Air Force Question Thread

[Sam Dhanraj]

I remember the Naval Commander incharge of Anti Air Defence of Keamari telling me that some Fokkers were drafted for maritime recce work during 1971. It has been a very long time and my memory is foggy.

Niaz Sahib, Seems You are correct. Here is some more info on air craft and Pilots on Indian Navy Website citing Pakistani Books after war

PAKISTAN MARITIME RECONNAISSANCE​

"Excerpt from Pakistan's Crisis in Leadership"


"The Navy, in the absence of any shore based radar and maritime reconnaissance aircraft, was virtually blind. Therefore the services of a civilian radar were requisitioned and Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) willingly provided a Fokker Friendship flight to operate reconnaissance flights. The PIA plane had its own limitations for the purpose it was being used. Its radar was a weather radar and it had only 7 degree decline which could not see downwards. The civil pilots, however, did an extremely good job of work without any previous training in this particular field.


"At about the same time on December 3, when Naval HQ was issuing orders and instructions, the Fokker flying along the Kathiawar coast - PIA air patrols had been started on November 30 - reported the sighting of India's Western Fleet consisting of a cruiser, six destroyers and an oil tanker off the Rann of Kutch coast. It was operating around its forward base at Okha."

"Excerpts from the Story of Pakistan Navy"


"The PN reconnaissance aircraft sighted a formation of eight enemy ships when the war had just started, but the naval observer, being unaware of war having started, made his contact report hours later after landing.


"After the first missile attack, Commodore Hanif took over as DCNS(O) on 5 December and contacted the Air Priority Board which provided a mixed bag of a dozen aircraft including the Governor of Punjab's Cessna, a plant protection aircraft, an old DC3 Dakota, some Aero Club Austers and two armed Cessnas. We also obtained two Fokkers and two Twin Otters fitted with radar. All these aircraft were lined-up at Karachi civil airport where a "Fleet Air Arm" was set up immediately. The aircraft were controlled by naval officers positioned at the airport along with a PAF liaison officer provided by MHQ.


"The aircraft were manned by civilian volunteer crews from PIA and the Flying Club and maintained by PIA and CAA at Karachi in such an efficient manner that there was no problem in operating 3 or 4 light aircraft at a time during day in their respective sectors on an arc 200 miles from Karachi covering the entire area from Jamnagar to the Makran coast. At night, two radar-fitted aircraft at a time covered the same arc. Thus, from the afternoon of 5 December, it was difficult for an Osa to approach within 200 miles of Karachi undetected

http://indiannavy.nic.in/t2t2e/Trans2Trimph/chapters/12_1971%20anlysis of pak account1.htm

 

[fatman17]

Niaz Sahib, Seems You are correct. Here is some more info on air craft and Pilots on Indian Navy Website citing Pakistani Books after war

sad reading indeed!

 

[shehbazi2001]

Following the posts, it means that SA-16 Albatross Maritime Patrol Aircrafts were put out of use or say decommissioned without replacement just two years before the 1971 war and the results were disastrous.

PIA aircrafts or Flying Club aircrafts did a good effort but these aircrafts are not optimised for searching over sea and tracking the vessels. Dedicated radars, long endurance, dedicated communication equipment etc are required in addition to professional training in this particular area.

 

[Munir]

When you have no tools you still make the best out of the toys. These guys are example how far one can get with the right spirit. Love the info.

 

[BATMAN]

I remember the Naval Commander incharge of Anti Air Defence of Keamari telling me that some Fokkers were drafted for maritime recce work during 1971. It has been a very long time and my memory is foggy.

Being once passenger of Fokker in good old times, i can very well imagine how challenging it could be.
I remember once travelling to Bahawalpur, it was bit strong wind from behind and Fokker had to turn around in opposite direction of wind for landing and the wind from behind took it far away in the process.

I also remember once travelling to Islamabad we caught in sudden storm near Islamabad, It was some night. Fokker was jumping up and down perhaps hundreds of feet and I could hear the lashes of blitz on the fuselage. I still wonder how pilot was able to play with the panel.
It was like riding a mad bull, the pilot who forced his way into storm and landed safely in Islamabad could do anything with his Fokker.

 

[superbikez]

Which country pak or india have strong Airforce (in Defence advance fighters and missile system etc ?)

 

[Kasrkin]

Pssh, dude Pakistan obviously, by a long shot...

Okay seriously now, in terms of figures the Indians are ahead of us but then again they were ahead of us in 65 too. Pakistan will be getting advanced fighters, Indians will be getting them too. As usual its down to the skill and organization of the pilots and the ground crew.
India plans things differently than we do. Indias purpose is power-projection and ours is minimal deterrence, so both are satisfied with their forces.

 

[TOPGUN]

Which country pak or india have strong Airforce (in Defence advance fighters and missile system etc ?)

I agree with kasrkin India has a much bigger airforce with alot more funds then we do to spend ! second there tatics are much diff from ours they seem to think qty over qulity we think the other way well really we have no choice cuz of funds etc but i know for sure with some knowledge that i have plus having some PAF backround in my family PAF is one of the best in the world in regards to our Pilots ,traning , tatics and combat experience and inshallah we will be getting our jf-17's , j-10's and f-16's hoping on the f-16's anyhow followed by air defense , air refueling tankers ,awacs and uav's thats my thought

 

[shehbazi2001]

Alignement of Guns

Like we know about WW-2 fighter that their guns on both wings had a focus point ahead of the aircraft. The focus length was left to pilots. Some pilots preferred that all guns should aim at a point at close range and other wanted a more distant focus point. For close focus points, the bullets from all 4 or 6 guns would target the same area/point in space at say 500 feet ahead from own fighter, which had a devastating effect.

I want to know that is it the same practice with jets like F-7s,Mirages and A-5s? and is it still left to the choice of pilots? ..........of course the fighters with a single gun are out of this discussion.

I am revisiting this post just to clarify this point as I came across it on net recently. Its properly called "CONVERGENCE". As I came to know, this was more important for those propeller and jet aircrafts whose guns were mounted on the wings. With nose-mounted guns, the importance of convergence has reduced. And with more and more fighters using a single gun, this phenomenon seems to disappear now.









In the first picture, gun convergence is set to 600 yards and in some others its set to 300 yards and its effect on target shooting is also shown.

 

[Blackpearl]

Gun boresighting...

My guess is that present aircarft guns are boresighted to engage targets at a range of 1000 yards.
Talking about F-16, fitted with Gatling 6 barrel rotating gun on left side. The gun still require to be boresighted
to converge pilot line of sight through gunsight reticle/piper on HUD, and bullets travel path, at some distance.

However. i have a question here that since bullets travel in a straight path, how F-16 engages bandit through gun while turning a tight turn. There must be some restriction on firing the gun uptil a certain rate of turn, otherwise bulletsw will not find their impact point.
There is a posasibilty that F-16 fire control computer itself calculates calculates the impact point by projeting CCIP (continously Calculated Impact Point) over the HUD. The input parametrs may be the speed of aircarft, altitude, and rate of turn.
The same may be the case with Mirage and F-7s......

 

[shehbazi2001]

Gun boresighting...

My guess is that present aircarft guns are boresighted to engage targets at a range of 1000 yards.
Talking about F-16, fitted with Gatling 6 barrel rotating gun on left side. The gun still require to be boresighted
to converge pilot line of sight through gunsight reticle/piper on HUD, and bullets travel path, at some distance.

However. i have a question here that since bullets travel in a straight path, how F-16 engages bandit through gun while turning a tight turn. There must be some restriction on firing the gun uptil a certain rate of turn, otherwise bulletsw will not find their impact point.
There is a posasibilty that F-16 fire control computer itself calculates calculates the impact point by projeting CCIP (continously Calculated Impact Point) over the HUD. The input parametrs may be the speed of aircarft, altitude, and rate of turn.
The same may be the case with Mirage and F-7s......

Bullets dont travel straight......under the action of gravity, bullets lose height and it depends on the muzzle velocity..........higher the muzzle velocity, farther the bullet goes straight...........

For shooting a bandit during turn, a technique called "Deflection Shooting" is used...........bullets dont go straight but they still hit the target...depends on gunsight and pilot skill......

 

[p2prada]

Bullets dont travel straight......under the action of gravity, bullets lose height and it depends on the muzzle velocity..........higher the muzzle velocity, farther the bullet goes straight...........

For shooting a bandit during turn, a technique called "Deflection Shooting" is used...........bullets dont go straight but they still hit the target...depends on gunsight and pilot skill......

Wind plays an important part too.


I also think the guns are capable of moving a few degrees on either side to increase its LOS. I m not sure though.

Anyways TVC helps in such situations.

 

[p2prada]

Question directed at Shehbazi.

Do u have any information on solid state devices used for microwave communications?
Any information will do. I can build up on that. Thanks in advance.

 

[Luftwaffe]

sorry to p opup in the middle of discussion...

Question u can call it stupid one but...

Why did PAF not design JF-17 equal in size to F-16??could have been more payload more room for upgrades etc.

 

[Imran Khan]

sorry mi don't under stand your qes but you can check size of both here. jf-17 is little big then f-16

jf-17nGeneral characteristics
Crew: 1 (2 for twin-seater)
Length: 14.94 m[40] (49 feet)
Wingspan: 9.45 m[40] (31 ft)
Height: 4.77 m (15 ft 8 in)
Wing area: 24.4 m²[40] (263 ft&#178
Empty weight: 6,441 kg[40] (14,200 lb)
Loaded weight: 9,100 kg[41] (20,062 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 12,700 kg[41] (28,000 lb)
Powerplant: 1× Russian RD-93 turbofan
Dry thrust: 50 kN (11,240 lbf)
Thrust with afterburner: 81.4 kN[41] (18,300 lbf)
Fuel Capacity: 5,130 lb [42]
Performance

Maximum speed: Mach 2.1
Combat radius: 1,352 km (890 nmi, 1,025 mi)
Ferry range: 3,500 km[43] (2,100 mi)
Service ceiling 17,000+ m[44] (55,000 ft)
Thrust/weight: 0.95
G-limit: +8.5 g[21]



f-16General characteristics
Crew: 1
Length: 49 ft 5 in (14.8 m)
Wingspan: 32 ft 8 in (9.8 m)
Height: 16 ft (4.8 m)
Wing area: 300 ft² (27.87 m&#178
Airfoil: NACA 64A204 root and tip
Empty weight: 18,900 lb (8,670 kg)
Loaded weight: 26,500 lb (12,000 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 42,300 lb (19,200 kg)
Powerplant: 1× Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-220 afterburning turbofan
Dry thrust: 14,590 lbf (64.9 kN)
Thrust with afterburner: 23,770 lbf (105.7 kN)
Alternate powerplant: 1× General Electric F110-GE-100 afterburning turbofan
Dry thrust: 17,155 lbf (76.3 kN)
Thrust with afterburner: 28,600 lbf (128.9 kN)
Performance

Maximum speed:

At sea level: Mach 1.2 (915 mph, 1,470 km/h)
At altitude: Mach 2+ (1,500 mph, 2,414 km/h)
Combat radius: 340 NM (295 mi, 550 km) on a hi-lo-hi mission with six 1,000 lb (450 kg) bombs
Ferry range: 2,280 NM (2,620 mi, 4,220 km) with drop tanks
Service ceiling 50,000+ ft (15,200+ m)
Rate of climb: 50,000 ft/min (254 m/s)
Wing loading: 88.3 lb/ft² (431 kg/m&#178
Thrust/weight: For F100 engine: 0.898, For F110: 1.095