F-22 Raptor pilots practice simulated combat against Pakistan, UK & France Pilots

[mjnaushad]

During the cold war Swedish military analysts calculated that if USSR wants they could over run Sweden in less than a week,and Swedish armed forces wont be able to stop them.
They didn't formulate a defense strategy against USSR as it was useless.Instead they made a retaliation/hit and run strategy.
Instead of building a handful of large military bases,they scattered their military assets throughout the country at known and hidden locations.So that if the large bases are conquered and destroyed, retaliation can be launched from multiple locations.
This explains why most of their motorways dont have light poles
so that their Grippen jets can land and take off from multiple locations outside airbases.This also explains why Grippen can take off and land from an 800 meter long by 9m wide runway.

Pakistan needs to adapt similar strategy

True....Better equipment is not always the game changer

BTW are you talking about this....

 

[Safriz]

And it is also a strong sign of mutual respect and cooperation, i.e. friends and allies.

Yes agreed.PAF's participation in the air war games alongside world's most advanced fighter jets,was a plume in PAF's hats.

 

[Safriz]

BTW are you talking about this....

wow,i never came across these statistics.
Very interesting.Goes to show that better strategy can outweigh better equipment and bigger numbers.

 

[Muhammad-Bin-Qasim]

Just make sure not to mention it when you have KFC,McDonalds.. or even use a computer.. after all .. these are all American inventions..
and oh.. while you are doing the 5th gen fighter dreaming against the US.. do thank them for their efforts in the flood relief and hope to expect such courtesy the next time disaster strikes the land of the "pure"..

And to those with the PAF vs USAF comparison.. personal testimony to me by a PAF officer who went for an exchange visit about the USAF..."they are 100 years ahead of us"..
Hypothetically, you would get your *** handed to you ten times over

Also.. those that have access to AFM.. please read the comments by F-22 raptor pilots about the PAF F-7PG's..
They praised the pilots.. and speculated on how best to "integrate" the F-22 with the F-7 next time they worked together.. instead of being on opposing sides.

The ATLC is a tactical leadership exercise to train mission commanders.. not a "My balls are bigger than yours" duel.
And I believe chogy is best placed to comment on what these are about.

I think I need to hold an umbrella against this guys mouth...

Oh just one question from you... Should we also thank the Americans for their constant drone attacks that have killed hundreds of Pakistani civilians (having nothing to do with terrorism)... plus thank them for supporting Israel... destroying Iraq... Abu Ghraib?

Maybe we should thank you for showering us with your wisdom as well... you could do it without using offensive language...

......

Chogy... Care to explain blood borders in a new forum then? Since we are not on America's hitlist... as you said...

......

Irfan... obliged for the info... many thanks

 

[SQ8]

In case you din notice.. most of our motorways don't have light poles anyway.. and generally most roads in Pakistan are unlit.. although I doubt if more than the two stretches of motorway are safe for cars.. let alone aircraft
a bit more off topic rant...
Lets just put it this way, hypothetically.. if the United states had beef with Pakistan's current leadership.. it would simply pull a few strings here and there and create a regime change.. and you would support it wholeheartedly.

The United states needs Pakistan... we need them.. simple.. right now.. and for some time.. during that time.. its better to make the best of a relationship than excrete conspiracy theories and confrontational scenario's.
A suspicious view of each other isnt an alliance..
Those who argue that we are better off not being allies.. well boys and girls.. wake up and smell the coffee, right now.. its because you are allies that a large US force is helping you with the flood relief effort... otherwise they'd have to be damned stupid to help the very people from which 98% of their current threats emerge..
Last I checked the Haitians dont burn US flags.. or blow themselves up killing their own countrymen more than anybody else..all the while crying "Allah O Akbar.. Death To AMERiCAAA!" and expecting to see about 70 or so virgins giving them their first taste of the opposite ***.

Any Success you had in '65, was because of American training and tactical instruction.. which you evolved to meet your needs.. before that the PAF was a flying club of showoffs with a plane crashing every other day...

I dont encourage *** kissing.. but that is how your leadership has played with the United states from the start..
we kiss *** and give exceedingly high expectations.. then we piss in their hands and cry foul.. and blame it all on them.. the Americans have had their fair share of mistakes when dealing with us.. But we havent exactly been the faithful bunch to them either when it came to what our leadership promised in return for American assistance.

Now.. bringing that bad blood in almost everything you do which involves America is really shortsighted. If there is something to be gained.. and it helps you..and carries no strings.. and there are people willingly giving it..
best one take it instead of bitching about how 10 years ago you felt you were screwed by that somebody.

 

[Muhammad-Bin-Qasim]

Safriz... very good analysis... I have seen the Grippin landing on motorways btw... They are good at what they do...

Naushad... What you quoted about Finland needs a whole new thread in my opinion... You could discuss how that happened... Seems very interesting...

 

[Safriz]

In case you din notice.. most of our motorways don't have light poles anyway.. and generally most roads in Pakistan are unlit.. although I doubt if more than the two stretches of motorway are safe for cars.. let alone aircraft
a bit more off topic rant...
Lets just put it this way, hypothetically.. if the United states had beef with Pakistan's current leadership.. it would simply pull a few strings here and there and create a regime change.. and you would support it wholeheartedly.

The United states needs Pakistan... we need them.. simple.. right now.. and for some time.. during that time.. its better to make the best of a relationship than excrete conspiracy theories and confrontational scenario's.
A suspicious view of each other isnt an alliance..
Those who argue that we are better off not being allies.. well boys and girls.. wake up and smell the coffee, right now.. its because you are allies that a large US force is helping you with the flood relief effort... otherwise they'd have to be damned stupid to help the very people from which 98% of their current threats emerge..
Last I checked the Haitians dont burn US flags.. or blow themselves up killing their own countrymen more than anybody else..all the while crying "Allah O Akbar.. Death To AMERiCAAA!" and expecting to see about 70 or so virgins giving them their first taste of the opposite ***.

Any Success you had in '65, was because of American training and tactical instruction.. which you evolved to meet your needs.. before that the PAF was a flying club of showoffs with a plane crashing every other day...

I dont encourage *** kissing.. but that is how your leadership has played with the United states from the start..
we kiss *** and give exceedingly high expectations.. then we piss in their hands and cry foul.. and blame it all on them.. the Americans have had their fair share of mistakes when dealing with us.. But we havent exactly been the faithful bunch to them either when it came to what our leadership promised in return for American assistance.

Now.. bringing that bad blood in almost everything you do which involves America is really shortsighted. If there is something to be gained.. and it helps you..and carries no strings.. and there are people willingly giving it..
best one take it instead of bitching about how 10 years ago you felt you were screwed by that somebody.

I have only one thing to say..

"This thinktank is broke" scrap it.

 

[mjnaushad]

...

Oh just one question from you... Should we also thank the Americans for their constant drone attacks that have killed hundreds of Pakistani civilians (having nothing to do with terrorism)...

If someone thinks drone attack are without Pakistan consent then i think they are living under a rock......Drones didn't kill 100s of civilians. Infact drone fire hellfire missile. which is quite accurate and the collateral damage is quite low. On occasions many civilians accepted that they are happy with drone strikes as its minimizing the collateral damage

plus thank them for supporting Israel... destroying Iraq... Abu Ghraib?

Yup they support Israel, Destroyed Iraq but they help Pakistanis....And i am thankful to them that they helped us and saved thousands in recent floods....


Many Many thanks USA
[/QUOTE]

 

[Irfan Baloch]

I have only one thing to say..

"This thinktank is broke" scrap it.

Sir
I beg to disagree, he is talking facts minus hot air and emotions

 

[Peregrine]

Sorry for barging in like this but the fact remains clear that" America has never been a trust worthy ally" No grandiloquence based on personal affiliations or views is going to alter the history or mold present & future accordingly as one desires. "Disenchated Allies" by Seth Seifman is worth reading for those who are interested in the history of US-PAK relations.

 

[illuzioN]

Sorry for barging in like this but the fact remains clear that" America has never been a trust worthy ally" No grandiloquence based on personal affiliations or views is going to alter the history or mold present & future accordingly as one desires. "Disenchated Allies" by Seth Seifman is worth reading for those who are interested in the history of US-PAK relations.

the past is in the past brother....

I assure you that now since many Americans are involved in who is in office, and with the help with the US Media....

we will never do anything to upset our allies...

We must all unit as one force for peace in the region....... join us brothers

 

[Peregrine]

the past is in the past brother....

I assure you that now since many Americans are involved in who is in office, and with the help with the US Media....

we will never do anything to upset our allies...

We must all unit as one force for peace in the region....... join us brothers

Since you have put it so amiably i have no choice but to adhere to your comment & hope for a better future.

 

[Super Falcon]

well 10 months old thread what the fuss descussing it again and again sick of it

 

[nightcrawler]

No...It was not so 'easily'. This 'long wavelength' story has been debunked elsewhere here. If it was so 'easily' then why was only one F-117 shot down? And if it was so 'easily' done against the F-117, then it should have been a thousand times more 'easily' against much more radar reflective aircrafts. But NATO flew tens of thousands of sorties over Yugoslavia and lost only TWO aircrafts from air defense missiles: one F-16 and one F-117. That is not an air defense combat I would boast about at the bar. Zoltan Dani got lucky from many factors, two important ones were that there were sympathizers who watched NATO flight schedules and that NATO was flying under predictable ingress/egress routes. Predictability equals to death in war. Still...To this day, Dani refused to divulge how many missiles he launched and the F-117 pilot, Dale Zelko, recalled he had to dodge at least two missiles. That mean it was a classic 'spray-and-pray' tactic that goes back to WW II AA gunnery. There were no MIG involved.

++
http://www.defence.pk/forums/1131582-post139.html

What all that stuff you posted basically boils down to is the assumption that the F-22s radar return on high frequency X band radar, which is the radar frequency traditionally used for detection, tracking and terminal homing (because of its precision) that to track an F-22 requires the radar to track everything insect size and larger, which is too much. To categorise the insects and other things floating around like Clouds as noise is to also categorise the F-22 as noise so it becomes invisible.
There was a similar problem a few decades ago with the An-2 biplane that the Soviets used as a light transport and also for dropping small teams of paratroopers.

When flying low and slow a modern radar looking down would detect the plane but the plane would be hidden in the enormous radar reflection of the ground. To remove the ground as a reflector they simply used the doppler effect so anything that was not moving at 120km/h was removed from the radar display so that cars did not appear as targets. This meant that the An-2 flying at 90km/h also disappeared and so it was the first stealth aircraft!

The difference in this case is that instead of looking down into a huge reflection of the ground looking for an insect sized target you are looking up and let me tell you there are no insects above 10,000m let alone the 20,000m operating ceiling of the F-22. Another thing is that few insects fly at anywhere near the speed of the F-22 so actual insects and clouds and other things that might be mistaken for F-22s can be removed as noise if they are moving at less than 50km/h which should remove everything except for those super cruising F-22s.

Another issue is of course that the shape of an aircraft only matters to radar that can actually detect shape like X band radar. L and N band radar resonates of the aircraft as a single pulse and detection range is not effected by shaping at all so a wing mounted L band radar that can detect an Su-27 at 400km can detect a T-50 or an F-22 at 400km too.
That is why they haven't wasted billions making the T-50 super stealthy... there will be no point in 20 years.

Regarding the shooting down of the F-117 lets put it in perspective.
It was NATO vs Serbia. NATO that looks on paper to be the most powerful military force the world has ever seen vs Serbia.
The F-117 was claimed to be completely invisible, undetectable.
It was going to go into the Soviet Union in the 1980s completely undetected but an enormous range of radars large and small and evade S-300 and S-300V SAM sites and Mig-31 interceptors and Su-27 fighters (note both with IRST sensors) and drop laser guided bombs on very high priority targets and then fly home in safety despite thousands of enemy fighters patrolling the skies etc etc etc.

If the shoot down was luck then why didn't the Iraqis get some too?

If you can base an air defence around luck why waste money on guided SAMs when unguided Grad rockets are much cheaper... just fit them with airpresure fuses so they explode at certain heights and fire barrages everytime you hear an aircraft engine?
Try this.
Get a digital camera and go out into the middle of nowhere that is under the flight path of an airport but far enough away from any airport so that all the aircraft are at 10,000m or so (ie 30,000ft would be a normal operating height for an airliner) so you can't hear its engines.
Close your eyes and get your map out and look up the flight schedule and work out, based on airspeed and time when the next aircraft flys over.
Using that fly over time you can take 30 shots of the sky but only planes caught in the dead centre of the picture count.
You have to take the photos with your eyes closed and you are not allowed to look for aircraft before or even after you take the photos.
Now do it again... at night.
Luck my a$$.
They wouldn't have been able to mass large numbers of SAMs to fire at the F-117 simply because a large group of SAMs would be detected and destroyed.
They probably only had one or maybe two launchers so that means about 6 shots maximum at the target... and if you can't see the target your chances of hitting it with even 6 shots is so close to zero it is not worth the effort.
The reality is that the F-117 was not invisible, what they probably did was illuminate the target with the radar of another battery from behind where the F-117 was coming from and so the radar emissions scattered from the target away from the emitting antenna would be reflected towards other batteries based in other places.
This means several things... first it means they knew what the target was going to be... not rocket science... they were there to defend something so they knew what the target of any plane in that area was.
Second it means they knew the direction it was coming from, which again is a no brainer because I am sure they would have taken steps to determine where NATO deployed its aircraft to and which were where.
Third it means that there was a spy at the NATO base who watched the F-117s take off to pass that information on to the Serbian air defences... not really a surprise.
Fourth... and most importantly they would need to aim the guidance beam at the F-117 and keep it on it for the missiles to guide. These SA-3s are not vanilla old models they have had upgrades and those upgrades probably included optical backup guidance which was probably used by the first unit to mark the aircraft with a pencil radar beam.
I rather doubt luck is why the F-117 was brought down, that would take a lot of organisation and coordination.

The reason the Serbs didn't seem to do very well with only two confirmed kills is simply because NATO was so scared it operated above the effective altitude of most Serbian systems. Another factor often ignored in the west is that the west used a lot of unmanned platforms and they lost something like 50 of those during the campaign.
If the Serbian Air Defence Force failed because it only brought down 2 manned aircraft then the all powerful NATO force failed because after 74 odd days of total air superiority and air domination it completely failed in its mission to defeat the Serbian armed forces, and the Serbian air defence forces were as dangerous to NATO aircraft on day 74 as they were on day 1.

Sounds like a fail fail fail for NATO to me.

In the end NATO had to resort to lying to Russia to make it think it would have a role in the peacekeeping afterwards to get the Serbs to sign and when the Russians found they had been double crossed they raced forces to Pristina.
The US General in charge reacted by ordering the local British forces to take Pristina, by force if necessary... to which the British General Michael Jackson (no joke... look it up) told him to get stuffed, that he would have to work with the Russians and he wasn't going to start WWIII over this.
Sensible chap IMHO. (The brit, not the yank).

 

[Muhammad-Bin-Qasim]

Sir
I beg to disagree, he is talking facts minus hot air and emotions

I think Safriz is 100 percent correct and it would seem that those who consider America as some sort of an undefeatable giant militarily are the ones who are emotional...

pp