What's new

General Chuck Yeager and the Pakistan Air Force

.
Please stop picking up the shattered ego of your IAF. If India was completely dominant, they would have rendered the PAF as defeated and useless.Now tell me. Did they?

Yes, they did.

Check out post#51. Also the thread below discussed the issue.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-history-strategy/18071-who-won-air-war-1971-a.html

The victory was not secured so comprehensively despite IAF but because IAF played a crucial role.

Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, who took over from General Yahya Yahya Khan after the 1971 defeat. On taking over, he made a speech in which he castigated the PAF chief Air Marshal Rahim Khan and several other officers by name.

This should tell you something. ;)
 
.
I was wating for someone to open a thread on MR.Chuck however it's been done thanks. The trolls are going crazy with hate and damaging their health lolz love this true story of MR.Chuck thanks so much for sharing some people just can't digest the truth jerks.
 
.
I find it to be a disgrace even debating that , you can't find the link because they would be all Indian links. You ain't not trying to disprove something , you are just making yourself look stupid.

Speaking of PAF , we hold another unique honor to ourselves , the first and also the last plane to be shot down between PAK-IND wars were both Indian. You know what that means ? :D

I am sorry, that was a silly retort.

I have read the same extract myself, independent of this reproduction. His colleagues considered Yeager an over-promoted, juvenile loose cannon, and there is ample evidence of his exceeding his brief and climbed into bed with the PAF. His version is anything but fair.

I have never failed to acknowledge, even highlight the truth in the matter of Indo-Pakistani military encounters, for that matter, military encounters anywhere. This self-adulatory piece at the beginning is a travesty of the truth.

Please base your evaluation of the 1965 encounter on the reports and analysis printed by Pakistani authorities themselves, if you wish, including the former chiefs of the PAF. Please do not continue to inflict this blatant propaganda on us.
 
.
Excellent autobiography by Chuck Yeager, I know what’s going through Indian mind right now & I can already see lots of upset Indians. It will be better for them to admit the truth & keep quiet rather than trolling the topic & spread their version of total lies story.
 
.
In 71 US would have entered the war if we invaded west Pakistan, we were nor are prepared to face an adversary like US.. However your tone is very condescending coming from a Pakistani and its situation... My last reply... Try to stay on topic, if you have nothing to say on topic you can troll somewhere else..

Before you point me to the topic, you just had to crap, didn't you? If the US had any intention to enter the war, they would have done so before the fall of Dhaka! And Soviet involvement in the war was a lot more then any help Pakistan got from any quarter. In 1971, it was East Pakistan against West Pakistan + India + Soviet Union (covert). No wonder India never dared cross the border ever again, as after that it would just have been India and Pakistan....odds that India does not take lightly!

On topic, IAF was 1200+ strong and still could not get the better of PAF, just imagine the situation, reversed. With less than 1/4 the inventory, PAF still performed better. Is that not enough to shut youup?
 
.
War broke out only a couple of months after we had arrived, in late November 1971, when India attacked East Pakistan. The battle lasted only three days before East Pakistan fell. India's intention was to annex East Pakistan and claim it for themselves. But the Pakistanis counter-attacked. Air Marshal Rahim Khan laid a strike on the four closest Indian air fields in the western part of India, and wiped out a lot of equipment. At that point, Indira Gandhi began moving her forces toward West Pakistan, and President Nixon sent an ultimatum: An invasion of West Pakistan would bring the U.S. into the conflict. Meanwhile, all the Moslem countries rallied around Pakistanis and began pouring in supplies and manpower. China moved in a lot of equipment, while Russia backed the Indians all the way. So, it really became a kind of surrogate war - the Pakistanis, with U.S. training and equipment, versus the Indians, mostly Russian-trained, flying Soviet airplanes.

The Pakistanis whipped their [Indians'] a$$es in the sky, but it was the other way around in the ground war. The air war lasted two weeks and the Pakistanis scored a three-to-one kill ratio, knocking out 102 Russian-made Indian jets and losing thirty-four airplanes of their own. I'm certain about the figures because I went out several times a day in a chopper and counted the wrecks below. I counted wrecks on Pakistani soil, documented them by serial number, identified the components such as engines, rocket pods, and new equipment on newer planes like the Soviet SU-7 fighter-bomber and the MiG-21 J, their latest supersonic fighter. The Pakistani army would cart off these items for me, and when the war ended, it took two big American Air Force cargo lifters to carry all those parts back to the States for analysis by our intelligence division.



Though this looks a biased excerpt, i need some answers:

1. The author claims that India started the war by attacking East Pakistan, but it is internationally agreed that the actual war was started on Dec. 3, 1971 when the PAF attacked Indian air bases close to borders of west Pakistan.

2. On what basis the author claims that India's intention was to annex East Pakistan as we all know after 1971 war that it wasn't the case.

3. US called itself a true ally of Pakistan, but when the war broke, President Nixon says that US will only involve itself in the war when west Pakistan will be attacked, how than it can call itself a friend or ally or whatever of Pakistan. Does this mean US had no objection to an independent Bangladesh.

4. How did the author came to know about the kills by both sides of air warfare?? firstly, there is no concrete proof till date as to who won the air war in 1971, if we assume what he says as to PAF victory than also his figure of 3 to 1 kill in favor of PAF seems absurd, he says he counted all the wreaks on the Pakistani side for the IAF planes, how was he able to count the PAF wreaks on the Indian side??
 
.
Aeronaut,

You can call me all you want but then I could almost guess that the only thing you could do was to throw up such useless sentences..

Here are the details of the article


Publication: The Washington Monthly
Date: October 1985
Volume/issue: Vol. 17


You can verify it yourself, it is not an Indian article..

Its more like the mod has taken that position now..

His perspective was that PAF would reach Delhi within a week too..

Here is a link

The right stuff in the wrong place. (Chuck Yeager's crash landing in Pakistan)
 
.

The painting in the article was depicted from this F-86 Sabre's Gun Camera images showing the Indian MiG-21 on fire after losing in dogfight with the obsolete Sabre, interesting to note the second image showing the moment of ejection as the Indian pilot leaves his stricken aircraft.





images


images
 
.
I can too post pics of IAF shooting down PAF aircraft from another forum but that will result in a ban:)

Wonder what else you can post except the shooting down of F-86s in Eastern Sector. !!
 
.
Ohhh!!! I see a lot of Indian pain here. They just cant keep to themselves if they have a point to prove against Pakistan. Just look at the number of posts on this thread by them.
 
. .
What do you mean sir?

The only gun camera images, Indian members keep posting is the shooting down of a couple of F-86s in Bora sector or something.
Where is the proof on tall claims of shooting down ten F-104s and Six Mirages and all else. ??
 
.
The only gun camera images, Indian members keep posting is the shooting down of a couple of F-86s in Bora sector or something.
Where is the proof on tall claims of shooting down ten F-104s and Six Mirages and all else. ??
I've seen Gun camera images but cannot post it coz it is on BR
 
.
Chuck Yeager was on Pakistan's side and his bias and really weird personal troubles then have been highlighted enough by other american officer of that time. Not to mention the factual liberties the drunk man seems to take.

While I understand why this makes Pakistan feel good (and blood telegram bad), it has little academic value.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom