PAF on the Offensive - 1971 War

[Yaduveer]

^^^
If PAF had given Air support in battle of Longewala then a disaster could be turn into Marvellous Success.
Yes Pakistani Army has made audacious and daring thrust which indian can never thought of , but without airsupport it firedback.

 

[shuntmaster]

The article is complete BS. Everyone knows that Pakistan initiated the war On the evening of 3 December Sunday, at about 5:40 p.m. The Pakistani Air Force (PAF) launched a pre-emptive strike on eleven airfields in north-western India, including Agra which was 300 miles (480 km) from the border.
This preemptive strike known as Operation Chengiz Khan, was inspired by the success of Israeli Operation Focus in the Arab-Israeli Six Day War. But, unlike the Israeli attack on Arab airbases in 1967 which involved a large number of Israeli planes, Pakistan flew no more than 50 planes to India and failed to inflict the intended damage. As a result, the Indian runways were cratered and rendered non-functional only for a few hours after the attack.

 

[Don't know]

any neutral(non pakistani,international) source conform this article

 

[Last Hope]

One Squadron against nine. Still showed great nerves.

Love Kaiser Tufail. Yes sir we all do

 

[Windjammer]

On the contrary.. the PAF performed very well.
It provided tacit air support to the Army.. whilst reserving its strength for the planned but never launched counter offensive of Tikka Khan... in which it was estimated that over a 100 PAF aircraft will be lost.

So at the end of the war, the PAF met all the objectives set out for itself.

Fighting an enemy poses sing an almost five times the strength with better equipment, the meagre PAF squadron strength barely made it into double figures, even then, it's alleged that at least three PAF squadrons weren't utilised......conserving them for long battles ahead.

 

[karan.1970]

On the contrary.. the PAF performed very well.
It provided tacit air support to the Army.. whilst reserving its strength for the planned but never launched counter offensive of Tikka Khan... in which it was estimated that over a 100 PAF aircraft will be lost.

So at the end of the war, the PAF met all the objectives set out for itself.

Which were??

 

[IND151]

Fighting an enemy poses sing an almost five times the strength with better equipment, the meagre PAF squadron strength barely made it into double figures, even then, it's alleged that at least three PAF squadrons weren't utilised......conserving them for long battles ahead.

you had US sabres

 

[SQ8]

Which were??

1.Defend Airbases enough to keep operational strength as intact as possible.

Airbases were relatively intact in the west prior to ceasefire.

2. Provide any possible CAS for ground operations.

CAS provided in the shakargarh sector, South.. was effective enough to stop Indian offensive in those areas.
The Longewalla offensive was launched without consultation with the PAF, even after being informed that the PAF could not provide the Army any effective support in that sector.

3. Preserve strength to provide CAS to counter offensive(which never materialized).

That PAF still had most of its combat strength intact to support the offensive under Tikka Khan.

---------- Post added at 08:30 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:29 AM ----------

you had US sabres

That comment tells me you know not much of Aircraft.

The Hunter was a superior aircraft to the sabre in many respects.. the IAF had more hunters than the PAF had sabre's.
The Mig-21 was a much more superior aircraft to the sabre.. the IAF had many aircraft.
Shall I continue?

 

[Windjammer]

you had US sabres

Even in 1971, Sabre was considered an obsolete aircraft, furthermore it was pitted against the likes of MIG-21, SU-7 and Hunters all superior in speed and performance.

 

[mitth]

self delete............

 

[John Doe]

Even in 1971, Sabre was considered an obsolete aircraft, furthermore it was pitted against the likes of MIG-21, SU-7 and Hunters all superior in speed and performance.

The same Sabres did a terrific job for the PAF in 1965 against the same Hunters, no? 2ndly, you are comparing the Su-7 ( BTW, it's not SU-7) with the Sabre? A ground attack aircraft with the agility of a ocean liner with a superb dog fighter like the Sabre? Can you back up your claims with any actual stats? Not likely.

So what changed? What are your 'cough, cough' expert comments?

 

[Windjammer]

The same Sabres did a terrific job for the PAF in 1965 against the same Hunters, no? 2ndly, you are comparing the Su-7 ( BTW, it's not SU-7) with the Sabre? A ground attack aircraft with the agility of a ocean liner with a superb dog fighter like the Sabre? Can you back up your claims with any actual stats? Not likely.

So what changed? What are your 'cough, cough' expert comments?

You get the best answers when you talk to your self !!..... Yes ?? nothing new.

The Sabre also did well in 1971, even bagging a couple of crème de la crème.....MIG-21s,
But this is not to suggest that it was an F-16 of that era, on the other hand the SU-7 ( Please share with us what's it called in your book of thoughts) had the advantage of engaging the afterburner to leave the battlefield.....however it's another thing, many SU-7 are known to have flamed out after crossing back into India. On the contrary, when the Sabre was deployed for ground attack with couple of bombs, it could barely rise above 20,000 feet.

 

[IND151]

1.Defend Airbases enough to keep operational strength as intact as possible.

Airbases were relatively intact in the west prior to ceasefire.

2. Provide any possible CAS for ground operations.

CAS provided in the shakargarh sector, South.. was effective enough to stop Indian offensive in those areas.
The Longewalla offensive was launched without consultation with the PAF, even after being informed that the PAF could not provide the Army any effective support in that sector.

3. Preserve strength to provide CAS to counter offensive(which never materialized).

That PAF still had most of its combat strength intact to support the offensive under Tikka Khan.

---------- Post added at 08:30 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:29 AM ----------



That comment tells me you know not much of Aircraft.

The Hunter was a superior aircraft to the sabre in many respects.. the IAF had more hunters than the PAF had sabre's.
The Mig-21 was a much more superior aircraft to the sabre.. the IAF had many aircraft.
Shall I continue?

mam,

PAF pilots had good experience of flying sabers.

IAF inducted SU 7 and mig 21 in late sixties.( correct if i am wrong.)

So IAF pilots had less experience.

plus Gnat and hunter faced canon jamming problems which were not faced by Sabre.

furthermore sabre is aerodynamically stable design offering PAF upper hand.

so sabre though somewhat outdated offered several advantages to PAF.

---------- Post added at 01:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:16 PM ----------

Even in 1971, Sabre was considered an obsolete aircraft, furthermore it was pitted against the likes of MIG-21, SU-7 and Hunters all superior in speed and performance.

mig 21 unlike Sabre is not aerodynamically stable.

 

[shuntmaster]

PAF was a miserable failure in 1971. The Pakistani security doctrine was based on premise of 'the defence of East lay in the West' i.e. to say, in case of hostilities with India regarding East Pakistan, the major Pakistani defence forces would be concentrated in West Pakistan and make major territorial gains in Kashmir-Punjab-Rajasthan belt, to negotiate India to a truce and hence safeguard East Pakistan. Unfortunately for Pakistan, this did not happen. India was able to fight West Pakistan to a stalemate, while making the blitzkrieg in East-Pakistan. India had learned valuable lessons form the 1965 war. The main lesson was that India was able to repulse any attack in Kashmir-Punjab-Rajasthan sector, which enabled them to plan the blitzkrieg in East-Pakistan. Pakistan seemed to not have learnt any lessons from 1965. They employed the same military tactics they has used in 1965, and Indians were prepared for it.
The war in West-Pakistan was supposed to be spear-headed by PAF,since it was the relatively stronger arm of the Pakistan military, but it failed very miserably to support its ground forces in gaining territory on the western border. The battle of Longewala is a prime example for this. Instead of being the offensive force, PAF operated as a defensive force for most of the war. On the other hand IAF gave full support to the ground forces and was very instrumental in the success of India in 1971 war. Not to mention IN's role too, especially in executing a effective blockade of East-Pakistan and hammering of Chittagong port by IN's air wing.

 

[John Doe]

The Sabre also did well in 1971, even bagging a couple of crème de la crème.....MIG-21s on the other hand the SU-7 ( Please share with us what's it called in your book of thoughts)

All that typing, and no sense was made by you today, twice !

Have you ever replied point for point to anyone in this forum? Truly childish!

Since you have no interest in learning anything much today or correcting the faults in your latest posts, let me just teach your noob self at least one thing: Why you ( and many others) are wrong in typing 'SU' and why it is not "MIG" either!!!

Products from Sukhoi Design Bureau are named " Su-xx"

Products from Mikoyan and Gurevich 's Design Bureau are named "MiG"

Please read and educate yourself. If you have some decency , feel free to correct your smart arse comments and apologize.

Sukhoi Company (JSC) - Company - The Company's history - Sukhoi Design Bureau (JSC)

MiG