8]

Hi,

You should have left it alone my man---.

Something is wrong with the forum. Keeps giving me a server error whilst trying to do that; is an odd backend issue.
The idea was to let your discussion headline this thread; hence rather than just a three line idea, a more engaged discussion. Sadly, not all things work out as in real life due to unforeseen issues.
Apologies.

 

[CriticalThought]

Hi,

Please don't assume that the targets are simply civilians or that civilians will be targeted---. The targets will be of tactical and military importance---and there will be 100's of them---.

You should know that when discussing military matters---the targets are of military importance and just not random targets---.

If the military brass knew---they have not shown anything to counter it---and if they have some plan---it really is not worth anything so far---.

And again---please don't assume that the " military brass " is more intelligent in planning than any other civilian.

They have failed so far.

View attachment 365117

Hi,

If you look at this map---the best tactical solution is shamsi base---dalbandin which is right on top of gwadar---.

They aircraft can fly 400---500 miles parallel to the enemy coastline and position itself to strike at targets in areas that have never been hit before---dash in and from standoff distances let lose their weapons at the mumbai coastline and its assets---and be gone.

The purpose is to create a major panic in the lower states of the enemy lands---and with proper subversive tactics---to create a situation of chaos and civil unrest---destruction of water supply---fuel dumps---bridges in major cities---create chaos---mayhem and panic---in the city and let the city public destroy it itself---.

You children have to clue how to fight a war---. Bomb this and bomb that---defensive here and defensive there---what is this---a frigging weed smoking contest---.

Thanks. That is a good plan. In general, the North Eastern Arabian Sea is going to be a busy place if India comes out with all its might, complete with Aircraft Career group. So the mission profile will need to take into account the ground realities at that time.

 

[war&peace]

Sir @MastanKhan
A very good article especially for the points you raised about tactics and strategies. I would like to highlight the psychological effect on the enemy of having heavy strike fighters in the fleet. Just take an example of a cricket or football team, having Lionel Messi, Cristiano Ronaldo, Rodinho, Zlatan Abrahamovic in the team really overwhelms the opposition psychologically..though this example is bit flawed since humans are flexible, unpredictable and have much wider range of capabilities and latent talent that may be unleashed in the competition and and upset may occur rather it occurs but machines have a definite set of capabilities which are there and a machine cannot perform beyonds its limitations... a medium fighter cannot carry a higher payload than specified or go farther than its range and especially not more than a heavy fighter...so enemy knows it very well..thus their mere presence can make it very difficult from planning's POV,

And also it can delay the nuclear war...since a heavy conventional payload emptied over an enemy city can achieve the similar effect as a nuclear strike, but it will still be a conventional strike and may not trigger the nuclear button from the enemy..

Then there is no denying about the role played by heavies in striking high valued targets in the sea .e.g. destroyers, ACC and frigates of enemies with CM400AKG, Ra'ad ALCM etc

So I have always been a proponent of inducting a few squadrons of heavy strike fighters like SU35, JH7 or J11.

 

[Khafee]

Hi,

When you assume---you make an a-ss of yourself---. I have not mentioned heavy bomber---but a hvy strike aircraft and no---the indians would not know if it lifted of from dalbandin and kept in low flight---exited over gwadar area in low flight.

It will have its protection escort for a certain distance---and while the escort engages the enemy---it will find ways to slip in---it only needs to launch its assets from some 200-250 miles from the coastling---and suppose if by some act of magic---the air force gets air launch version of Babur cruise missile---it can launch it from 500 miles away.

In a war---the enemy gets to vote as well---weak as they might be----buddy---never forget this american proverb---.

Sir, The air force does not need Babur, they have RAAD, and RAAD's range is no way in hell 350kms. Even if it was, it would be very easy to increase it. And my opinion is that they just might have.

 

[CriticalThought]

Hi,

If you had started with fighter / bomber or heavy strike aircraft---the discussion would have been more focused than it is---.

You also have to convey how where and when to target an enemy the size of the opponent and you have not come up with anything original.

You also have to share why you would to do what you want to do in order to achieve what.

You still do not have any understanding of why the Paf needs a heavy strike aircraft with long legs---.

here are some threads for you to look into if you want to

https://defence.pk/threads/jh7b-as-buddy-refueller.406674/


https://defence.pk/threads/there-was-no-reason-to-go-for-only-8-new-f16s.404773/

https://defence.pk/threads/pafs-def...ignorance-out-of-incompetence-or-what.394925/

https://defence.pk/threads/jf-17-is-the-wrong-omnirole-aircraft-for-pakistan.391848/

I wanted to keep things generic because:

1. I am myself learning a lot as the thread progresses.
2. Restricting the options is like putting words into people's mouths. It could limit their thought patterns. Unfortunately people keep going back to "We need air superiority, we don't have funds for bombs..."

I wanted to address each of the gaps you have pointed out above, but I wanted the discussion to progress naturally instead of me coming out with, I think we should have xyz bomber because of xyz reason. I have been trying to make people think by laying down scenarios, hypothesizing mission profiles... but the result is in front of you.