What's new

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

Copying this again from my earlier post:
--------------------------------------------
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_B-52_Stratofortress

B-52 Stratofortress
The bomber is capable of carrying up to 70,000 pounds (32,000 kg) of weapons,[5] and has a typical combat range of more than 8,800 miles (14,080 km) without aerial refueling.

The B-52 completed sixty years of continuous service with its original operator in 2015. After being upgraded between 2013 and 2015, it is expected to serve into the 2040s.

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/paf-bombers.469738/page-2#ixzz4UTgcP8Ks
--------------------------------------------

Question: Why did they upgrade them again in 2013-15 and why do they expect them to serve into the 2040s?
The point I am trying to make is that it is incorrect to say 'Days of bombers are over'.

Secondly, everyone understands that acquiring even 1 stratofortress like aircraft is beyond the realm of possibility.

That said, what I am trying to do is enumerating the various mission scenarios where intensive air offense will be needed. I am hoping other members can join the analysis with information like what is the enemy concentration we may face, how much munitions (1000s of kg) we may need to drop, and how much distance we may need to travel. Remember, in an actual operation, you don't move in a straight line from X to Y. Mission planning determines areas of enemy's weakness where radar coverage is low, enemy SAMs and fighters are not a threat, and then a route can be determined. Such a route can require a very long distance to be covered.

Given the various scenarios and inputs on the previously listed points, what would be a good bomber for PAF? Let's find the theoretical answer. Once we know the ideal, we can try to approximate it as best as we can.

@pakistanipower @Naif al Hilali plz read my response above.



Before we go into specific aircraft, can we first please discuss the types of missions where large munitions drops from the air are needed?



Everyone has their own specialties, a focus on some particular aspect of things. I like to learn from everyone's specialties and I think that's what makes the forum so diverse. If he has lots of technical knowledge, I find that impressive. I can learn from that and then apply it to tactics and strategy.

Ok lets discuss this from theoratical point of view ... a big plane like b52 can give you an immense fire power specially in support of ground troops ... but this aircraft is highly vulnerable due to its size and speed ... so more close you try to come to enemy more vulnerable it becomes ... even a short range low end sam can easily take it down ... and remember these type of same are part of mechnized corps of india which will be the first line of offense after cold start doctrine ... so we cant use them unless we have complete air suoeriority atleast 300km inside indian borders and succefully clear all sams through sead oprations ... can we achieve that without even having one to one match with india in terms of fighter aircraft ? On the contrary usa always starts with getting air superiority and sead mission then b52 enters for cleaning of making havoc on adversaries ground forces ... and finally they send in tbeir troops ... so bombers are very much suited to their doctrine ...

Second use of these bombers are long range strikes ... lets consider a hypothetical scenario of need to strike israel (just hypothetical ao israeli members are requested not to derail thread by discussing strikes) ...

Again in that case first we need to take out air defenses and ai suoeriority for which we need to have a base like an aircraft carrir or a neighbouring country base ... fighter aircrafts with tankers will also have very limited effect as turn around time will be huge ...

Even if we get tbe base we will not be able to get air superriority easily ... infact it will bee near to impossible ...

Third scenario is using them against weak nations like afghanistan ... so i would say due to political and diplomatic reasons we need to avoid confrontations with other countries and we can handle afghanistan with much cheaper solution like border managmenet so there is no need to invest in such heavh platforms ... to kill a bird you dont purchase anti air missile ...
 
.
why did the PAF have Canbeera bombers in the past ??


can bomber survive without escort fighter ?

Number of reasons ...

  1. At that time bombers could survive on their own as radar coverage was low sams were not that dense and not that widely available ..
  2. bombing capcity of fighter aircrafts was very low ...
  3. Multi-role aircraft at that time was very new concept so not applicable on anycarft of pakistan at that time
  4. no percision guided munition so to take on a ground or naval target it was required to drop multiple bombs ...
  5. For bombing mission special type of tactics and aircraft aerodynamics was required ... as those aircraft have to be stable ,,, ground view should be high and less nimble ... all these facilities are available on mordern multi-rile fighter through various goodies ...
 
.
Hi,

The first step for success is to " Control the controllable "---if they can use andeman & nicobar islands---you just need to pulverize mumbai---and you will smash the enemy---.

Mumbai is the achilles heel of the opponent---it is an easier and reachable target---it is the wealth and economic center of the enemy---it is the jugular vein---. Cut it---and you have the enemy bleeding bad---.

Indian economy is much larger than just Mumbai. Anyway, on a public forum, a civilian like myself shouldn't be scheming for mass murder. I want to be respectful of the sensitivities of our Indian members as well. Strikes on major cities will be thoroughly calculated by the top brass. They are definitely not unaware of their potential. I just want to discuss military tactics against military targets. Thanks.
 
.
Please do not give the name of inability to doctrine and stop glorifying it


We need long range multipurpose and air superiority planes now if we do not have will or money it is another thing. Do not say days of bombers are over. There were people who said days of dog fight are over, days of guns on planes are over but they never were.

Your post shows that you have no idea of defense planning ...

Doctrine always incorporate your current abilities and resources ... so if something is in doctrine than it is based on your current resources ... so we dont have bombers as of now ...

Secondly there is a huge difference in bombers and air superiority role fighter .. we are discussing bombers like B52 ... who is denying need of a air superiority fighter ,, and if we could get a long range air superiority fighter like j20 or su35 then it would be ideal...

BUt thread is about bombers not air superiority fighter ...

if needed bombers can be purchased easily infact you can convert many of your existing big planes in bomber roles ... but if have money we should invest it on multirole capable (But more towards air superiority fighter

Indian economy is much larger than just Mumbai. Anyway, on a public forum, a civilian like myself shouldn't be scheming for mass murder. I want to be respectful of the sensitivities of our Indian members as well. Strikes on major cities will be thoroughly calculated by the top brass. They are definitely not unaware of their potential. I just want to discuss military tactics against military targets. Thanks.
I completely agree .. just want to add two things ...

attack on economy means attack on military economy ... i.e. military complexes so that enemies fighting capability could be destoryed ...

second if it comes to do and die situation then nuclear weapons come in ... and remember nuclear weapons are for mass killing ... that is why there are so much restrictions on this capability ... sadly so but reality is ... nuclear missiles will definitiely be targetting mumbai, dehi, lucknow, karachi, lahore and islamabad ...
 
.
Your post shows that you have no idea of defense planning ...

Doctrine always incorporate your current abilities and resources ... so if something is in doctrine than it is based on your current resources ... so we dont have bombers as of now ...

Secondly there is a huge difference in bombers and air superiority role fighter .. we are discussing bombers like B52 ... who is denying need of a air superiority fighter ,, and if we could get a long range air superiority fighter like j20 or su35 then it would be ideal...

BUt thread is about bombers not air superiority fighter ...

if needed bombers can be purchased easily infact you can convert many of your existing big planes in bomber roles ... but if have money we should invest it on multirole capable (But more towards air superiority fighter


I completely agree .. just want to add two things ...

attack on economy means attack on military economy ... i.e. military complexes so that enemies fighting capability could be destoryed ...

second if it comes to do and die situation then nuclear weapons come in ... and remember nuclear weapons are for mass killing ... that is why there are so much restrictions on this capability ... sadly so but reality is ... nuclear missiles will definitiely be targetting mumbai, dehi, lucknow, karachi, lahore and islamabad ...
thanks for all your posts above
 
.
JH7B or J10 strike variant would be the best option for Pakistan. A dedicated bomber/strike aircraft as opposed to multi role F16 or JF17 would be ideal.

Pakistan has used the A5 and Canberra aircraft in this role previously and the JH7 was brought into service by China to replace its own A5 and H5 bombers. It carries a decent payload and as discussed in a Navy thread would be good in a strike role there too

B52s are long range bombers and don't meet Pakistans requirements. Who would we fly to attack halfway around the world.
 
.
I have said it before and I'll say it again. PAF needs to think outside the box. The IAF has an ability to run sortie after sortie against PAF and through numerical superiority and the use of long ramge SAMs like S400 reaching deep into Pakistan, will eventually overwhelm Pakistan in the air. The hope is to prolong air war with IAF to force a stalemate or prevent an attack to begin with. Strategic bombers if used as cruise missile trucks rather than bombers (as the H6K can do) will be able to overwhelm IAF Forward bases and SAM batteries in a matter of hours. An Air launched version of babur would have a theoretical range of at least 1000km. An H-6K could sit comfortably inside Pakistan airspace under the protection of PAF fighters and SAMs and launch strikes against S400 and FOB. This would push the IAF deeper into India. Meaning IAF fighters going out or returning would need to fly further meaning they carry less weapons and more fuel and arent able to turn around fighters as quickly as they otherwise could it would also eliminate many fighters from entering PAF airspace due to short legs, without a2a refueling (exposong tanker assets to PAF attack. S400 would not be able to operate in close enough proximity to hit PAF fighters in Pakistani airspace. 1 H-6K carriers 6 LACM and PAF would be able to overwhelm an IAF FOB's defenses with 1 or 2 H-6K. That coupled with Ra'ad strikes from PAF fighters would help level some of the playong field for PAF. It would not give parity but wpuld give the IAF a bloody nose knowing that even before they eliminate the PAF, they would lose most if not all their FOBs amd many S400 facilities (likely in first few hours provided PAF can equip enpugh LACM on sufficient number of bombers). 10-12 would likely be sufficient though even 6-8 would be a game changer.
 
.
thanks for all your posts above

Right, time to cut the bromancing. Can you gentlemen please list all of PAF's Air to surface munitions and their destruction power against each of the following? Remember, we are looking at the power of 1 missile or bomb. If the bomb can take out multiple such targets, please mention the number of targets. Also remember I am not looking for secret info. Just publicly available information.

1. 100 sqm reinforced concrete structure.
2. Armored tank.
3. Artillery piece.
4. 100 infantrymen in a tight formation.
5. 100 infantrymen dispersed within 100 sqm.
6. 50 ft. of runway.
7. 50 ft. of road.

If I am missing something plz point out.

@Naif al Hilali @The Accountant @MastanKhan
 
.
Right, time to cut the bromancing. Can you gentlemen please list all of PAF's Air to surface munitions and their destruction power against each of the following? Remember, we are looking at the power of 1 missile or bomb. If the bomb can take out multiple such targets, please mention the number of targets. Also remember I am not looking for secret info. Just publicly available information.

1. 100 sqm reinforced concrete structure.
2. Armored tank.
3. Artillery piece.
4. 100 infantrymen in a tight formation.
5. 100 infantrymen dispersed within 100 sqm.
6. 50 ft. of runway.
7. 50 ft. of road.

If I am missing something plz point out.

@Naif al Hilali @The Accountant @MastanKhan
no thanks, I do not care to

the effects of everything from a .22 bullet to the 30,000 lb. GBU-57 to Pakistan's low-yield tactical nukes to the B61-12 to the Tsar Bomba can easily be Googled.

thanks for letting me post in your thread.

over and out.
 
. .
I have said it before and I'll say it again. PAF needs to think outside the box. The IAF has an ability to run sortie after sortie against PAF and through numerical superiority and the use of long ramge SAMs like S400 reaching deep into Pakistan, will eventually overwhelm Pakistan in the air. The hope is to prolong air war with IAF to force a stalemate or prevent an attack to begin with. Strategic bombers if used as cruise missile trucks rather than bombers (as the H6K can do) will be able to overwhelm IAF Forward bases and SAM batteries in a matter of hours. An Air launched version of babur would have a theoretical range of at least 1000km. An H-6K could sit comfortably inside Pakistan airspace under the protection of PAF fighters and SAMs and launch strikes against S400 and FOB. This would push the IAF deeper into India. Meaning IAF fighters going out or returning would need to fly further meaning they carry less weapons and more fuel and arent able to turn around fighters as quickly as they otherwise could it would also eliminate many fighters from entering PAF airspace due to short legs, without a2a refueling (exposong tanker assets to PAF attack. S400 would not be able to operate in close enough proximity to hit PAF fighters in Pakistani airspace. 1 H-6K carriers 6 LACM and PAF would be able to overwhelm an IAF FOB's defenses with 1 or 2 H-6K. That coupled with Ra'ad strikes from PAF fighters would help level some of the playong field for PAF. It would not give parity but wpuld give the IAF a bloody nose knowing that even before they eliminate the PAF, they would lose most if not all their FOBs amd many S400 facilities (likely in first few hours provided PAF can equip enpugh LACM on sufficient number of bombers). 10-12 would likely be sufficient though even 6-8 would be a game changer.

Brother if it had to be launched from within pak boundries than why fro airal platform ?

Babar can have 1000 km range and can be launch from ground ... you guys has no knowledge of air defense ...

@The Accountant looks like you are on your own.
Brother now a days there is no single bomb which cant be droped from fighters except for heavy weights ... why the hell you guys do not understand that it is not about utility of bombers ... ofz they are handy due to their range and load carrying capacity ... but guys in case of pakistan it is not worthwhile as our adversary is in our neighbourhood and bombers are easy target ... they will never able to achieve any mission ...

If you still insist you can modify il76 tanker to do this job but will it be able to ever enter indian airspace ?

We are resource short ... so if i would be paf planner my first proirity would have been air defense ... then air superiority over border region ... then air superiority deep inside adversory and fourth qould be land attack within enemy area ...

You guys cant see we are stugling in getting first priority ...

We should invest in long range and medium range sam and advance air superiroity fighters and then we can think of bombers ...
 
.
I have said it before and I'll say it again. PAF needs to think outside the box. The IAF has an ability to run sortie after sortie against PAF and through numerical superiority and the use of long ramge SAMs like S400 reaching deep into Pakistan, will eventually overwhelm Pakistan in the air. The hope is to prolong air war with IAF to force a stalemate or prevent an attack to begin with. Strategic bombers if used as cruise missile trucks rather than bombers (as the H6K can do) will be able to overwhelm IAF Forward bases and SAM batteries in a matter of hours. An Air launched version of babur would have a theoretical range of at least 1000km. An H-6K could sit comfortably inside Pakistan airspace under the protection of PAF fighters and SAMs and launch strikes against S400 and FOB. This would push the IAF deeper into India. Meaning IAF fighters going out or returning would need to fly further meaning they carry less weapons and more fuel and arent able to turn around fighters as quickly as they otherwise could it would also eliminate many fighters from entering PAF airspace due to short legs, without a2a refueling (exposong tanker assets to PAF attack. S400 would not be able to operate in close enough proximity to hit PAF fighters in Pakistani airspace. 1 H-6K carriers 6 LACM and PAF would be able to overwhelm an IAF FOB's defenses with 1 or 2 H-6K. That coupled with Ra'ad strikes from PAF fighters would help level some of the playong field for PAF. It would not give parity but wpuld give the IAF a bloody nose knowing that even before they eliminate the PAF, they would lose most if not all their FOBs amd many S400 facilities (likely in first few hours provided PAF can equip enpugh LACM on sufficient number of bombers). 10-12 would likely be sufficient though even 6-8 would be a game changer.

Pakistan is looking into this I believe there is an air launched cruise missile named Ra'ad which is still in testing stage of development.

Most of the current PAF inventory could carry one missile only so a platform that could carry at least 2 like JH7B would be suited to this.
 
.
Pakistan is looking into this I believe there is an air launched cruise missile named Ra'ad which is still in testing stage of development.

Most of the current PAF inventory could carry one missile only so a platform that could carry at least 2 like JH7B would be suited to this.
Ra'ad has been operational since almost a decade now.

 
.
Brother if it had to be launched from within pak boundries than why fro airal platform ?

Babar can have 1000 km range and can be launch from ground ... you guys has no knowledge of air defense ...


Brother now a days there is no single bomb which cant be droped from fighters except for heavy weights ... why the hell you guys do not understand that it is not about utility of bombers ... ofz they are handy due to their range and load carrying capacity ... but guys in case of pakistan it is not worthwhile as our adversary is in our neighbourhood and bombers are easy target ... they will never able to achieve any mission ...

If you still insist you can modify il76 tanker to do this job but will it be able to ever enter indian airspace ?

We are resource short ... so if i would be paf planner my first proirity would have been air defense ... then air superiority over border region ... then air superiority deep inside adversory and fourth qould be land attack within enemy area ...

You guys cant see we are stugling in getting first priority ...

We should invest in long range and medium range sam and advance air superiroity fighters and then we can think of bombers ...

Babur has a range of 700km. Even if they extend the range of the ground launched version, the air launched version will always have more range, that is why you look at the strategic bomber, the more range the missile has, the deeper the bomber will push the IAF bases and SAMs back. The US navy is wary of the H-6K for that very reason, enough to develop entire doctrines against its potential in the South China Sea, perhaps you know more about the utility of these bombers then them. Its not like the Chinese are planning on bombing from thousands of miles away...their main target is right next door too. As for fighters being used, they cant deliver the amount of ordinance on target from the same range as the H-6K, a single H-6 will deliver more firepower to deep within India from deep within Pakistan where it is relatively protected. You would need 3-4 F-16 flying into Indian airspace to do the same thing plus another 4-5 protecting them from IAF fighters and all would likely get shot down by S400. That is why it is a force multiplier...it will perform the role of 3-4 F-16s while staying safe and sparing another 4-5 fighters from escort of which all 7 -9 fighters would likely get shot down over India doing exactly what 1 H-6K can do from deep inside Pakistan where it is far safer.

Pakistan is looking into this I believe there is an air launched cruise missile named Ra'ad which is still in testing stage of development.

Most of the current PAF inventory could carry one missile only so a platform that could carry at least 2 like JH7B would be suited to this.

Ra'ad is a 350km ALCM which does not carry the same ordinance as Babur. It is more likely to be launched from fighter aircraft and while it has its uses in that respect, it is more of a tactical weapon than a strategic one like an air launched Babur would be from an H-6K. While I agree that PN and PAF could use a fighter like JH7B, that is a different matter from what I am refering to. As above, you will need 3-4 JH-7B to equal the number of weapons delivered onto target that 1 H-6K can deliver, and it would require a fighter escort (even with Ra'ad's 350km range). While H-6K will also need a fighter escort in times of war, it will also be protected by its distance from Indian airspace and the amount of fighters and SAM's IAF fighters would need to go though just to get within firing range of it. Basically the huge range that Babur would afford it is a protective perk in and of itself.
 
.
Indian economy is much larger than just Mumbai. Anyway, on a public forum, a civilian like myself shouldn't be scheming for mass murder. I want to be respectful of the sensitivities of our Indian members as well. Strikes on major cities will be thoroughly calculated by the top brass. They are definitely not unaware of their potential. I just want to discuss military tactics against military targets. Thanks.

Both India and Pakistan have refrained from mass bombing of cities and civilian targets in previous wars
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom