What's new

Infra-Red Search & Track (IRST) Systems

But---then the J10 was being developed at the same time and it had IRST.
A couple of scenarios (all hypothetical):

1) PAF did not want an IRST, because they weren't convinced of the cost versus utility.
2) PAF didn't want a chinese IRST, at that point in time.
3) PAF actually thinks that after the deployment of AWACS, IRST isn't cost effective.
4) PAF wants to add one, but bean counters have them by the balls.

:cheers:

@Windjammer @araz @TaimiKhan Would appreciate your input.
 
.


Counter-stealth performance

It is a general wisdom that IRST is of limited usefulness due to its sensitivity to adverse weather conditions. However, most modern stealth fighters (excepting the F-35 and J-31 tactical bombers) are intended to operate at high altitudes – above 50.000 ft – where ambient temperatures range from -30 to -60 degrees Celsius, which helps provide excellent contrast. Air at this altitude is also very dry, with 99,8% of the atmospheric water being below 45.000 ft. Combined with low air density and low aerosoil content, this means that there is very little atmospheric absorption of IR radiation. This applies especially to the longwave band, but detection capability is significantly improved in most bands as can be seen from the image below.



Stealth aircraft are designed to have certain IR signature reduction measures, but effectiveness of these is rather limited due to basic physics. To fly, aircraft has to overcome two basic forces: gravity and drag. Drag is created due to friction with air, compressibility effects and lift. To overcome gravity, aircraft needs lift. To generate lift, aircraft has to move forward and overcome drag. As a result, aircraft has to perform work – which creates heat. Indeed the largest IR sources on the fighter aircraft are its engines. Jet engines work by burning fuel in order to heat up huge quantities of air, which is then propelled out of the rear in order to push the aircraft forward. This leads to significant heat – engine itself is very hot (especially turbines), as is the exhaust nozzle.Engine heats up airframe surrounding it, which can be detected. Exhaust plume is also very hot, though much of the radiation is typically absorbed by the atmosphere (this depends on the altitude – refer to the image before this paragraph).

Other than the engines themselves and their exhaust, there are other sources of IR radiation. Any moving objects have to push the air out of the way. If object is fast – for example, an aircraft flying at high subsonic or supersonic speeds – air cannot move out of the way quickly enough. This leads to compression of the air in front of the aircraft, which in turn leads to heating of said air. At Mach 1,7, a supercruising fighter generates shock cones with stagnation temperature of 87 degrees Celsius. As the air moves out of the way for the aircraft, it also creates significant friction with the aircraft itself, leading to heating of the aircraft’s skin. In a jet fighter, hottest parts of the airframe other than the engine nozzles are tip of the nose, front of the canopy, as well as leading edges (of wings, tail(s) and air intakes).



As mentioned before, MiG-31 would heat up to 760 degrees Celsius during intercepts due to aerodynamic heating alone. Airframe temperature due to friction can reach 54,4 degrees Celsius at Mach 1,6 and 116,8 degrees Celsius at Mach 2,0. F-22 has two pitot tubes – one at each side of the nose – which are heated to 270* C during flight operations to prevent them from icing at high altitude. Avionics have to be cooled – especially radar. Heat exhaust is typically located at fighter’s upper surface – just behind the cockpit in Gripen, and about one canopy length behind it for the F-22. F-35 is in even worse situation since it uses fuel as a coolant, and said fuel completely surrounds its engine. This has the effect of increasing its IR signature as well as thepossibility of bursting into flames if hit.

These temperatures can be compared to the ambient air (Standard US Atmosphere). F-22 achieves maximum cruise speed of Mach 1,72 at ~38.000 ft without afterburner, and maximum speed of Mach 2,0 at between 38.000 and 58.000 ft with afterburner. Above cca 53.000 ft it requires afterburner to fly, and can achieve maximum altitude of ~64.000 ft, where it is limited to maximum speed of Mach 1,6-1,8. Ambient temperature is -44,4 *C at 30.000 ft, -54,2 *C at 35.000 ft, -56,5 *C at 40.000 ft to 60.000 ft, and -55,2 *C at 70.000 ft. That is to say, difference between shock cone of a M 1,7 F-22 and ambient air will be around 130-145 * C, while temperature difference between airframe and ambient air will be cca 111 * C at Mach 1,6 and cca 172 * C at Mach 2,0.

While fighter’s IR signature can be reduced by reducing speed, such course of action also has the effect of reducing one’s own weapons range, as well as making a rear-quarter surprise more likely. In either case, fighter will get detected by modern QWIP IRST before it reaches missile effective range (10-40 km for AIM-120D at most, and can be as low as 2 km).

It is possible to apply IR absorbent paints to a fighter in order to reduce IR emissions from systems inside it. This, at best, does not have any impact on aerodynamic heating. Some IR absorbent paints cause more friction than would otherwise be the case, increasing aerodynamic heating. RAM coatings also can increase friction. While it is not a significant factor in MWIR band, LWIR detectors can detect aircraft by detecting sunshine reflections from its surfaces, such as canopy.

Modern IRST systems can even detect missile launch from its nose cone heating – this is in fact a significant advantage for IR MAWS, as UV MAWS cannot detect missiles that have spent fuel. They are also sensitive enough for planets, birds, and (in air-to-ground) barbecue grills to be sources of clutter.

Note that even if an object is at the exact same temperature as its environment, it still emits blackbody radiation, most of it at longer wavelengths.

Tactical impact

Unlike radar, IRST is primarily a passive system. This allows a fighter aircraft, or a fighter group, to detect and track the enemy without latter being aware of their presence, thus gaining a significant initial advantage in the OODA loop. Even when the enemy is aware of the fighter’s presence, he has no way of knowing wether he has been detected, or is being targeted, until a significant shift in fighters’ posture (such as painting target with a rangefinder or shifting flight path or formation). For comparison, just turning on the radar warns the aircraft in very large area of scanning fighter’s presence – and said area is far larger than one covered by the radar. Not only does it give away fighter’s presence, but if the enemy has good enough listening equipment, it is possible to triangulate location and even identify the target through its unique radar signals. Even radio communications and datalinks can serve the same purpose.

If the enemy is using radar, it is possible to use data from radar warner to generate a bearing, after which IRST can be used in a “stare” mode – continuous track, during which photon impacts are combined over prolonged timeframe to detect a target at greater distances than would normally be possible. This mode is also present in radar systems, and like IRST, radar also has to be cued by other sensors to make use of it. But while using radar in such a manner basically guarantees than the enemy with a competent RWR will detect radar transmissions, IRST is undetectable. Even a short radar burst can allow the passive fighter to generate such bearing, albeit it will somewhat limit the precision.

If radars are jammed, or more likely turned off for fear of detection, first indication of IRST-equipped fighter’s presence that the enemy aircraft will get may be alarm from a missile warning system (or radar warning system if missile is using an active seeker), thus allowing only a short time for defensive reaction. (Simulated trials of ECR-90 have shown that its airborne detection range could be cut to less than 9 kilometers by jamming). If both sides have IRST, it comes down to sensor quality and IR signature differences.

Aircraft equipped with IRST, and using IR MAWS, can remain completely silent during the mission. If the enemy has no IRST, then he will have to turn on his own radar(s), allowing the passive aircraft excellent situational awareness, well beyond what using radar in addition to IRST would allow. Further, active usage of radar will allow geolocation of radar emitters, allowing the passive fighter to use IRST to engage such targets with high precision – thus gaining a “see first, strike first” capability. IRST-equipped aircraft is also not vulnerable to anti-radiation missiles. (Note that such missiles are not very hard to make, with basically all air-to-air engagement radars being in X band).

IRSTs shortcomings can be compensated for by using datalinks to network the fighter with other assets, such as other IRST-equipped fighters and radar-equipped AWACS. As a result, radar is not the primary onboard sensor any more, and is not actually even required.

Using datalink from AWACS (though AWACS is unlikely to survive for long in a shooting war) or ground radars, fighter can then approach the enemy from side or rear, in order to prevent detection by enemy’s own radar and maximize IRSTs detection range. Once target is acquired on IRST, fighter can pursue engagement completely independently. Of course, if enemy fighter uses its own radar, no AWACS is required. It should be noted that most, possibly all, fighter aircraft today lack the datalink capable of transferring amount of data necessary for a firing solution. Even if such datalink is deployed, it will be easy to jam. As a result, fighters have to rely on onboard sensors to create a firing solution (when Rafale shot down a target at 6 o’clock, shot was done with onboard sensors and within visual range; F-35 may have a similar capability).

Large radar-based fighters – such as the F-15, F-22, Flanker variants – can act as AWACS of sorts, providing radar image to smaller IRST-only fighters, which can then use such image to achieve optimal position for a surprise attack. This in turn will allow IRST-equipped fighters to focus the IRST and achieve detection ranges larger than could normally be achieved. Even if radars are jammed, radar-based fighters should be able to roughly tell positions of enemy fighters, unless DRFM, active cancellation or standoff jamming is used. Using IRST to generate a firing solution, and then launching an IR BVRAAM or ramjet RF BVRAAM (or, ideally, a ramjet IR BVRAAM, though such missile does not exist in Western inventory) at a surprised opponent will allow far higher kill probabilities than using an obvious radar for firing solution.

Still, using an AWACS with a huge IRST plus extensive ESM arrays might allow the same tactics without a drawback of warning the enemy that he has been detected, and without suffering vulnerability to decoys and jamming that radar has. Additional advantage of such system is that its effectiveness will not be significantly degraded even against VLO targets. On the other hand, while bad weather degrades IRSTs performance, it also degrades performance of stealth coatings (assuming that stealth fighters can safely enter storm clouds), thus combining radar AWACS with IRST-equipped fighters does make some sense, as does using both types of AWACS.

IRST is the best solution for engaging stealthy aircraft and cruise missiles. As it can be seen from the previous section, is impossible to significantly reduce IR signature of a high-speed, highly maneuverable aircraft, and even low-performance aircraft that do have very extensive IR signature reduction measures are still detectable at large distances by new QWIP imaging IRSTs. Even against “legacy” aircraft its is a better choice than radar, as radar cannot separate valid contacts from decoys except at very short range – especially if it is being jammed. As a result, only IRST-equipped fighters can effectively engage modern fighters at beyond visual range.

IRST can be used as a relatively cheap way of turning an old, possibly even WVR-only, platform into one capable of BVR combat. With PIRATE + MICA IR combination, even an old F-86 would gain a capability to shoot down enemy fighters from beyond visual range (that being said, issues of low cruise speed, deficient acceleration by today’s standards and no defense suite at all would remain, and would mean that even against the F-35, F-86 would not achieve positive kill/loss ratio).

Analytic simulations indicate that an IRST-equipped aircraft will have 230% better exchange ratio than a non-IRST equipped aircraft against a “legacy” target, and 370% better against a LO target.
 
.
A couple of scenarios (all hypothetical):

1) PAF did not want an IRST, because they weren't convinced of the cost versus utility.
2) PAF didn't want a chinese IRST, at that point in time.
3) PAF actually thinks that after the deployment of AWACS, IRST isn't cost effective.
4) PAF wants to add one, but bean counters have them by the balls.

:cheers:

@Windjammer @araz @TaimiKhan Would appreciate your input.

Hi,

The AWACS would be flying for 3 days in a conflict----what were they thinking after that!!
 
. .
Sir, Maybe the PAF doesn't agree with you? Maybe, they don't think they will loose their AWACS in 3 days?

Hi,

The car salesman in me says that with the current aircraft inventory that we have----it will be with in the first 24 hours if not 48 hours that the awacs and the tankers will be gone.

My 72 hours comment was just being polite to the paf. And it will be a matter of utmost shame on the IAF if they are not able to do that with what they have as of now.

With the number of air superiority aircraft that they have at their disposal---they must be able to just smash thru the paf defenses---no ifs and buts.

I will be literally shocked if the first sorties did not have around 150 aircraft right from the word go to start with and peaking up to maybe around 250 aircraft by the time the first aircraft start returning to the base----.

Those awacs that survive maybe landing in iran---.
 
.
A couple of scenarios (all hypothetical):

2) PAF didn't want a chinese IRST, at that point in time.
3) PAF actually thinks that after the deployment of AWACS, IRST isn't cost effective..

Number 2 is correct. The PAF wanted an Italian or French solution initially, but later, they were trying to get a South African solution, based on Israeli tech from the late 90's (still advanced than the Chinese one, as of a few years ago).

On AWACS, IRST and AWACS are two totally different things, and methods. IRST is local to a plane and its just one Sensor, a processing unit, LRF, and a pod like device integrated with a jet's avionics to apply target acquisition and locking techniques / algorithms to the MFD's, and data link with AAM weapons. It won't have a large cost issue for the JFT.

However, most modern stealth fighters (excepting the F-35 and J-31 tactical bombers) are intended to operate at high altitudes – above 50.000 ft – where ambient temperatures range from -30 to -60 degrees Celsius, which helps provide excellent contrast..

Says who? Whoever wrote an article, did he get classified memo of operations from some "Stealth" operating air force outside of the USAF (USAF is the only one with Stealth jets right now).

These are ALL speculations about how great IRST would work against Stealth jets. I think even a child air-force enthusiast would know that after 30K feet, the air is clean, dense and colder. Imagining that people who produced Stealth jets like the F-22, didn't think of these things, is pretty silly.

As a reference: the EFT, in an exercise, had put a lock through IRST onto a Raptor in a dog fight. The incident and the pictures were MUCH hyped and publicized. What people didn't think about, was the fact that how come the EFT's much acclaimed 60-90KM IRST didn't detect the Raptor until it was within visual range, literally a few hundred meters away???

BAM!!! the reality check: you can't shoot what you can't see, whether at 10k, 30k or 50k feet. The air can be as clean as the glass looks. But Ghosts are invisible, unless they show up right in front of you!!

The Iranians have put in Russian IRST's in the -14's and the -4's. A year or so ago, two Iranian jets were chasing down a USAF UAV. A Raptor was flying directly underneath the formation for a while, he pulled out to the side and told the Iranians that they "ought to go home"!! Everyone can guess the response from the other side. The heading vectors were changed drastically to say the least. You can't shoot at, what you can't see!!

The car salesman in me says that with the current aircraft inventory that we have----it will be with in the first 24 hours if not 48 hours that the awacs and the tankers will be gone.

Even 24 hours is a LOT of time, specially with the current strength. The PAF needs to make up her mind and decide on getting something. 50 FC-20, or J-11 would do wonders if supplemented by 18-36 more -16 block 52's (or 40+ used ones at block 40+). These are the need of the hour.

The JFT program should still continue on the side to produce the "workhorse" platform. Not try to turn the JFT into "the only platform". That can start to happen after 2018, when the JFT grows in size and strength (block IV may be).
 
Last edited:
.
Number 2 is correct. The PAF wanted an Italian or French solution initially, but later, they were trying to get a South African solution, based on Israeli tech from the late 90's (still advanced than the Chinese one, as of a few years ago).

On AWACS, IRST and AWACS are two totally different things, and methods. IRST is local to a plane and its just one Sensor, a processing unit, LRF, and a pod like device integrated with a jet's avionics to apply target acquisition and locking techniques / algorithms to the MFD's, and data link with AAM weapons. It won't have a large cost issue for the JFT.



Says who? Whoever wrote an article, did he get classified memo of operations from some "Stealth" operating air force outside of the USAF (USAF is the only one with Stealth jets right now).

These are ALL speculations about how great IRST would work against Stealth jets. I think even a child air-force enthusiast would know that after 30K feet, the air is clean, dense and colder. Imagining that people who produced Stealth jets like the F-22, didn't think of these things, is pretty silly.

As a reference: the EFT, in an exercise, had put a lock through IRST onto a Raptor in a dog fight. The incident and the pictures were MUCH hyped and publicized. What people didn't think about, was the fact that how come the EFT's much acclaimed 60-90KM IRST didn't detect the Raptor until it was within visual range, literally a few hundred meters away???

BAM!!! the reality check: you can't shoot what you can't see, whether at 10k, 30k or 50k feet. The air can be as clean as the glass looks. But Ghosts are invisible, unless they show up right in front of you!!



Even 24 hours is a LOT of time, specially with the current strength. The PAF needs to make up her mind and decide on getting something. 50 FC-20, or J-11 would do wonders if supplemented by 18-36 more -16 block 52's (or 40+ used ones at block 40+). These are the need of the hour.

The JFT program should still continue on the side to produce the "workhorse" platform. Not try to turn the JFT into "the only platform". That can start to happen after 2018, when the JFT grows in size and strength (block IV may be).


Hi,

I think that I was not being truthful to myself and to my analysis about the neutralization of the awacs-----so I was giving them 24 hours just to show that we might put up a fight.

The fact is that by the time---the first sortie is completely over all the awacs would be taken out---.

Paf is sort of living in an illusion that a sortie of 2 here and 4 there will be flown---and I don't think that the indians are that stupid----.

I firmly believe and looking at what has happened in the wars for the last 25 years----it will start with massive strikes---the likes of which not seen before in the arena---.

For that reason---paf needs heavy strike aircraft---those that can reach mumbai and surround regions. If pakistan's industrial complex is going to be destroyed---then mumbai's industrial complex and harbor needs to be destroyed amongst other major targets----.

I wish that @WebMaster invites a serving senior member of the PAF in this web site as a regular member---so that we can find out----how can to us pakistanis how pakistan's inferior machinery can overcome hindustan's superior machinery.
 
Last edited:
.
Hi,

I think that I was not being truthful to myself and to my analysis about the neutralization of the awacs-----so I was giving them 24 hours just to show that we might put up a fight.

The fact is that by the time---the first sortie is completely over all the awacs would be taken out---.

Paf is sort of living in an illusion that a sortie of 2 here and 4 there will be flown---and I don't think that the indians are that stupid----.

I firmly believe and looking at what has happened in the wars for the last 25 years----it will start with massive strikes---the likes of which not seen before in the arena---.

For that reason---paf needs heavy strike aircraft---those that can reach mumbai and surround regions. If pakistan's industrial complex is going to be destroyed---then mumbai's industrial complex and harbor needs to be destroyed amongst other major targets----.

I wish that @WebMaster invites a serving senior member of the PAF in this web site as a regular member---so that we can find out----how can pakistan's inferior machinery can overcome hindustan's superior machinery.
PAF versus IAF : PAF v IAF


Pakistan Air Force

Combat Aircraft Numbers Serviceability Combat Effectiveness Aggregate Combat Value

F-16 44 85% 0.9 33.66

JF-17 17 95% 0.9 14.535

F-7 PG 55 85% 0.75 35.0625

F-7 MP/P 105 70% 0.7 51.45

Mirage Rose 125 70% 0.8 70

Mirages - other 20 60% 0.7 8.4

A-5III/C 'Fantan' 40 50% 0.25 5

406 72.24% 0.72 218.1075

Indian Air Force

Combat Aircraft Numbers Serviceability Combat Effectiveness Aggregate Combat Value

Su-30 MKI 100 70% 0.99 69.3

Mirage 2000H/TH Vajra 51 85% 0.9 39.015

Jaguar S(I) Shamsher 139 75% 0.6 62.55

Mig-29/UB Baaz 62 50% 0.8 24.8

Mig-27 Bahadur 130 50% 0.55 35.75

MiG-21 Bison 120 60% 0.75 54

MiG-21 Bis 56 50% 0.3 8.4

MiG-21 M/MF 80 50% 0.25 10

738 61.46% 0.65 303.815


Capability Gap 39.30% (relative to PAF)

Numbers Gap 81.77% (relative to PAF)

Serviceability Gap -14.92% (relative to PAF)

Combat Effectiveness Gap -10.79% (relative to PAF)
We find the aggregate combat value by multiplying each of the factors and the number of aircraft. As you notice, I have not included factors such as home advantage to the PAF, PAF’s higher pilot ratio or PAF’s better training. I have also not included the short-legged nature of the MiG-21s and India’s likely inability to lose (or risk not losing) their forward air bases effectively rendering them non-operational. These factors are more intrinsic and are harder to quantify so I will leave the reader to judge by how much to upgrade the PAF’s score on these parameters, or discount the IAF’s.

I am assuming that Air-to-Ground capabilities will also be an important aspect as destroying enemy aircraft on the ground or important installations is a significant element of the air war. I therefore am holding higher numbers of effectiveness for aircraft on both sides that otherwise would be completely redundant such as the IAF MiG-27. Of course, Air-to-Air is more important generally but strike missions should also be considered relevant. As such the model is only moderately biased towards air-to-air capabilities.

Conclusion
It would appear that the IAF is still the superior force. And while accounting for the exogenous items in this model would further lower the gap than the massive 39% gap shown in the table, depending on how it is discounted it is still decidedly in India’s favor. However given the short nature of any conflict between India and Pakistan the gap does not lend credibility to India attaining air superiority over Pakistan under any scenario as could be concluded if we took the 82% gap in numbers. I believe that the gap has to at least be 100% to have a reasonable chance of achieving air superiority over Pakistan. Nevertheless, the PAF would likely sustain significant causalities but would be able to deny the IAF any semblance of air superiority over Pakistan, at least for any conflict lasting up to a few weeks. As long as the PAF can deny the IAF air superiority it can be considered to have done its job and would be ready to pick the pieces up from where it left it in the last conflict over Kargil.


Read more: Grande Strategy
 
.
PAF versus IAF : PAF v IAF


Pakistan Air Force

Combat Aircraft Numbers Serviceability Combat Effectiveness Aggregate Combat Value

F-16 44 85% 0.9 33.66

JF-17 17 95% 0.9 14.535

F-7 PG 55 85% 0.75 35.0625

F-7 MP/P 105 70% 0.7 51.45

Mirage Rose 125 70% 0.8 70

Mirages - other 20 60% 0.7 8.4

A-5III/C 'Fantan' 40 50% 0.25 5

406 72.24% 0.72 218.1075

Indian Air Force

Combat Aircraft Numbers Serviceability Combat Effectiveness Aggregate Combat Value

Su-30 MKI 100 70% 0.99 69.3

Mirage 2000H/TH Vajra 51 85% 0.9 39.015

Jaguar S(I) Shamsher 139 75% 0.6 62.55

Mig-29/UB Baaz 62 50% 0.8 24.8

Mig-27 Bahadur 130 50% 0.55 35.75

MiG-21 Bison 120 60% 0.75 54

MiG-21 Bis 56 50% 0.3 8.4

MiG-21 M/MF 80 50% 0.25 10

738 61.46% 0.65 303.815


Capability Gap 39.30% (relative to PAF)

Numbers Gap 81.77% (relative to PAF)

Serviceability Gap -14.92% (relative to PAF)

Combat Effectiveness Gap -10.79% (relative to PAF)
We find the aggregate combat value by multiplying each of the factors and the number of aircraft. As you notice, I have not included factors such as home advantage to the PAF, PAF’s higher pilot ratio or PAF’s better training. I have also not included the short-legged nature of the MiG-21s and India’s likely inability to lose (or risk not losing) their forward air bases effectively rendering them non-operational. These factors are more intrinsic and are harder to quantify so I will leave the reader to judge by how much to upgrade the PAF’s score on these parameters, or discount the IAF’s.

I am assuming that Air-to-Ground capabilities will also be an important aspect as destroying enemy aircraft on the ground or important installations is a significant element of the air war. I therefore am holding higher numbers of effectiveness for aircraft on both sides that otherwise would be completely redundant such as the IAF MiG-27. Of course, Air-to-Air is more important generally but strike missions should also be considered relevant. As such the model is only moderately biased towards air-to-air capabilities.

Conclusion
It would appear that the IAF is still the superior force. And while accounting for the exogenous items in this model would further lower the gap than the massive 39% gap shown in the table, depending on how it is discounted it is still decidedly in India’s favor. However given the short nature of any conflict between India and Pakistan the gap does not lend credibility to India attaining air superiority over Pakistan under any scenario as could be concluded if we took the 82% gap in numbers. I believe that the gap has to at least be 100% to have a reasonable chance of achieving air superiority over Pakistan. Nevertheless, the PAF would likely sustain significant causalities but would be able to deny the IAF any semblance of air superiority over Pakistan, at least for any conflict lasting up to a few weeks. As long as the PAF can deny the IAF air superiority it can be considered to have done its job and would be ready to pick the pieces up from where it left it in the last conflict over Kargil.


Read more: Grande Strategy


Hi,

Thank you for the 'feel good' post---. It won't save your ar-se and it won't save my ar-se in case when the actual war starts---. That is what feel good posts do---they make you feel good---warm and comfy---and make you feel that everything is alright.

The indians already know about the down time of their aircraft and maintenance issues---so---for that reason---they will throw everything in---including the sink in the first sortie.

The purpose of the first soriti would be to neutralize all the airfields---SA batteries---all the awacs and tankers----.

The only way they can succeed is with overwhelming numbers in the first strike---and that is why I say---the first strike will start with around 150 aircrafts and will peak at around 250 by the time it is done---.

Each and every airfield in pakistan would be targetted and all the assets hunted---in the first strike. There will be packs of aircraft just hunting for pakistani awacs and tankers.

The loiter time of the indian primary aircraft is long enough for them to take due time to do their search and go as far as they can.

Truth be told---pakistan air force is a liar---it has been lying to the pakistani public for the last 25 years +++.

It had a simple task and money given to it---to procure an air superiority aircraft---it has not been able to do that in the last 14 years.

If you are a gambler---don't put your money on the paf.
 
Last edited:
.
Hi,

Thank you for the 'feel good' post---. It won't save your ar-se and it won't save my ar-se in case when the actual war starts---. That is what feel good posts do---they make you feel good---warm and comfy---and make you feel that everything is alright.

The indians already know about the down time of their aircraft and maintenance issues---so---for that reason---they will throw everything in---including the sink in the first sortie.

The purpose of the first soriti would be to neutralize all the airfields---SA batteries---all the awacs and tankers----.

The only way they can succeed is with overwhelming numbers in the first strike---and that is why I say---the first strike will start with around 150 aircrafts and will peak at around 250 by the time it is done---.

Each and every airfield in pakistan would be targetted and all the assets hunted---in the first strike. There will be packs of aircraft just hunting for pakistani awacs and tankers.

The loiter time of the indian primary aircraft is long enough for them to take due time to do their search and go as far as they can.

Truth be told---pakistan air force is a liar---it has been lying to the pakistani public for the last 25 years +++.

It had a simple task and money given to it---to procure and air superiority aircraft---it has not been able to do that in the last 14 years.

If you are a gambler---don't put your money on the paf.
Sir If they attack in that large number we did't develop cruise missiles for display, may they attack us and take large number for our jets and airfields but they can't land on their airfields because no airfield will be left to receive the Indian heroes. We have many options and Pls don't feel that sane person only available at PDF we have large sane minded officers and policy makers they know better than me and you.
Regards,

Further on above why you forget our air defense we have quite capable air defense system and SAM like Spada and HQ's.
 
.
Sir If they attack in that large number we did't develop cruise missiles for display, may they attack us and take large number for our jets and airfields but they can't land on their airfields because no airfield will be left to receive the Indian heroes. We have many options and Pls don't feel that sane person only available at PDF we have large sane minded officers and policy makers they know better than me and you.
Regards,

Further on above why you forget our air defense we have quite capable air defense system and SAM like Spada and HQ's.


Hi,

Dream on----as a pakistani---you have every right to---.

You quite capable sane minded policy makers have failed you by not getting the right kind of aircraft in the last 25 plus years---.

All your cruise missiles will be taken out except a few in the first round----because in a surprise air attack---most of the missiles will not be in deployed position.

You don't have thousands of cruise missiles on the ready to cover all the closer airfields----.

By the way---your post is full of DESPERATION----. I feel sad for you because I feel the same way for myself----.

When the day comes for you to learn that you have been lied to by the paf for so many years---you will understand what I am saying.
 
.
Hi,

Dream on----as a pakistani---you have every right to---.

You quite capable sane minded policy makers have failed you by not getting the right kind of aircraft in the last 25 plus years---.

All your cruise missiles will be taken out except a few in the first round----because in a surprise air attack---most of the missiles will not be in deployed position.

You don't have thousands of cruise missiles on the ready to cover all the closer airfields----.

By the way---your post is full of DESPERATION----. I feel sad for you because I feel the same way for myself----.

When the day comes for you to learn that you have been lied to by the paf for so many years---you will understand what I am saying.
2008 air alert
After the 2008 Mumbai attacks, PAF was put on high alert. It deployed to all its wartime locations and started combat air patrols. The speed and intensity of the deployment and PAF's readiness took the Indian Army High Command by surprise and later reports suggest was the main factor in the Indian decision of not going for cross border raids inside Pakistan.[46][47]PAF was issued a Standing Order to launch an immediate counter-attack in case of an air attack from India, after a call from the Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee to the Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari (the call later turned out to be a hoax)
 
. .
2008 air alert
After the 2008 Mumbai attacks, PAF was put on high alert. It deployed to all its wartime locations and started combat air patrols. The speed and intensity of the deployment and PAF's readiness took the Indian Army High Command by surprise and later reports suggest was the main factor in the Indian decision of not going for cross border raids inside Pakistan.[46][47]PAF was issued a Standing Order to launch an immediate counter-attack in case of an air attack from India, after a call from the Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee to the Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari (the call later turned out to be a hoax)

Hi,

The deployment of the ground troops took a long time for india---. But for the air force it won't.

The need for LR SAMS is one of the two must requirements on a fastrak---.

Why did you get banned?
 
.
Why did you get banned?

How can he tell you now :-)

Anyway I wanted to know your opinion on this delusional fantasy that
some of your country men are having that
China will just transfer Su 35 for Pakistan

Do people dont have even a BASIC idea of such international deals and transactions
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom