MiGs over Kargil: How the Fulcrum buzzed the Falcons

[dbc]

Yes, they claimed.

But as we knew then, and as they also know today, it was planned by the army chief himself, and was an operation to capture Indian territory, planned by the highest war planners in the land, including their corps commanders (who basically run Pakistan). And yet they did not dare to use their air force. Not because individual pilots were afraid to fight, but because in the overall picture, PAF stood no chance.

If the PAF had parity with the IAF, they would have used it. Like they did in their previous attempt to take Kashmir in 1965. Then too, similar story of "freedom fighters" was put out. But the PAF did not hesitate to attack Indian bases then.

Their objective was limited war to take a strategic mountain peek overlooking Indian supply lines to crucial forward areas.
They had no intention of escalating this to a full blown conflict. A secondary objective was to internationalize the Kashmir issue by claiming local insurgency, natives waging a war against an occupying force. They went to great lengths to conceal their involvement under such circumstances providing air support to their forces on the mountain was ruled out during the planning phase of the operation.

 

[wakapdf]

3-1 ratio, 3-1... People who dont learn are doomed to repeat it.

 

[dbc]

As if their forces wouldn't have officially jumped in, the minute the attack would have shown even a remote chance to be successful.
The fact is, PAF was in clear disadvantage back then and any involvement into the conflict would have resulted in high losses and remaining defensive was the better choice. However, it's also a fact that the times had changed and that PAF is way more capable in defensive, but also offensive regards today.

I believe the PAF would have succeeded in keeping IAF off the forces occupying the peaks for a week or for as long as they were able to sustain F-16 sorties. In military terms Pakistan's objective was to occupy the peak, Indian offensive was limited to dislodging the occupying force. Escalation into a wider conflict was untenable for both due to nuclear weapons and international pressure. Given the circumstances I doubt either would have established air superiority over the contested mountain.

I think many people here regard hardware superiority in terms of capability, numbers and technology over everything else. This is true when one side enjoys overwhelming superiority over the other, in 1999 IAF did not enjoy overwhelming superiority. There are more important considerations of which employment, training and tactics is far more crucial to the outcome and in this the IAF did not really shine in 1999.

 

[janon]

Their objective was limited war to take a strategic mountain peek overlooking Indian supply lines to crucial forward areas.
They had no intention of escalating this to a full blown conflict. A secondary objective was to internationalize the Kashmir issue by claiming local insurgency, natives waging a war against an occupying force. They went to great lengths to conceal their involvement under such circumstances providing air support to their forces on the mountain was ruled out during the planning phase of the operation.

Look, that is the question I am posing to you. Why is it that their war planners planned for such an objective, deciding not to involve the PAF at all? The war was their idea, and an air force is meant to help, not simply do combat air patrols over territories that are not at war.

The fact that they did not plan to use the PAF at all is because IAF was no match for them. Yes, IAF did enjoy complete superiority. Don't just look at what was on paper. Look at what Pakistani members said earlier about the PAF being under sanctions. Their entire fleet was near being grounded for want of spares, and could have done precious few sorties. So yes, the IAF enjoyed supremacy over them in every way in terms of ability to conduct repeated offensive sorties.

That is the reason they did not do a 1965. Not because of choice, but because of the ground reality.

 

[Bang Galore]

The IAF did not keep PAF from entering the war, the F-16's were limited to patrol missions and their only instruction was to engage intruders into Pakistan airspace. IAF did not intrude and PAF did not engage - it is really that simple. Implying that the PAF was afraid of the Mig-29 or the converse that the IAF was afraid of the F-16 is stupid.

Of course the IAF kept the PAF out of the war. Whatever reasons are given (including patrol missions & following instructions to limit their involvement in Pakistani airspace), those were Pakistani problems and Air Commodore Kaiser Tufail has made their position known. Those limitations were necessitated by the presence of the IAF. Pakistan started that war & the army had no problems crossing the LoC but the air force suddenly developed a conscience? It was simply a realisation that doing anything more than presenting attendance would have resulted in escalating the conflict, something they were not prepared to do. Conversely, the IAF was used and even within their rules of engagement was an escalation that Pakistan had not bargained for. People who start trouble cannot then use excuses of why they could not finish what they started. It is not about being afraid of another aircraft but of the realisation that the PAF could not afford to stop the IAF in whatever they were doing without risking escalation, especially when the IAF & Indian political leaders had shown some willingness to escalate matters already.

 

[ANPP]

Yes India was but not as badly effected as Pakistan. Huge difference.... India was getting all the goodies from Russia and Israel. I mean you got mighty Fulcrums, Flankers and mirages in those sanctions right?? where as Pakistan was denied even spares to keep its old F-16s in air. Plus china wasn't producing anything better than mig-21s therefore in 1999 PAF was in quite a bad shape but as of now things are better... and in near future as more options would be available from a single source only (China) things would get much better.

Time change so far but one thing still lack in pak...........i.e. $$$$$$$$$.

 

[janon]

Of course the IAF kept the PAF out of the war. Whatever reasons are given (including patrol missions & following instructions to limit their involvement in Pakistani airspace), those were Pakistani problems and Air Commodore Kaiser Tufail has made their position known. Those limitations were necessitated by the presence of the IAF. Pakistan started that war & the army had no problems crossing the LoC but the air force suddenly developed a conscience? It was simply a realisation that doing anything more than presenting attendance would have resulted in escalating the conflict, something they were not prepared to do. Conversely, the IAF was used and even within their rules of engagement was an escalation that Pakistan had not bargained for. People who start trouble cannot then use excuses of why they could not finish what they started. It is not about being afraid of another aircraft but of the realisation that the PAF could not afford to stop the IAF in whatever they were doing without risking escalation, especially when the IAF & Indian political leaders had shown some willingness to escalate matters already.

They miscalculated badly. They knew that without precision guided munitions, it would be impossible to take out the well prepared bunkers (heck, we made them) at those Himalayan heights. And they knew that we didn't have PGMs. But what they did not foresee was Israel supplying us with PGMs to fit on our mirages after the conflict began. Also, they did not anticipate the ingenuity of the IAF pilots who did operations that would not have been thought possible with existing technology (as analysed in the paper mentioned in the article). Despite what @Death.By.Chocolate says, the IAF outwitted the Pakistani planners, and showed excellent training and discipline and skill. Not that we didn't make mistakes - we lost a mi-17 to shoulder fired SAMs because we sent them without counter measures, because we did not expect them to be carrying SAMs.

That is the real reason that they did not plan to use the PAF - because they thought the IAF would be ineffectual anyway, and that they could get away with no air support. But when the PGMs started blowing them to smithereens, they had no options at all - the PAF could provide no air support or even cross the border, FOR FEAR OF THE MUCH MORE CAPABLE IAF. Not because of the goodness of their hearts, as I said before, and as DBC is trying to make it sound like, but because they had no choice.

 

[rockstarIN]

The IAF did not keep PAF from entering the war, the F-16's were limited to patrol missions and their only instruction was to engage intruders into Pakistan airspace. IAF did not intrude and PAF did not engage - it is really that simple. Implying that the PAF was afraid of the Mig-29 or the converse that the IAF was afraid of the F-16 is stupid.

There were instances Jags attacked the other side of the LoC supply chains and F-16s where sent to intercept. Both the interceptors where locked on by a single Mig-29. They were forced to go back.
For more details @DARKY @sandy_3126

 

[scarcry]

Yes India was but not as badly effected as Pakistan. Huge difference.... India was getting all the goodies from Russia and Israel. I mean you got mighty Fulcrums, Flankers and mirages in those sanctions right?? where as Pakistan was denied even spares to keep its old F-16s in air. Plus china wasn't producing anything better than mig-21s therefore in 1999 PAF was in quite a bad shape but as of now things are better... and in near future as more options would be available from a single source only (China) things would get much better.

but as of now things are better... and in near future as more options would be available from a single source only

jf17s

 

[janon]

but as of now things are better... and in near future as more options would be available from a single source only

jf17s

And AEWACs and refuellers and BVR missiles.

 

[scarcry]

YOU MEAN CHINESE ONES that even the pakistan thinks is ok ok..... Reported in March 2007 to have been tested and evaluated by PAF, and found to be "fairly good" but some improvements were desired in both platform and radar.

 

[janon]

YOU MEAN CHINESE ONES that even the pakistan thinks is ok ok..... Reported in March 2007 to have been tested and evaluated by PAF, and found to be "fairly good" but some improvements were desired in both platform and radar.

And Swedish Eyries. Four of them.

Don't underestimate the PAF - with their limited budget, they have modernized fairly well.

 

[ANPP]

I believe the PAF would have succeeded in keeping IAF off the forces occupying the peaks for a week or for as long as they were able to sustain F-16 sorties. In military terms Pakistan's objective was to occupy the peak, Indian offensive was limited to dislodging the occupying force. Escalation into a wider conflict was untenable for both due to nuclear weapons and international pressure. Given the circumstances I doubt either would have established air superiority over the contested mountain.

I think many people here regard hardware superiority in terms of capability, numbers and technology over everything else. This is true when one side enjoys overwhelming superiority over the other, in 1999 IAF did not enjoy overwhelming superiority. There are more important considerations of which employment, training and tactics is far more crucial to the outcome and in this the IAF did not really shine in 1999.

I respect your feelings for f-16, but just analyse the situations.
Mig29s are better than f16 in air combact in bvr as well as wvr(especially in case indain mig-29 & pak older f-16). yes may be we loss few mig-29 but in that average PAF gonna lose many fighter including those F-16.

& even if count 1vs1 means 1 mig-29 by 1 f-16 lose, we have twice much more plane than PAF f-16,even withdraw of PAF f-16 we still had more than 40 mig-29 which are enough for air dominance in PAk air space.

 

[OrionHunter]

I guess these self praising articles will never mention such incidents where a formation of two F-16s crept up behind a flight of five Mig-29s flying parallel on their side of the border. The MiGs were completely unaware of PAF's presence and maintained their heading, however at some point the Indian GCI picked up the F-16s and called Fulcrum leader to break, the MiGs jinxed so violently that they nearly crashed into each other....after which they left the scene.

Nice science fiction! Seems you've been reading lots of Tom Clancy trash of late and too many comics too! Get serious and stop posting baloney for a change and wasting everyone's' time..

 

[Windjammer]

There were instances Jags attacked the other side of the LoC supply chains and F-16s where sent to intercept. Both the interceptors where locked on by a single Mig-29. They were forced to go back.
For more details @DARKY @sandy_3126

Give it a rest mate, your airforce conducted operations within it's own borders hence there was no reason for the PAF to engage the IAF.....but as soon as a MiG-21 and a MiG-27 made the mistake of crossing the border, both were ultimately shot down albeit in this case by the PA. !! Locking up each other happened from both sides but did it produce any results.... NO. !!
So what's big deal in aircraft flying within it's own airspace and unable to open fire......happens all the time over Adriatic and Sea of Japan. !!