What's new

PAF's Defensive Doctrine---Out of Ignorance---Out of Incompetence Or What?

Lets start taking the whole argument apart again,

The U S does not need to fly B52's over Syria or Iraq against isis is that it does not need to

Clearly someone never went beyond their knowledge of airwarfare beyond that of CNN.
The US does not fly B-52s over Syria because it already has assets based in the theatre in the form of its Carrier air wings and most recently the deployment at Incrilik AFB in Turkey. At no point does the usage or non usage of smart bombs have ANYTHING to do with the deployment of B-52s. Not to mention that since 1998, the entire B-52 fleet is equipped with JDAMs which are generally considered very smart. They were the first aircraft to attack the Taliban from their base in Guam


Hi,

Yeah---indeed---that would be really really smart to send a B52 to drop 1 or 2 JDAMS on one or two targets---absolutely brilliant-----. The USAF can always claim that Oscar snr mod at def . pk said that we could---- hey centcom ---can you approve that strike of the B52's for just 1 jdam--Oscar said so----.

So---please enlighten us----how many B 52 missions have been flown over the isis territory s far---if any.

Oh---I am sorry---I did not realize---that it was Saturday and you would be partying hard---dude---don't write these posts with red after you had a 6 pack---okay----.



id.jpg



:haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha::haha:
 
.
Hi,

Yeah---indeed---that would be really really smart to send a B52 to drop 1 or 2 JDAMS on one or two targets---absolutely brilliant-----. The USAF can always claim that Oscar snr mod at def . pk said that we could---- hey centcom ---can you approve that strike of the B52's for just 1 jdam--Oscar said so----.

So---please enlighten us----how many B 52 missions have been flown over the isis territory s far---if any.

Since you clearly have forgotten how to read too, Please see where it says thusly in my post.

The US does not fly B-52s over Syria because it already has assets based in the theatre in the form of its Carrier air wings and most recently the deployment at Incrilik AFB in Turkey

You seem to be suffering from severe foot in mouth disease, is it something common with old age or drinking?
 
.
.
IAF knows that 100% avibility of MKIs will always be a tough call thats why IAF intends to use onli 6 squads of MKi against PAF (18X6=108) while two each of M2ks and Mig 29s while 8 squads on Jags(for SEAD/DEAD & deep strike ) 8 squads of bisons for point defence

also tell me what do you have to counter Upgraded M2Ks and Mig 29s :coffee:

as for naval arm well we dont need that for PAF as we both nations share a 1000 mile border hope you get my point sirji :-)

Sir,
It comes down to what strategy is implemented. PAF is looking towards air-supremacy denial over Pakistan, for this they are relying on SAM, JF-17 and F-16's.

IAF knows that they might loose around 50-70 % of what ever they send...
This is the reason they are looking for increasing the numbers of MKI's available on the West by procuring Rafale's to defend India's North West areas from a Chinese offensive.

Mig-29's would be used along coastal defenses and protecting Indian Navy because India is not going to send in the Carrier group because they know it is required to defend the Indian sea lines from a Chinese Threat. This is the reason Pakistan keeps these carriers as their prime targets.

Now the issue of how long a war is going to last, the longer the war the higher losses on Indian side. This is the very reason India is looking on a limited or surgical strike options.

To overwhelm Pakistan's defenses India would have to field her entire Airforce and Naval assets hence greater would be the loses. On the other hand if somehow Pakistan does manages to salvage a decent number of aircraft after this kind of strike India would not be able to protect her own Airspace. This would really be a invitation for any other forces to take control of India (Chinese offensive).
More over Indian Navy would also become defenseless.

This scenario is based on war on a single front.

This post of mine would open a troll fest but this is the most real and honest personal opinion...

Realistically there is not going to be a war because both countries know that who ever is brought down to the breaking point would inevitably go for an unconventional war. Calculating the breaking point, my guess would be as good as your.

Border skirmishes would continue, similarly Kashmir problem is going to continue as no side is looking to find a long lasting solution. Political parties on both side would continue to gain point scoring in elections. Forth Generation or economical war is the way forward, both would prosper the only issue is Pakistan would develop faster and with 1/4 the cost that would be required for India. This is due to the size and population constraints.

@Oscar @MastanKhan @araz @Panther 57 @Indus Falcon @Arsalan @gambit @fatman17 @Windjammer
 
Last edited:
.
Sir,
It comes down to what strategy is implemented. PAF is looking towards air-supremacy deniaakistan, for this they are relying on SAM, JF-17 and F-16's.

IAF knows that they might loose around 50-70 % of what ever they send...
This is the reason they are looking for increasing the numbers of MKI's available on the West by procuring Rafale's to defend India's North West areas from a Chinese offensive.

Mig-29's would be used along coastal defenses and protecting Indian Navy because India is not going to send in the Carrier group because they know it is required to defend the Indian sea lines from a Chinese Threat. This is the reason Pakistan keeps these carriers as their prime targets.

Now the issue of how long a war is going to last, the longer the war the higher losses on Indian side. This is the very reason India is looking on a limited or surgical strike options.

To overwhelm Pakistan's defenses India would have to field her entire Airforce and Naval assets hence greater would be the loses. On the other hand if somehow Pakistan does manages to salvage a decent number of aircraft after this kind of strike India would not be able to protect her own Airspace. This would really be a invitation for any other forces to take control of India (Chinese offensive).
More over Indian Navy would also become defenseless.

This scenario is based on war on a single front.

This post of mine would open a troll fest but this is the most real and honest personal opinion...

Realistically there is not going to be a war because both countries know that who ever is brought down to the breaking point would inevitably go for an unconventional war. Calculating the breaking point, my guess would be as good as your.

Border skirmishes would continue, similarly Kashmir problem is going to continue as no side is looking to find a long lasting solution. Political parties on both side would continue to gain point scoring in elections. Forth Generation or economical war is the way forward, both would prosper the only issue is Pakistan would develop faster and with 1/4 the cost that would be required for India. This is due to the size and population constraints.

@Oscar @MastanKhan @araz @Panther 57 @Indus Falcon @Arsalan @gambit @fatman17 @Windjammer
first of all Pakistan doesn't have good SAMs in its inventory unlike India which has developed SAMs and have good quality SAMs with different types of ranges and also level India has LR SAMs, 2 to three types of SR SAMs, and QR SAMs, and not to forget S300, jf 17 is not a problem for India even in this worst condition of India but when Teh\jas will kick in then its a whole new Ball game.

Even without good air supremacy and without good Sams and with fighters like jf 17 you are implying that whatever india will spend india will loose 60 to 70 % fighters.
Quite contradictory, Don't you think?

IAF has Mig 29 which were made and inducted in keeping F15 in mind
you have 18 block 52 which can pose threats for them 18 Sukhoi 30 MKI are enough.

CBGs will be used for blockade, pakistan does not possess navy for which a carrier is required, which we have seen in the past.


And by the way kid A war is not won by instant strike by full force it is won by proper planning and in days so India will plan its way out and not send or put all its resources like an amateur fighter without any planning.

As i said planning is done by keeping in mind the capabilities of opponent
In water your navy is not a problem our coast Guard is even bigger than you and unlike PN which requires PAF for air support IN has its independent naval Air arm which in the meantime is set to grow even bigger than your PAF let alone the number of fighters of IAF.

In Air- Even though you have less aircrafts you lack quality too, IAF has Su mki which will be approximately 300+ in number till 2019, and which are more than enough for any fighter in your inventory to offer not to forget their upgradation in super sukhoi

On land- We have army 3 to 4 times bigger than you

So please be sure what you are talking about.
 
.
Wow this post got my attention....and that's exactly what its designed to do. I figure the PAF, Pak Navy and Army are in an excellent position to determine their doctrine based on their capabilities. It is my belief that the GHQ, Air Headquarters and Naval Headquarters is not manned by prepubescent teens deciding their strategy over a game of Ludo or by posting "cool" posts on a military forum. There are a thousand factors that go into determining military strategy and doctrine (many of which even serving military men are not privy too as per their security clearance). it is very interesting to try to figure out the reason behind such strategy but to presuppose that a particular military arm is sitting with their tail between there legs and struts about like a peacock in heat is immature and absurd. Things simply do not work at this simplistic a level. It would be better to talk about what the PAF means by a defensive doctrine and take it from there.
 
.
PAF is looking towards air-supremacy denial over Pakistan, for this they are relying on SAM, JF-17 and F-16's.
Every country must -- or should -- have air supremacy over its own territorial airspace. At least in theory anyway.

Over home territory is slightly different when a military is expeditionary. At home, the establishment of air supremacy of territorial airspace is primarily burdened by the air force and can be supported by ground SAM forces and other home assets. It does not mean that if there is a violation, the trespasser is immediately stricken from the sky. What it mean is that even if the home air force is generous enough to delay armed response to perform some kind of investigations or even allow the trespasser to continue his course, the ability to remove the trespasser from the sky is uncontested should the order come.

An example of this is back in 1987 when Mathias Rust violated Soviet airspace and landed his Cessna in Red Square, making a public mockery of Soviet air defenses. The reality is that Soviet air defense had continuous track of Rust, from border to Moscow, and it was Soviet bureaucratic incompetence over diverse organizations that Rust lived. An argument can be made that organizational efficiency is a part of the ability to secure air supremacy but that is for a different debate.

In the US and other Western countries that have an active civil and non-commercial aviation industry there will be many procedural roadblocks to armed response of an airspace violation. Note the non-commercial aspect of this. Commercial aviation is controlled aviation. Non-commercial civil aviation is not always under government controls. Pilots are free to change courses as convenient to them, even after filed flight plans. In the US, civil non-commercial aviation, aka sports and enthusiast aviation, are loosely regulated, but not always under strict control.

Over enemy territory by an expeditionary military will have different rules-of-engagement (ROE) that are usually more relaxed to secure air supremacy. Remember, this is about the expeditionary air force away from home and the expeditionary air force is the aggressor and violator of a territorial airspace. The ROE in this case are usually local, meaning the decision to remove any opposition rests upon the local commander, which mean the lead pilot in the sky, or an AWACS whose commander have overall authority of air operations. For the expeditionary air force, its friendly ground forces may not be in place to support it with SAMs against territorial air force, so the ROE against the territorial air force must be relaxed and local in order to secure that air supremacy condition.
 
.
Sir,
It comes down to what strategy is implemented. PAF is looking towards air-supremacy denial over Pakistan, for this they are relying on SAM, JF-17 and F-16's.

IAF knows that they might loose around 50-70 % of what ever they send...
This is the reason they are looking for increasing the numbers of MKI's available on the West by procuring Rafale's to defend India's North West areas from a Chinese offensive.

Mig-29's would be used along coastal defenses and protecting Indian Navy because India is not going to send in the Carrier group because they know it is required to defend the Indian sea lines from a Chinese Threat. This is the reason Pakistan keeps these carriers as their prime targets.

Now the issue of how long a war is going to last, the longer the war the higher losses on Indian side. This is the very reason India is looking on a limited or surgical strike options.

To overwhelm Pakistan's defenses India would have to field her entire Airforce and Naval assets hence greater would be the loses. On the other hand if somehow Pakistan does manages to salvage a decent number of aircraft after this kind of strike India would not be able to protect her own Airspace. This would really be a invitation for any other forces to take control of India (Chinese offensive).
More over Indian Navy would also become defenseless.

This scenario is based on war on a single front.

This post of mine would open a troll fest but this is the most real and honest personal opinion...

Realistically there is not going to be a war because both countries know that who ever is brought down to the breaking point would inevitably go for an unconventional war. Calculating the breaking point, my guess would be as good as your.

Border skirmishes would continue, similarly Kashmir problem is going to continue as no side is looking to find a long lasting solution. Political parties on both side would continue to gain point scoring in elections. Forth Generation or economical war is the way forward, both would prosper the only issue is Pakistan would develop faster and with 1/4 the cost that would be required for India. This is due to the size and population constraints.

@Oscar @MastanKhan @araz @Panther 57 @Indus Falcon @Arsalan @gambit @fatman17 @Windjammer

See there is one thing, that is missing from the equation, and it is so critical that it changes the equation completely.

Going by the previous wars, one must be blind NOT to notice how our so called Ally put sanctions on us. Having learnt a lesson from this, This time around we have chosen our "Allies" more carefully.

What people on PDF have to keep in mind, is NOT our existing capability, BUT our capability IF we were to be attacked.

If people have understood, well and good. IF not my apologies, I can't go into further details.

Thank You and Have a Good Evening!
 
.
Hi,

Thank you for these comments---. Missiles cannot do the job by themselves----. It is a TEAM effort---it is a combination of weapons systems that makes the 'whole', potent.

To make the 'whole' potent---you have to have strength in all the periphrees----. One weak link allows the enemy to smash thru to create a beachhead---and the weak link in our case is a deep naval strike aircraft.

And again I bring in the JH7B---because this aircraft is being pushed to take on the U S flotilla challenging the Chinese fleet in a strike role. The Chinese SU30's and the J11D's are for air superiority---.

The purpose of this thread is to enlighten the reader that Pakistan needs to get away from the nuc now doctrine to keep on with the conventional warfare fight----for that it needs too re-adjust its game plan and weapon systems.

I see a lot of guys nipping at my heals---and to them I will say again----you were te same guys who bragged about the JF 17 being integrated within a year or two from its inception----.

Actually---most you and specially the Think Tank here had no clue what the integration meant----and slowly and slowly that you learnt the bitter reality of the truth----and almost close to 8 years now and still in the integration mode----and this was one of the many disagreements that we had----where all of you failed---and ganged up on me.

Well---it is no different now----it is the same thing all over----.

Rajastahn cannot be simply cut off----that area is better suited for our cold start doctrine---we can deploy troops faster in that area and strike deep and conquer more land even before the enemy forces get close to the border-----.

We only lack in heavies-----.

Araz---you have been trying at it for the last what---close to 9 years now---don't make it personal---.




No---they don't---and that is what this discussion is about----to have fighter bombers----.


I cant see any point, what the JH-7B can do better than a J-11D or J-16 !
 
.
Hi,

CONTD
Hi Mastan as an analyst and and ex-professional from the same ilk. The PAF and the IAF took 21 years to evolve their own rules of engagement. Most of the books I saw were just modified from World war two. Hey I was in one of ur bases and they were reading BR's (British Regulations) for their morning test. You can be happy to know the Indian's are no better off
 
.
I cant see any point, what the JH-7B can do better than a J-11D or J-16 !

Hi,

First of all---any J version would do---. Secondly---JH7B would be around 25 mil approx.----thirdly---it is a prime aircraft for Chinese navy for naval strike missions---it can carry more weight and has longer legs----.

Other than that---any of them will work
 
.
Sir,
It comes down to what strategy is implemented. PAF is looking towards air-supremacy denial over Pakistan, for this they are relying on SAM, JF-17 and F-16's.

IAF knows that they might loose around 50-70 % of what ever they send...
This is the reason they are looking for increasing the numbers of MKI's available on the West by procuring Rafale's to defend India's North West areas from a Chinese offensive.

Mig-29's would be used along coastal defenses and protecting Indian Navy because India is not going to send in the Carrier group because they know it is required to defend the Indian sea lines from a Chinese Threat. This is the reason Pakistan keeps these carriers as their prime targets.

Now the issue of how long a war is going to last, the longer the war the higher losses on Indian side. This is the very reason India is looking on a limited or surgical strike options.

To overwhelm Pakistan's defenses India would have to field her entire Airforce and Naval assets hence greater would be the loses. On the other hand if somehow Pakistan does manages to salvage a decent number of aircraft after this kind of strike India would not be able to protect her own Airspace. This would really be a invitation for any other forces to take control of India (Chinese offensive).
More over Indian Navy would also become defenseless.

This scenario is based on war on a single front.

This post of mine would open a troll fest but this is the most real and honest personal opinion...

Realistically there is not going to be a war because both countries know that who ever is brought down to the breaking point would inevitably go for an unconventional war. Calculating the breaking point, my guess would be as good as your.

Border skirmishes would continue, similarly Kashmir problem is going to continue as no side is looking to find a long lasting solution. Political parties on both side would continue to gain point scoring in elections. Forth Generation or economical war is the way forward, both would prosper the only issue is Pakistan would develop faster and with 1/4 the cost that would be required for India. This is due to the size and population constraints.

@Oscar @MastanKhan @araz @Panther 57 @Indus Falcon @Arsalan @gambit @fatman17 @Windjammer
and do you realli think IAF hasnt made any arrengements for SEAD & DEAD missions .... read about indian jaguars here backed by M2Ks(these two types are for first strike)and they dont need to go deep as most of the targets in pakistan are within 15-65 miles from the border +we have Bhramos supersonik cruise missile and some other classified anty radar missiles

so the first ones to srtike will be bhramos followed by jags and M2K which will be given cover by upgraded Mig29s(im not talking about Mig29Ks) then they will be given cover by MKIs so tell me will PAF first neutralise jags , M2Ks and Mig29s or go for MKIs :azn:

now taking that into account why would india loose 50-70% off its assets on first week of war :azn:

do you realli think forward india air bases and radar installations are defence less :sarcastic:

what if i told you a Phalcon flying over amritsar can track targets and do jamming and other EW stuff as far sarghoda :azn: even if you forget multiple spy sats india possesses :D

but even if that wasnt enof india does have a very strong ground and aerostat based multi level and multi layered radar and SAM apparatuss backed by 8 squads ok Bisons

just to tell you even jags and bisons are BVR capable

tejas or rafale or FGFA are no where in picture just like the fact onli 6 squads ok MKI are for PAF rest for PLAAF

as for coastel defnce first PAF has to tackle and defete IAF assets next to indo pak border but just to tell you we have that coverred too with two CBGs and some 12 P8Is and bears (ASW)

forget everything GOD forbid if ever things come to that chances are PAF will raise white flag much before most of hub bul watan pakistani mebers here want to beleve :cheers:
 
.
PAF doesn't know how to make a doctrine, so you claim, or are defensive. Defending the aerospace from the first and second wave should be an important part of their doctrine, but as others mentioned, we should leave such complicated subjects to the professionals. We are in good hands.

and do you realli think IAF hasnt made any arrengements for SEAD & DEAD missions .... read about indian jaguars here backed by M2Ks(these two types are for first strike)and they dont need to go deep as most of the targets in pakistan are within 15-65 miles from the border +we have Bhramos supersonik cruise missile and some other classified anty radar missiles

so the first ones to srtike will be bhramos followed by jags and M2K which will be given cover by upgraded Mig29s(im not talking about Mig29Ks) then they will be given cover by MKIs so tell me will PAF first neutralise jags , M2Ks and Mig29s or go for MKIs :azn:

now taking that into account why would india loose 50-70% off its assets on first week of war :azn:

do you realli think forward india air bases and radar installations are defence less :sarcastic:

what if i told you a Phalcon flying over amritsar can track targets and do jamming and other EW stuff as far sarghoda :azn: even if you forget multiple spy sats india possesses :D

but even if that wasnt enof india does have a very strong ground and aerostat based multi level and multi layered radar and SAM apparatuss backed by 8 squads ok Bisons

just to tell you even jags and bisons are BVR capable

tejas or rafale or FGFA are no where in picture just like the fact onli 6 squads ok MKI are for PAF rest for PLAAF

as for coastel defnce first PAF has to tackle and defete IAF assets next to indo pak border but just to tell you we have that coverred too with two CBGs and some 12 P8Is and bears (ASW)

forget everything GOD forbid if ever things come to that chances are PAF will raise white flag much before most of hub bul watan pakistani mebers here want to beleve :cheers:

I have seen many claims by you in this post, and other posts. India has this and India has that. PAF will raise white flag...yes, like we did over halwara, pathan lot, agra, khem karan, BRB, lahore, and every time there is a vector towards the border. Maybe you should ask a real IAF officer what they think of people across the border, and you may get over your flag waving horse manure. If you truly knew how much your country's hardware was serviceable, or ready for operation, you may shit a dozen bricks before coming back here on our forum talking BS about us.

Wow this post got my attention....and that's exactly what its designed to do. I figure the PAF, Pak Navy and Army are in an excellent position to determine their doctrine based on their capabilities. It is my belief that the GHQ, Air Headquarters and Naval Headquarters is not manned by prepubescent teens deciding their strategy over a game of Ludo or by posting "cool" posts on a military forum. There are a thousand factors that go into determining military strategy and doctrine (many of which even serving military men are not privy too as per their security clearance). it is very interesting to try to figure out the reason behind such strategy but to presuppose that a particular military arm is sitting with their tail between there legs and struts about like a peacock in heat is immature and absurd. Things simply do not work at this simplistic a level. It would be better to talk about what the PAF means by a defensive doctrine and take it from there.
Excellent summary.
 
.
Wow this post got my attention....and that's exactly what its designed to do. I figure the PAF, Pak Navy and Army are in an excellent position to determine their doctrine based on their capabilities. It is my belief that the GHQ, Air Headquarters and Naval Headquarters is not manned by prepubescent teens deciding their strategy over a game of Ludo or by posting "cool" posts on a military forum. There are a thousand factors that go into determining military strategy and doctrine (many of which even serving military men are not privy too as per their security clearance). it is very interesting to try to figure out the reason behind such strategy but to presuppose that a particular military arm is sitting with their tail between there legs and struts about like a peacock in heat is immature and absurd. Things simply do not work at this simplistic a level. It would be better to talk about what the PAF means by a defensive doctrine and take it from there.


Hi,

Please don't ASSUME that they do---. The 1965 and 1971 were very poor and third rate showing of Pakistani doctrine by the general staff.

They want to hide their shame and incompetence in the blood sacrifice of the warriors who laid down their lives.

All the young 2nd LT and LT of the 65 and 71 war say the same thing---either it is Musharraf---Gen Durrani---Brig Shaukat or anyone else----.


If it was not for officers under the rank of Lt Col and non comms and soldiers---Pakistan would be history---.

Chawinda was a stroke of luck---started by a Major---and a surprise strike by the air force. Incidently---I don't know the name of the major----.

1971 war was that of alcoholic---drunkard generals of the Pakistan military---as was some of the 65 war----. The reaction to missile gun boats by the Pakistan air force in 1971 was equally pathetic----and to top that off---the destruction of the RB57 Canberra electronic surveillance plane on the tarmac at Karachi----.

So---just don't assume----. Question them---and question them hard----that is how you keep them on their tows and get the best out of them.
 
Last edited:
.
[QUOTE"]and do you realli think IAF hasnt made any arrengements for SEAD & DEAD missions .... read about indian jaguars here backed by M2Ks(these two types are for first strike)and they dont need to go deep as most of the targets in Pakistan are within 15-65 miles from the border +we have Bhramos supersonik cruise missile and some other classified anty radar missiles

so the first ones to srtike will be bhramos followed by jags and M2K which will be given cover by upgraded Mig29s(im not talking about Mig29Ks) then they will be given cover by MKIs so tell me will PAF first neutralise jags , M2Ks and Mig29s or go for MKIs :azn:
[/QUOTE]

Hi,

Pakistanis need to look at their map in relation to India-----. Their ability to strike back at india is over the Arabian sea / indian ocean-----which gives them a vast opportunity of multiple targets.

Unlike the land across border---where there would be multiple surface to air batteries operating---and extremely difficult to penetrate.

The vast ocean gives limitless opportunities to an aircraft that can fly long distances with standoff weapons----.

The purpose of the war needs to create panic in southern india---the state of Gujrat---maharashtra---the first sorties out of the bases on Arabian sea would be basically one way sorties----to take out the electronic hubs of india and the cities along the coastline---create hysteria amongst the foreign community---make them leave in a panic----.

This act needs to be committed by the aircraft and not by surface to surface missiles primarily----..

Drop a million dollar missiles on a 50 dollar hut---you have done minus one million dollar damage plus the fuel and maintenance cost-----.

Drop a million dollar missile on a 10 million dollar facility and you done a 50 million dollar damage----. Destroy the industrial centers of south india----.

We know that india is going to destroy us---destroy our cities---but we have to hurt them where it hurts the most----.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom