PAF superiority over IAF in 65 war

[ahmeddsid]

Patriot, Ahmed is the first Indian who admits that we Pakitanis were in small numbers but superior in 65. In 71 our biggest problem or political defeat was because we were fight our own people.
Now the situation is totally different the figures are still the same but we can't say who will win. Haan our missile technology is way ahead of them and Ahmed will agree to it no doubt.

Before my retirement I held a post in which I presented a presentation to all the Chief including Joint Chief.
just to sum up
Our missile technology is way advanced/ far ahead from India in the case we go for war, We only have to take care of the planes in the air because by the time they go back there will be no IAF bases left . If we didn't have this missile tech and the nukes, India would have attacked us a long time ago. Zia was smart he never told anyone whats in the bag, David Frost asked him whats in the bag he replied their is a cat in the bag. DF said how big is the cat he said I don't know but I can say this there are a lot of them referring to our nukes.

I recently saw that Indian news the 7 steps to get Pakistan, Let me tell you by the first step yes they will take us by surprise but there will no 2nd step we would have taken care of them in 20 min and this figure is not a factious one. They have already seen our readiness few months back again yes we might be fighting in Air to a superior weapon I mean SU-30 but that would give us enough time to take action against them. For the last 20 years there are people on both side who say lets do it and see who's the best. Which is insane if we fight both Pakistan and India will go back to 1947 and no one wants that. That is why americans can up with a fancy name The doctrine of Mutual Nuclear Deterrence

Sir, I hope you are talking of Cruise Missiles, because in a Future conflict if Pakistan launches a Conventional Ballistic Missile, India will detect it, and think it is a Nuclear Missile and Launch a Nuclear Attack. This is the sole reason, why even the US didnt fit up their missiles with Conventional Warheads I have read. You cant differentiate much from a Nuclear Missile flying at you, or a Conventional One. Even During Desert Storm, when each Scud was launched, there was panic as to whether it is nerve toxin etc.

I guess you are talking of Cruise Missiles (Babur). Yes I agree you guys got a Tomahawk equivalent and India doesnt have one now, (Under Development). You are right, you can take out IAF bases with the Babur, but you must remember that, for it to be effective you must fire hundreds of Baburs at the targets, because our Air Defence Systems will surely Intercept many of the Baburs and shoot it down. Shooting down cruise missiles are easier, especially Sub Sonic ones. The Russians have said that their Mig 31 Fighters could have Intercepted and destroyed 90% or so of the Tomahawks launched against Iraq during the recent war. I am sure, the SU30s have better Radar Suite than the Mig 31, I am not mistaken, and not to forget the Countless equipments we have from Israel to take out the cruise missiles, and the Spy Sat hovering above which can detect launches. But You are right, you can still try.

Now, The Planes approaching Pakistan will be carrying the Air Launched Brahmos, and I am pretty sure, Pakistan doesnt have an effective network to take out a SuperSonic Cruise Missile. They will be used to take out the Air Bases of Pakistan, just like you would try. But we still have an edge when the Anti Missile Stuff comes into play. That you have to admit! The Brahmos will be both Air Launched and Land based just like yours. But the Range is in your favor, but again I am sure the Brahmos can go longer than the prescribed Range and we are working on it, I can vouch.

You are right, India would have had Pakistan for Breakfast if you didnt have Nukes and Missiles now. Its a Mutually Assured Destruction, and I pray it never comes to it!

 

[Patriot]

Hi Texasjohn,
Please explain how it had better hardware..Only 120 sabres and 2 sqd's of Starfighters..Gnat was better then Sabre..thanks to its small size and agility.IAF also had mig21..the F22 of that time.PAF had Starfighter in response to Mig21..mig21 we all know is very agile air craft even today..while star fighter was more like rocket.

 

[Gin ka Pakistan]

India would have had Pakistan for Breakfast

explain plz , hard to digest

 

[Muradk]

Sir, I hope you are talking of Cruise Missiles, because in a Future conflict if Pakistan launches a Conventional Ballistic Missile, India will detect it, and think it is a Nuclear Missile and Launch a Nuclear Attack. This is the sole reason, why even the US didnt fit up their missiles with Conventional Warheads I have read. You cant differentiate much from a Nuclear Missile flying at you, or a Conventional One. Even During Desert Storm, when each Scud was launched, there was panic as to whether it is nerve toxin etc.

I guess you are talking of Cruise Missiles (Babur). Yes I agree you guys got a Tomahawk equivalent and India doesnt have one now, (Under Development). You are right, you can take out IAF bases with the Babur, but you must remember that, for it to be effective you must fire hundreds of Baburs at the targets, because our Air Defence Systems will surely Intercept many of the Baburs and shoot it down. Shooting down cruise missiles are easier, especially Sub Sonic ones. The Russians have said that their Mig 31 Fighters could have Intercepted and destroyed 90% or so of the Tomahawks launched against Iraq during the recent war. I am sure, the SU30s have better Radar Suite than the Mig 31, I am not mistaken, and not to forget the Countless equipments we have from Israel to take out the cruise missiles, and the Spy Sat hovering above which can detect launches. But You are right, you can still try.

Now, The Planes approaching Pakistan will be carrying the Air Launched Brahmos, and I am pretty sure, Pakistan doesnt have an effective network to take out a SuperSonic Cruise Missile. They will be used to take out the Air Bases of Pakistan, just like you would try. But we still have an edge when the Anti Missile Stuff comes into play. That you have to admit!

You are right, India would have had Pakistan for Breakfast if you didnt have Nukes and Missiles now. Its a Mutually Assured Destruction, and I pray it never comes to it!

A big Amen the smitten doesn't mean we will be taking warm showers together

 

[ahmeddsid]

The Gnats were technically Inferior to your planes. It was thanks to the resourcefulness of the IAF that the gnats became feared. But ask MuradSir and he will tell you that a lone Gnat can be eaten up, by the Sabres.

Texas John has summed it up perfectly. Thanks

 

[TexasJohn]

Patriot, Ahmed is the first Indian who admits that we Pakitanis were in small numbers but superior in 65. In 71 our biggest problem or political defeat was because we were fight our own people.
Now the situation is totally different the figures are still the same but we can't say who will win. Haan our missile technology is way ahead of them and Ahmed will agree to it no doubt.

Before my retirement I held a post in which I presented a presentation to all the Chief including Joint Chief.
just to sum up
Our missile technology is way advanced/ far ahead from India in the case we go for war, We only have to take care of the planes in the air because by the time they go back there will be no IAF bases left . If we didn't have this missile tech and the nukes, India would have attacked us a long time ago. Zia was smart he never told anyone whats in the bag, David Frost asked him whats in the bag he replied their is a cat in the bag. DF said how big is the cat he said I don't know but I can say this there are a lot of them referring to our nukes.

I recently saw that Indian news the 7 steps to get Pakistan, Let me tell you by the first step yes they will take us by surprise but there will no 2nd step we would have taken care of them in 20 min and this figure is not a factious one. They have already seen our readiness few months back again yes we might be fighting in Air to a superior weapon I mean SU-30 but that would give us enough time to take action against them. For the last 20 years there are people on both side who say lets do it and see who's the best. Which is insane if we fight both Pakistan and India will go back to 1947 and no one wants that. That is why americans can up with a fancy name The doctrine of Mutual Nuclear Deterrence

Maradk, here is where I think you are wrong. In the event of hostilities, I don't think anyone will be firing missiles, and here is why. No one on the recieving end would know if the missile is nuclear tipped or not. This would lead to needless escalation.

On the other hand I would expect to see arty, tanks, and infantry. I certainly don't see the PAF making spectacular attacks on Indian territory. I see them rather defending their own Airspace.

MAD is pecisely why no one would launch a missile.

 

[ahmeddsid]

A big Amen the smitten doesn't mean we will be taking warm showers together

I hope not Sir! hehehehehehe God Speed.

 

[ahmeddsid]

explain plz , hard to digest

Not the Thread actually, but keep the Nukes out of the frame and think!!!!

 

[Patriot]

The Gnats were technically Inferior to your planes. It was thanks to the resourcefulness of the IAF that the gnats became feared. But ask MuradSir and he will tell you that a lone Gnat can be eaten up, by the Sabres.

Texas John has summed it up perfectly. Thanks

You need to make up your mind..in one post you say paf had better training then you say IAF pilots were so great that they made Gnat better then sabre and no Sabre was not better.Gnat was smaller and more agile then Sabre.The Gnat had a thrust-to-weight ratio of near one - unheard-of at that time while sabre did not have that kind of T2W ratio.

 

[ahmeddsid]

You need to make up your mind..in one post you say paf had better training then you say IAF pilots were so great that they made Gnat better then sabre and no Sabre was not better.Gnat was smaller and more agile then Sabre.The Gnat had a thrust-to-weight ratio of near one - unheard-of at that time while sabre did not have that kind of T2W ratio.

What does Resourcefulness have to do with me Saying the PAF had better training??? The Gnats were agile all right, but not superior than the Sabres. Gnats used to hunt in packs if I am not wrong. Murad Sir will explain I feel better. I have heard him say that Gnats would be taken out if alone by the Sabre.

The IAF was better than the Israeli Airforce if the Pakistani Pilots who fought the Israeli Air Force are to be believed! That tells me PAF respects IAF more than you, Saad as an individual will ever do!

The Gnats were not made Better by welding on superweapons onto them! They Were made better by utlising them in a better way! Even Today, On Paper your F16s wont last a second against a SU30, but dont you think PAF has a plan as to how to take on the SU30s???? I think they have, but dont know how sucessful they will be. During the 65 war, it was a Similar scenario (not completely but similar). IAF used the weaknesses of the Sabres against it! i.e TW!!!

A Request finally, Dont try to dissect your opponents post by raking up stuff which will fall flat. Argue Sensibly, with the power of Words/Facts. Its what wins eventually! Not name calling or jingoism!

 

[Romanch]

@Romanch

"So, move over. Past is past. Think about what is happening now and what will happen in the future. "


History will repeat itself in the future FYI

Yup.. like how history repeated itself six years after 1965 war?

 

[TexasJohn]

Hi Texasjohn,
Please explain how it had better hardware..Only 120 sabres and 2 sqd's of Starfighters..Gnat was better then Sabre..thanks to its small size and agility.IAF also had mig21..the F22 of that time.PAF had Starfighter in response to Mig21..mig21 we all know is very agile air craft even today..while star fighter was more like rocket.

Gnat was an inferior older plane. The only thing it had going for it was the size and agility for the dogfight days. All PAF needed was 120 Sabres and 2 squadrons of F-104s. The IAF was stretching it's resources over two fronts ( and had to keep a wary eye on China also).

The MIG-21 (especially the early models) was no superstar. The F-4 phantom was already in service by then. And there were others too.

Pound for pound, the PAF was better in terms of hardware, training and cohesive thinking. That changed in 1971 and there there were no spectacular from the PAF. If anyone remembers of any, please correct me and jog my memory.

MIG-21 nowadays is an old plane that needs to go away, but won't. There are plenty of Airforces today that fly this roadkill or copies of the same...

 

[Muradk]

Maradk, here is where I think you are wrong. In the event of hostilities, I don't think anyone will be firing missiles, and here is why. No one on the recieving end would know if the missile is nuclear tipped or not. This would lead to needless escalation.

On the other hand I would expect to see arty, tanks, and infantry. I certainly don't see the PAF making spectacular attacks on Indian territory. I see them rather defending their own Airspace.

MAD is pecisely why no one would launch a missile.

We both know that no one on either side will fire a nuke because both of them have it, Because of that half the world will come to stop the fight. If India and Pakistan go head to head the fight will last max 2 days by that time both countries will be forced to sit on a table. Russia, China, USA still have the power to put both of us on a table weather we like it or not.
Another thing which no one has thought if we fight Iran will get a chance to get who ever they want Israel ofcourse and EU and USA will not let that happen. It a chain reaction which no one wants

 

[ahmeddsid]

Maradk, here is where I think you are wrong. In the event of hostilities, I don't think anyone will be firing missiles, and here is why. No one on the recieving end would know if the missile is nuclear tipped or not. This would lead to needless escalation.

On the other hand I would expect to see arty, tanks, and infantry. I certainly don't see the PAF making spectacular attacks on Indian territory. I see them rather defending their own Airspace.

MAD is pecisely why no one would launch a missile.

He was referring to the Babur Cruise Missiles, and he is right, they are made for such operations. Refer to my above post, you will get the scenario I feel. Rest all You are spot on! Thanks!

 

[TexasJohn]

We both know that no one on either side will fire a nuke because both of them have it, Because of that half the world will come to stop the fight. If India and Pakistan go head to head the fight will last max 2 days by that time both countries will be forced to sit on a table. Russia, China, USA still have the power to put both of us on a table weather we like it or not.
Another thing which no one has thought if we fight Iran will get a chance to get who ever they want Israel ofcourse and EU and USA will not let that happen. It a chain reaction which no one wants

Sorry, I don't think I understood what you meant about Iran. Did you mean incursions into Pak territory?