IAF losing edge over PAF:Military Intelligence.

[SQ8]

Now where was the thread???
IAF losing the edge?
Sensible posts on that..
anything else.. is going pink very soon.

 

[blain2]

Sure.. Pilot skill matters a lot.. But that factor is being diminished every day, not just in the field of military but over all.. Take an example of a plane with BVR going up against an older plane. Pilot skills be damned. The non BVR guy wont even know what hit him.. Isnt it. And I am using BVR as an example and technical jump. No implication between India and Pakistan balance..

Pilot skill is the one and only factor that will always matter unless AI takes over the job of flying aircraft. Employing BVR requires considerable skill and even more so to avoid a BVRAAM. The way the aircraft is positioned for a weapons employment solution will always require skilled pilots who really understand and train hard on tactics. WIth WVR, which is not gone despite what people say (it reminds me of the USAF's decision to get rid of the gun on the F-4 because they thought all engagements would be with AAMs and were proven wrong).

Airforces such as PAF and IAF will come fairly close and without a shadow of doubt get engaged in WVR combat.

 

[blain2]

in 65 and 71, PAF had better training, exposure and tech. while IAF had numbers.

now IAF has all the advantages (declining numbers though)

I would disagree vehemently with your statement. Any day, any time, you pitch one of our pilots against their IAF counterparts and you will find PAF pilots just as good or better, no ifs and buts about it. Exposure? Is your side the only ones training with others and is exposure the only way to get better? Most of the "getting better" is done by burning the midnight oil on your own. There is plenty of this going on in the PAF.

We make do with less, but do not cut corners in our training.

 

[Bang Galore]

I would disagree vehemently with your statement. Any day, any time, you pitch one of our pilots against their IAF counterparts and you will find PAF pilots just as good or better, no ifs and buts about it. Exposure? Is your side the only ones training with others and is exposure the only way to get better? Most of the "getting better" is done by burning the midnight oil on your own. There is plenty of this going on in the PAF.

We make do with less, but do not cut corners in our training.

I agree with you on the quality of personnel on both sides. All things being equal, the side with the better equipment would win, would it not?

 

[blain2]

My own take is that this whole report is for internal Indian consumption. PAF and IAF both keep each others' strengths and force projection plans in mind when planning.

While the absolute number of aircraft is going down, more and more multi-role aircraft are being inducted which reduce the need to have a dedicated sqn sanctioned. Fleet rationalization is also a consideration and this is a trend world wide.

Pakistan needs enough to make the IAF realize that their task is not easy, and for the IAF, despite the reduction in the squadrons, this is a temporary issue because MMCRA and LCA are supposed to replace the aging aircraft.

Overall, nothing dire about the situation on hand. The GoI know it and the IAF know it.

 

[blain2]

I agree with you on the quality of personnel on both sides. All things being equal, the side with the better equipment would win, would it not?

Again depends on the margin of "better". In both of the past two wars, F-86s and Folland Gnats have bested better aircraft. That should suggest something. Now I am not saying that even if we had an F-86 go up against the F-16, it would depend on the pilot. In such cases the advantage is too big for one platform/pilot, however in the case of India and Pakistan, with the mix of aircraft, things won't be so clear cut. If limited F-7s are employed, they would be provided cover with BVR capable platforms (JF-17, F-16 etc.). The same goes for your side.

 

[Bhim]

If Pakistan is having an numerical edge over India, then I see no reason India going for more fighter crafts then already under production or to be ordered.
I see future air wars and superiority by UAVs.
India should develop high endurance armed UAVs. Combined with Satellite imagery and vast array of Radars, they can prove very lethal, and even if not able to return can just go and explode deep inside enemy territory.
So there will be many types of drones, the spy drones, the attack drones and the suicide mission drones.
The spy drones coming up for trials are solar powered able to stay airborne for weeks, having high resolution cameras, its able to keep an eye on every enemy forward line formations and movement.
Once

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

(it reminds me of the USAF's decision to get rid of the gun on the F-4 because they thought all engagements would be with AAMs and were proven wrong)..

F-4 was one unstable,sometimes scary sonofabitch to fly....those sexy bends & curves were there to balance its instability esp in high speed....it had a bad fuel consumption; drank fuel the way a russian goes through a bottle of the stiff stuff esp. with after-burners which dramatically reduced its range --you could watch the fuel needle dipping southwards....it was easily detected b/c of the black smoke trail it left..... USAF did get rid of the gun but after incident over Korea the later versions were fitted with a gun pods under the wings


---until the Vulcan was finally fitted to the nose....thats the best thing i like about F4, its Vullcan


i feel sorry for any sorry bastard who was ever in their lifetime at the receiving end of that gun.............but i digress!

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

That is an old argument---which doesnot hold much ground now----the missiles of this day and age are making 80% kills within their 60% max range----missiles of Phantom era were barely---what 20% kill ratio if any----. Some assess the kill ratio to be 95% at closing in range----

The doctrine of combat has changed as well----. Planes like the F22 fight a totally different battle that its predessors fought----the enemy will be engaged from a distance---whomsoever has better missiles and longer ranges will win----. No average pilots sits in the machines of this day and age and claim hisself to be an ordinary pilot----. Each one of them is a very capable pilot---it is just the function of the design that te pilot has to be above average to operate these beasts---then the real multiplier of strength or the force multiplier is his equipment---it is the computer/electronics that is doing the leg work----so where lies the issue---.

Now----if pak has about 200 F 16's Blk 52's and mlu's with amraam in operation now----I would say that indian air force beware----but what we have as of today----Iaf has nothing to worry about----. It would be a lopsided affair----even though the paf fighter would take the honorable route---it would a total mismatch----superior numbers---superior weaponery----longer range----.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

not necessarily given the fact that PAF is primarily a defensive force with offensive-defence capability......

also keep in mind that the neighbour country will be retiring many of their older aircrafts as they are reaching or have already reached their service lives (we're in the same boat but have a viable replacement in store already).

also, india does have flagship fighters like the flankers which are qualitatively ahead of most of what we have in our fleets......however with recent inductions we do have access to tech and capabilities that have closed the tech. gap between us and the enemy --not limited to force multipliers like AEW&C but also the AMRAAMS ('charlies') and F-solas undergoing structural and internal upgradations

we are a smaller country with fewer resources but the pilot training imparted will ensure that we know every trick in the book; we know how to plan for enemy tactics and --based on records and attritions -- our flight safety record is more than respectable. Flight safety is often un-spoken about but it is crucial for any professional air force.


at the end of the day, as long as we can keep our skies saffron-free --- then 99% of the mission is complete. Thus far, we've done pretty well -- again, despite all odds against us.


not trying to sound pompous or over-confident here. Just saying.

 

[harshad]

I would disagree vehemently with your statement. Any day, any time, you pitch one of our pilots against their IAF counterparts and you will find PAF pilots just as good or better, no ifs and buts about it. Exposure? Is your side the only ones training with others and is exposure the only way to get better? Most of the "getting better" is done by burning the midnight oil on your own. There is plenty of this going on in the PAF.

We make do with less, but do not cut corners in our training.

iaf pilots have always been as good as paf pilots its only that the russian technology was not as reliable as the american technology which pakistan had in 65,71
and the thing that iaf losing edge over paf is just a referance to the quantitative aspect

 

[abdulbarijan]

Here are the vids by headlines today

 

[NALANDA]

Good Pilots and Bad Pilots depends upon the quality of training imparted to Pilots......and the brain in the pit.

Just compar the years of training an Indian Air Force officers gets right from selection at SSB to hours of man flight etc.....this will throw the right answer.

I am not comapring the brain behind the pit as we Pakistani Posters only believe in physical attributes and not the Baniya Buddhi.

About Past success, if any, it's like a mutual fund disclaimer ( past success in no gaurantee of future returns).

Training and equipment is the key when there is comeptition between unequals and brain when equals..

 

[kingdurgaking]

?????10?60%??_?_



I'm assuming you're talking about the R 73 Archer missile with a range of 40 Km with the mark 2 version. The J10B would easily detect the MKI at ranges where the SD 10 or PL 12 could engage. As for the MKI surviving a modern high explosive BVR missile. Thats just laughable. The J10B would be receiving a AESA radar with far greater range, accuracy, and amount of missiles capable of being guided. Even compared to J 10A specifications the MKI does not have a significant advantage. Its radar range is nullified by its own enormous RCS which allows fighters with less powerful radars to detect it at the same range as it would detect others.



Yes you are very much a fanboy. You take the good things from the MKI and completely ignore its shortcomings like its PESA radar, enormous RCS, and etc. You also discount the opponent aircrafts advantage like, AESA, lesser RCS, and IRST.

Looky here MKs also carry a s**tload of missiles and a powerful radar. We win. Great argument eh?

Yes it is very true if you have more missile under your wing and if you can engage more target at the same time you have edge..
if you agree or not.. it is immaterial.. you can ask your own military defense personal...

RCS doesnt have any value until the enemy is possessing stealth crafts.. whose detection range is within 40 KM and he has a engaging missile more than 80 km which is the advantage of F-22 posses... MKI can detect F-16 size RCS more than 100 KM away and has capabilities to launch missile at 80Km Range about 8 missiles simultaneously... which is a good advantage..

 

[Silk]

Good Pilots and Bad Pilots depends upon the quality of training imparted to Pilots......and the brain in the pit.

Just compar the years of training an Indian Air Force officers gets right from selection at SSB to hours of man flight etc.....this will throw the right answer.

I am not comapring the brain behind the pit as we Pakistani Posters only believe in physical attributes and not the Baniya Buddhi.

About Past success, if any, it's like a mutual fund disclaimer ( past success in no gaurantee of future returns).

Training and equipment is the key when there is comeptition between unequals and brain when equals..

Let us move away from a pilot better then b pilot. Let us focus on the planes. Since no one has followed both PAF and IAF training we can skip that part. And if the IAF was that good then how come that since inception the IAF had better material, better pilots, 1 to 5 ration advantage and still there was no huge loss on the Pakistani side? I mean we saw how Israel pretty much destroyed either anything in the ground or up in the air. How come India did not achieve that while they should have done it with two hands down? Was it different era? Doubt that.There were even the same planes! We can conclude that Pakistani Airforce is pretty good. It has no other choice and it is even the motto said by Qaid Azam. "Second to none".So if quality, quantity and environment (no depth) is disadvantage then it is corrected with other methods.

About the ability to do something. Let us compare the production hall of LCA with that of the JF17. You can say a lot but there is extremely clear difference. Look at the halls, look at the people and then tell me what is professional and clean. Things that we all can see and judge. I am not going to say that LCA is less or more but I do have to say that the Indian side has a lot to improve. I admire their intentions and ideas but there is a huge gap with reality. Still, in a world with only a few nations able to make planes these days, India is trying to get that done.