F-35’s can knock down whole PAF & IAF: Pervez Hoodboy

[War Thunder]

His intellectual stature is greater than 1.4 billion Indians put together. So when he says something, people take him seriously. He doesn't make sensational claims just like that. There must have been a lot of research to back his claims.

An intellect that can't even help him comprehend God, is nothing but stupidity thrown in front of ignorants who take it as intellect.

 

[God Parshuram]

We believe in what Uncle SAM said. They are decades ahead than us.
Anything is possible.

One F 35 can shoot down whole of IAF and APF is just too much. It is true that it can defeat any plane in Indian inventory or Pakistan inventory very easily but certainly it is not easy to wipe out whole of Airforce of the either of the country.

 

[Maxpane]

i think he is on ice these days

 

[Peaceful Civilian]

One F 35 can shoot down whole of IAF and APF is just too much. It is true that it can defeat any plane in Indian inventory or Pakistan inventory very easily but certainly it is not easy to wipe out whole of Airforce of the either of the country.

He means F35s, there is S present , so it may be one squardon or few.

 

[CriticalThought]

He knows because he still has connections from the CIA.

He may be doing the job for his CIA masters, keeping desis in awe of US Super Powers. Half the battle is psychological. And the shame is that there is no one who could contradict him.

 

[Shah_G]

F-117 sorties-to-loss ratio over Iraq and Serbia combined = 1300+ : 1

F-117 is 1st generation subsonic VLO bird. Years have passed and much of the world have not managed to produce its equivalent, let alone an F-35.

Above all, recall Operation Neptune Spear in which stealthy helicopters and drones were imvolved - deep inside Pakistan. It worked.


Which reports and which excercises? F-35 was under development in all these years, and its kinematics were intentionally restricted all along.

FYI: https://theaviationist.com/2019/02/...ggressors-at-red-flag-are-starting-to-emerge/

Additionally;

Norway requested USAF to bring its F-22R Raptors for excercises with F-35 of Norwegian Air Force recently, because F-35 is too advanced for other jets to stand up to.

"The Norwegians told Shalal that practicing with the American F-22s provided the stealthy new jets with training opportunities that would not normally be available since the F-35s are usually able to surprise and “overpower” conventional non-stealthy aircraft."

Link: https://taskandpurpose.com/f-35-f-22-dogfight-norway


Hmm. From where I shall begin?

Of-course, decent training of a pilot is essential, but F-35 is designed to do the heavylifting for the pilot in so many ways.

F-35's EODAS capability:

- all on its own, provide massive advantage to the aircraft's pilot in WVR combat situations.

But;

[1] https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/unde...-35-jsf-for-the-dummies.472240/#post-10935637

[2] https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/turk...f-su-57-fighters-to-ankara.613126/page-5#post

[3] https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/turk...f-su-57-fighters-to-ankara.613126/page-7#post

Point is, F-35 and F-22 are entirely different class of birds in comparison to what PAF and IAF have in their inventory, and even Russia and China are far behind in this race.

F-117 was never up against any modern airforce, plus when it flew stealth tech was newly introduced. Let F-117 fly above Pakistan and watch it coming down in seconds. F-117 was up against world war 2 era weaponry during gulf war and Iraq war. Secondly, F-117 wasn’t built for dogfight it’s built to enter enemy airspace to drop bombs on enemies air defenses without being detected, before rest of aircrafts such as F-18s can enter to take on from there.

We all know there was a story behind Operation Neptune Spear. Americans were on our soil working with us and against us at the same time. The Americans did their homework for years and knew the best route from Afghanistan towards abbotabad with knowledge of our defenses along the way. Basically during Musharraf and Zardari era they used ppl like Husain’s haqqani as Trojan horse against us by infesting the nation with CIA and black water. So that’s a whole different story.

Back to F-35, like I said with a right pilot behind F-16, F-35s can be taken out of sky. They’re overrated just like F-4 phantoms were during Vietnam war. Americans are just hyping it up for sales.

The pictures you attached you can see it’s more useful against ground attack. It’s not built like that to take on the likes of F-16s and F-22. If anything, F-22 is the real challenging one.

https://breakingdefense.com/2015/07/f-16-vs-f-35-in-a-dogfight-jpo-air-force-weigh-in-on-whos-best/

 

[gambit]

...all I’m saying is it’s proven that F-35s can be shot down during dog fights with right tactics.

I have been saying -- on this forum -- for yrs, and I suggest you pay attention...

In a fight, you win not by fighting under your opponent's rules, but by forcing him to fight under yours. And cheating is allowed.

War and combat are not meant to fight fair, as in Queensberry Rules. In wars and combat, you fight dirty, you fight 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 to one.

In combat, any advantage you have is a 'rule'. If your fighter have more powerful engines and can climb faster, you take the fight away from cornering. On the other hand, if your fighter can corner better, you do your best to take your opponent into a turning fight. If you have a longer radar, that is a rule and you shoot from afar. If you are smaller, you use background clutter to hide.

In the end, the pilot who understand his fighter better than the opponent understand his fighter -- win.

So what you do mean by 'right tactics' against the F-35, a fighter with practically unmatched sensory applications, maneuvers like with thrust vectoring but without the real thrust vectoring, low radar observability body, and radar operating in low probability of intercept mode?

So what 'right tactics' can you come up? Am not trying to be mean to you. When I was active duty and transitioned from the F-111 to the F-16, I knew there was no way -- other than a miracle -- that an F-111 can win against the F-16. The F-111 was more maneuverable than most people realized, but when I felt 9g in the F-16, I knew the F-111 was grossly outmatched.

The F-22 and F-35 are as different from today's main line fighters as the analog F-16 to the F-111. Some times the differences are so great and no 'right tactics' are possible. Red Flag exercises with the F-22 and F-35 are secret, but anecdotal testimonies from adversary pilots gave a rather dejecting future for opponents of those fighters.

 

[Yaseen1]

I have been saying -- on this forum -- for yrs, and I suggest you pay attention...

In a fight, you win not by fighting under your opponent's rules, but by forcing him to fight under yours. And cheating is allowed.

War and combat are not meant to fight fair, as in Queensberry Rules. In wars and combat, you fight dirty, you fight 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 to one.

In combat, any advantage you have is a 'rule'. If your fighter have more powerful engines and can climb faster, you take the fight away from cornering. On the other hand, if your fighter can corner better, you do your best to take your opponent into a turning fight. If you have a longer radar, that is a rule and you shoot from afar. If you are smaller, you use background clutter to hide.

In the end, the pilot who understand his fighter better than the opponent understand his fighter -- win.

So what you do mean by 'right tactics' against the F-35, a fighter with practically unmatched sensory applications, maneuvers like with thrust vectoring but without the real thrust vectoring, low radar observability body, and radar operating in low probability of intercept mode?

So what 'right tactics' can you come up? Am not trying to be mean to you. When I was active duty and transitioned from the F-111 to the F-16, I knew there was no way -- other than a miracle -- that an F-111 can win against the F-16. The F-111 was more maneuverable than most people realized, but when I felt 9g in the F-16, I knew the F-111 was grossly outmatched.

The F-22 and F-35 are as different from today's main line fighters as the analog F-16 to the F-111. Some times the differences are so great and no 'right tactics' are possible. Red Flag exercises with the F-22 and F-35 are secret, but anecdotal testimonies from adversary pilots gave a rather dejecting future for opponents of those fighters.

 

[shambhu]

His intellectual stature is greater than 1.4 billion Indians put together. So when he says something, people take him seriously. He doesn't make sensational claims just like that. There must have been a lot of research to back his claims.

he is a liberal pakistani most of the time he is criticised for his views .i respect him.

 

[Aasimkhan]

Fifth generation aircraft — such as the F-35 stealth fighter — have tilted an already tilted playing field much further. In Atlantic war exercises these fighters have been repeatedly tested against the kind of third- and fourth-generation fighters like those currently in the Pakistani and Indian air fleets. While kill ratios are secret, they are sometimes leaked. Assuming the leaks are correct, in some hypothetical war just two squadrons of American F-35s could knock down the combined might of the PAF and IAF fleets fighting together for the loss of just one F-35 — or perhaps none.


https://www.dawn.com/news/1475818

What is he smoking these days ?

Hoodbhoy is a confused idiot

 

[shambhu]

first u.s will not be going to destroy indian airforce as they need them to contain china and if they destroy Paf we will nuke israel which u.s cannot afford so I think if u.s destroy airforce of Pakistan,india this will lead to russia and china involvement in conflict and we may get j20,su35 or su57 which will be challenging for f35 or any u.s jet and their aircraft carriers or other ships in the region may be attacked .

great analysis .

 

[maverick1977]

Fifth generation aircraft — such as the F-35 stealth fighter — have tilted an already tilted playing field much further. In Atlantic war exercises these fighters have been repeatedly tested against the kind of third- and fourth-generation fighters like those currently in the Pakistani and Indian air fleets. While kill ratios are secret, they are sometimes leaked. Assuming the leaks are correct, in some hypothetical war just two squadrons of American F-35s could knock down the combined might of the PAF and IAF fleets fighting together for the loss of just one F-35 — or perhaps none.


https://www.dawn.com/news/1475818

What is he smoking these days ?

Dissect his claim by breaking down what made him put this claim out like this... we all know that’s the truth ... may be lopsided but for sure 5:1 easily in favor of F35 ...

 

[shambhu]

lols worshipper of advance weapons! all the tech combined all the allies of the world couldnt beat Taliban in Afghanistan! i am sure wr will manage!

taliban are gurilla fighters only , nothing related to fifth generation aircraft .

Dissect his claim by breaking down what made him put this claim out like this... we all know that’s the truth ... may be lopsided but for sure 5:1 easily in favor of F35 ...

yes right .

 

[Respect4Respect01]

@newb3e You don't have ability to think & see outside of box. You people Just used to tell what ratta rattaya like parrot. People like you believe in stone Pelters afghanis taking out american airforce & navy. U.S.A wanted to come near china and expand influence. That's one of the reason they left footprints in afganistan..
As far as casualties are concerned, 1.2 million stated in iraq only till 2007, Now combine other Muslim countries and count. U.S.A don't need to demolish afganistan , they themselves are enough due to backward mentality.

what ratta rataya? sure they might be "backwards" but they had the will and guts to fight, our coward Musharraf bowed down to USA pressure and destroyed Pakistan...which is disgraceful for a nuclear nation.

yea agree with you on this one, 1.2 million CIVILIANS were killed, now you decide whose the real terrorist here? what did american navy and air force achieve except civilian casualties? Taliban are still fighting back, you can't say that they are defeated until they surrender or lose all their captured areas, its the Americans that are asking for peace talks right now.

 

[Shah_G]

I have been saying -- on this forum -- for yrs, and I suggest you pay attention...

In a fight, you win not by fighting under your opponent's rules, but by forcing him to fight under yours. And cheating is allowed.

War and combat are not meant to fight fair, as in Queensberry Rules. In wars and combat, you fight dirty, you fight 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 to one.

In combat, any advantage you have is a 'rule'. If your fighter have more powerful engines and can climb faster, you take the fight away from cornering. On the other hand, if your fighter can corner better, you do your best to take your opponent into a turning fight. If you have a longer radar, that is a rule and you shoot from afar. If you are smaller, you use background clutter to hide.

In the end, the pilot who understand his fighter better than the opponent understand his fighter -- win.

So what you do mean by 'right tactics' against the F-35, a fighter with practically unmatched sensory applications, maneuvers like with thrust vectoring but without the real thrust vectoring, low radar observability body, and radar operating in low probability of intercept mode?

So what 'right tactics' can you come up? Am not trying to be mean to you. When I was active duty and transitioned from the F-111 to the F-16, I knew there was no way -- other than a miracle -- that an F-111 can win against the F-16. The F-111 was more maneuverable than most people realized, but when I felt 9g in the F-16, I knew the F-111 was grossly outmatched.

The F-22 and F-35 are as different from today's main line fighters as the analog F-16 to the F-111. Some times the differences are so great and no 'right tactics' are possible. Red Flag exercises with the F-22 and F-35 are secret, but anecdotal testimonies from adversary pilots gave a rather dejecting future for opponents of those fighters.

I have been saying -- on this forum -- for yrs, and I suggest you pay attention...

In a fight, you win not by fighting under your opponent's rules, but by forcing him to fight under yours. And cheating is allowed.

War and combat are not meant to fight fair, as in Queensberry Rules. In wars and combat, you fight dirty, you fight 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 to one.

In combat, any advantage you have is a 'rule'. If your fighter have more powerful engines and can climb faster, you take the fight away from cornering. On the other hand, if your fighter can corner better, you do your best to take your opponent into a turning fight. If you have a longer radar, that is a rule and you shoot from afar. If you are smaller, you use background clutter to hide.

In the end, the pilot who understand his fighter better than the opponent understand his fighter -- win.

So what you do mean by 'right tactics' against the F-35, a fighter with practically unmatched sensory applications, maneuvers like with thrust vectoring but without the real thrust vectoring, low radar observability body, and radar operating in low probability of intercept mode?

So what 'right tactics' can you come up? Am not trying to be mean to you. When I was active duty and transitioned from the F-111 to the F-16, I knew there was no way -- other than a miracle -- that an F-111 can win against the F-16. The F-111 was more maneuverable than most people realized, but when I felt 9g in the F-16, I knew the F-111 was grossly outmatched.

The F-22 and F-35 are as different from today's main line fighters as the analog F-16 to the F-111. Some times the differences are so great and no 'right tactics' are possible. Red Flag exercises with the F-22 and F-35 are secret, but anecdotal testimonies from adversary pilots gave a rather dejecting future for opponents of those fighters.

I have been saying -- on this forum -- for yrs, and I suggest you pay attention...

In a fight, you win not by fighting under your opponent's rules, but by forcing him to fight under yours. And cheating is allowed.

War and combat are not meant to fight fair, as in Queensberry Rules. In wars and combat, you fight dirty, you fight 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 to one.

In combat, any advantage you have is a 'rule'. If your fighter have more powerful engines and can climb faster, you take the fight away from cornering. On the other hand, if your fighter can corner better, you do your best to take your opponent into a turning fight. If you have a longer radar, that is a rule and you shoot from afar. If you are smaller, you use background clutter to hide.

In the end, the pilot who understand his fighter better than the opponent understand his fighter -- win.

So what you do mean by 'right tactics' against the F-35, a fighter with practically unmatched sensory applications, maneuvers like with thrust vectoring but without the real thrust vectoring, low radar observability body, and radar operating in low probability of intercept mode?

So what 'right tactics' can you come up? Am not trying to be mean to you. When I was active duty and transitioned from the F-111 to the F-16, I knew there was no way -- other than a miracle -- that an F-111 can win against the F-16. The F-111 was more maneuverable than most people realized, but when I felt 9g in the F-16, I knew the F-111 was grossly outmatched.

The F-22 and F-35 are as different from today's main line fighters as the analog F-16 to the F-111. Some times the differences are so great and no 'right tactics' are possible. Red Flag exercises with the F-22 and F-35 are secret, but anecdotal testimonies from adversary pilots gave a rather dejecting future for opponents of those fighters.

I have been saying -- on this forum -- for yrs, and I suggest you pay attention...

In a fight, you win not by fighting under your opponent's rules, but by forcing him to fight under yours. And cheating is allowed.

War and combat are not meant to fight fair, as in Queensberry Rules. In wars and combat, you fight dirty, you fight 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 to one.

In combat, any advantage you have is a 'rule'. If your fighter have more powerful engines and can climb faster, you take the fight away from cornering. On the other hand, if your fighter can corner better, you do your best to take your opponent into a turning fight. If you have a longer radar, that is a rule and you shoot from afar. If you are smaller, you use background clutter to hide.

In the end, the pilot who understand his fighter better than the opponent understand his fighter -- win.

So what you do mean by 'right tactics' against the F-35, a fighter with practically unmatched sensory applications, maneuvers like with thrust vectoring but without the real thrust vectoring, low radar observability body, and radar operating in low probability of intercept mode?

So what 'right tactics' can you come up? Am not trying to be mean to you. When I was active duty and transitioned from the F-111 to the F-16, I knew there was no way -- other than a miracle -- that an F-111 can win against the F-16. The F-111 was more maneuverable than most people realized, but when I felt 9g in the F-16, I knew the F-111 was grossly outmatched.

The F-22 and F-35 are as different from today's main line fighters as the analog F-16 to the F-111. Some times the differences are so great and no 'right tactics' are possible. Red Flag exercises with the F-22 and F-35 are secret, but anecdotal testimonies from adversary pilots gave a rather dejecting future for opponents of those fighters.

Well.. I’m not degrading the F-35, it’s just what the statistics says that’s it’s possible. It’s not built for dogfight or a air superiority fighter like F-22 which is whole different class on another level.

F-35 is built to shoot from far and the moment it releases its weaponry, it’s going to reveal its presence in the air alerting the enemy. Now if aircraft such as F-16/Rafel can get close enough, which did happen in past, it can be taken out.

I have a question for you. If F-35 is superior with such advance tech, why’s it being offered to other countries, when F-22 aren’t being offered to none?