MastanKhan
PDF VETERAN
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2005
- Messages
- 21,269
- Reaction score
- 166
- Country
- Location
For NATO YES, but NEVER for us.
When your enemy is right next door, its natural that majority of the battles will take place in WVR mode. For the IAF to implement their Cold Start Doctrine, the IAF will need to cross the border and engage the PAF in order to execute their war plans. They cannot just stay within their borders and try to take out our jets from stand off ranges. Our situation is similar to that of the IDAF, majority of their foes are right next door and that is why even to this day they effectively train their pilots for WVR battles.
PAF has had limited BVR capability for quite some time, they have been training in BVR engagements for almost a decade now. So they are not totally new to this concept, but obviously the introduction of the AIM120 and SD10B in large numbers is definitely a game changer for PAF. This allows them to accept the battle against the IAF from stand off ranges, that is something totally new that the IAF has to worry about. I fear that with the addition of all these BVR enabled planes, PAF will loose its edge in WVR arena a niche of which we are considered masters off. I certainly hope that PAF continues to train in both WVR and BVR A2A engagements.
Notorious,
Goodman----. You see-----IAF has screwed itself up by placing its primary air bases so close to pakistani border that at time of take off to intercept incoming aircraft----the planes are already WVR-----.
If their primary bases were farther off----they could have stayed afloat for longer and taken long shots with impunity and at their discretion-----but they have given away their primary advantage of longer legs-----why would you have a SU30 sqdrn within 2 minutes of your border with pak----when you have this aircraft that can stay afloat for 4 plus hours------what a price we pay for our posturing and strut----.