PAF's First Aggressor Unit TDS

[The Accountant]

penetration is always depndant on the recieving party, how far up she can take it

Agreed but with the heavily guarded air space of India and Pakistan a bomber of such size will be identified within minutes of take off and jets will be scrambled right away and it will be a piece of cake to take down such a huge aircraft with BVR missiles even before escorting aircrafts could intercept the defenders ... IN Pakistan specific threat we need fighter bombers, there is no room for strategic bomber which is required when you have to hit an enemy 1000s of kms away ...

 

[khanasifm]

Top Gun has evolved a lot, it now has air-to-air, air-to-ground and CAS in the syllabus. And I'm not sure how the CCS course helps with commanding a squadron as for that you have various leadership courses at the Air War College....as I know a couple of who commanded squadrons without ever going through CCS (distant relative was a former Mirage OC and now OC Flying on JF-17s).


CCS always had two dedicated squadrons, often taking the roles of aggressors. Mirages and F-6s (now F-7s) were the two main squadrons, and now a JF-17 squadron is also there, not sure if they're used in aggressor role but definitely in DACT. Yet CCS units can be deployed and utilised for combat if needed......years ago during Gulf War I, No. 14 Squadron on F-16s and a CCS Mirage squadron were given orders to get ready for Desert Storm deployment to the Middle East.....shortly after the orders were revoked.

Air war college has nothing to do with flying its more like executive MBA for air forces

Ccs fail and your days are over in paf if you are in flying, must be some one who had near and dear in higher ups there are few paf chiefs with stories of nepotism and corruption up the wazo

 

[khanasifm]

 

[Raider 21]

Air war college has nothing to do with flying its more like executive MBA for air forces

Ccs fail and your days are over in paf if you are in flying, must be some one who had near and dear in higher ups there are few paf chiefs with stories of nepotism and corruption up the wazo

And CCS doesn't determine your eligibility for commanding a squadron.....yes get a failing aggregate score in CCS then you get suspended from fighters, but you can still fly at the academy as an IP. Current Air Chief had a lot of trouble during CCS when the F-16 course was in its early stages, yet he pulled off an amazing comeback to finish the course (CCS 1993 F-16s).

And agreed the course is pretty tough.........one of the first JF-17 test pilots who did his test pilot course at ETPS in the UK....failed the CCS course.

 

[khanasifm]

And CCS doesn't determine your eligibility for commanding a squadron.....yes get a failing aggregate score in CCS then you get suspended from fighters, but you can still fly at the academy as an IP. Current ACM had a lot of trouble during CCS when the F-16 course was in its early stages, yet he pulled off an amazing comeback to finish the course (CCS 1993 F-16s).

And agreed the course is pretty tough.........one of the first JF-17 test pilots who did his test pilot course at ETPS in the UK....failed the CCS course.

Test pilot has nothing to do with commanding a sqn or wing move on end of story

 

[Raider 21]

Test pilot has nothing to do with commanding a sqn or wing

What I'm trying to say it is a tough course....he didn't pass CCS after he finished TPS...(he commanded the first JF-17 squadron before being relocated to Peshawar).

 

[messiach]

There are definite restrictions.

In the fleet as-is, an adequate force would that of the F-16 MLU with Link-16, but there might be American restrictions on operating F-16s with JF-17s in the air (@messiach), hope I am wrong.

 

[MastanKhan]

Agreed but with the heavily guarded air space of India and Pakistan a bomber of such size will be identified within minutes of take off and jets will be scrambled right away and it will be a piece of cake to take down such a huge aircraft with BVR missiles even before escorting aircrafts could intercept the defenders ... IN Pakistan specific threat we need fighter bombers, there is no room for strategic bomber which is required when you have to hit an enemy 1000s of kms away ...

Hi,

Pakistan's geography is as such that in can utilize strategic bombers along with strike aircraft. Stand off weapons have changed the ball game.

 

[The Accountant]

Hi,

Pakistan's geography is as such that in can utilize strategic bombers along with strike aircraft. Stand off weapons have changed the ball game.

How can we utilize strategic bomber ?

 

[CriticalThought]

There are definite restrictions.

On Block 50+ or in general?

 

[MastanKhan]

How can we utilize strategic bomber ?

Hi,

You have to have the map of the region in front of you---the arabian sea / indian ocean is an open space.

 

[The Accountant]

Hi,

You have to have the map of the region in front of you---the arabian sea / indian ocean is an open space.

We are specificaly discussing t62 ...the moment it fly from anywhere in sindh it will be on radar ... furthermore if it takes a long route to attack from south even we dont have long range fighters that can escort and it will become a high risk mission

 

[MastanKhan]

We are specificaly discussing t62 ...the moment it fly from anywhere in sindh it will be on radar ... furthermore if it takes a long route to attack from south even we dont have long range fighters that can escort and it will become a high risk mission

What is a t62? All missions are high risk---.

Sell the nucs---make peace.

I have discussed the issue of long range strike in detail for many a years---.

 

[The Accountant]

What is a t62? All missions are high risk---.

Sell the nucs---make peace.

I have discussed the issue of long range strike in detail for many a years---.

Appologies, the bomber I was referring to was tu-160 ... a member here recommended to purchase tu 160 type of bomber which is specifically designed for attacking US by Russia due to the distance involved ... In Pak India scenario we need something quick and fast ... I agree with your concept of bomb truck but tu160 is way to big for need of Pakistan ...

 

[gambit]

Historically, USAF has utilized Migs when available aircraft were not a good replica of real threats.

Which begs the question: How to simulate something that is dissimilar when you do not have the very thing that is truly dissimilar ?

This is why the F-16 is such a popular aircraft.

The F-16's flight capabilities is at the edge of the human endurance of 9g. When it debuted, that was shocking. Not so today. But that is why the F-16 is ideal for DACT.

US Aggressor pilots flying the F-16 is trained to limit their flying profiles to match that of known foreign fighters. This is where the T-38 and the F-5 failed to meet expectations. You cannot simulate 9g when you can do only 4g.

For examples...

http://www.moody.af.mil/News/Articl...y-pilots-play-bad-guys-in-aggressor-training/

“We simulated threats pilots might encounter when facing older planes,” he said. “(To do so) we flew with limited ordnance and no radar capability. We take the role seriously and simulate the bad guys as closely as we can.”

https://theaviationist.com/2014/04/01/f-5e-tiger-adversary/

One of the best things about the F-5 is that it is very hard to see. This one of the biggest learning objectives for the missions we fly – to show just how easily we can obtain unobserved entry onto the fighters.

If a potential adversary's air forces flies a fleet of small fighters and he just happened to reside next door, it would be beneficial if your air force is trained on how to detect small attackers using mountainous terrain as cover. For now, it does not matter if your fighters can outmaneuver his fighters in a WVR engagement. You have to find him first. So small fighters like the F-5, even if not as maneuverable as your F-16, can still provide very realistic scenarios on how you can lose an air war. The pilots in those F-5s are going to be the very best from your air force. They will do everything they can in those old F-5s to give you a hard time. But that is the point of having an 'aggressor' air force.

This is why the F-16 with its 9g capability, small size, and weapons load that includes nuclear bombs, are excellent training adversary platforms.