Pre-emptive air strikes feasible anymore?

[Fireurimagination]

Couple of decades back for initiation of any war a solid pre-emptive air strike was considered as the very best strategy. But with advances in air defence systems and AWACS, are big scale daring pre-emptive air strikes (like Israel - 1967) even possible? Can countries go for pre-emptive air strikes against air defence systems first and then against military targets or can the same be targeted simultaneously.

Today are pre-emptive air strikes dead or the same only possible between unequal adversaries (mighty on the weak)?

 

[Mughal-Prince]

Couple of decades back for initiation of any war a solid pre-emptive air strike was considered as the very best strategy. But with advances in air defence systems and AWACS, are big scale daring pre-emptive air strikes (like Israel - 1967) even possible? Can countries go for pre-emptive air strikes against air defence systems first and then against military targets or can the same be targeted simultaneously.

Today are pre-emptive air strikes dead or the same only possible between unequal adversaries (mighty on the weak)?

Sub bata dain hain!! Aur tum seekh lo ... Phir humari billi humhi say miaoon ... Main nahin bataoon ga

 

[Sinnerman108]

Couple of decades back for initiation of any war a solid pre-emptive air strike was considered as the very best strategy. But with advances in air defence systems and AWACS, are big scale daring pre-emptive air strikes (like Israel - 1967) even possible? Can countries go for pre-emptive air strikes against air defence systems first and then against military targets or can the same be targeted simultaneously.

Today are pre-emptive air strikes dead or the same only possible between unequal adversaries (mighty on the weak)?

Starting a conflict is easy,
predicting it's course single handed, is next to impossible.

 

[Fireurimagination]

Starting a conflict is easy,
predicting it's course single handed, is next to impossible.

True, I was just wondering that a solid pre-emptive air strike would no longer be as attractive an option for generals as it was in the past.

 

[Foxtrot Delta]

Couple of decades back for initiation of any war a solid pre-emptive air strike was considered as the very best strategy. But with advances in air defence systems and AWACS, are big scale daring pre-emptive air strikes (like Israel - 1967) even possible? Can countries go for pre-emptive air strikes against air defence systems first and then against military targets or can the same be targeted simultaneously.

Today are pre-emptive air strikes dead or the same only possible between unequal adversaries (mighty on the weak)?

Today its primarily done by drone strikes to avoid loss of life on ur side and to soften up targets or expose them.

It can be followed up by missile strikes. Manned Aircraft only come in once SAM and imterceptor threat is minimal.

 

[Fireurimagination]

Today its primarily done by drone strikes to avoid loss of life on ur side and to soften up targets or expose them.

I don't think anybody other than US will have that capability.

It can be followed up by missile strikes. Manned Aircraft only come in once SAM and imterceptor threat is minimal.

Then it won't be called pre-emptive strikes, will it?

 

[Foxtrot Delta]

I don't think anybody other than US will have that capability.



Then it won't be called pre-emptive strikes, will it?

Pakistan china russia russia and turkey have this capability and have used it on multiple occasions.

 

[graphican]

Preemptive strikes may have meaning for countries but not for India. India cannot pull it off. It previously tried two surgical strikes against Pakistan, both failed, both humiliated India more than before.

In surgical strike #1, you got your 14 soldiers dead and one captured alive named Chandu Babulal Chohan.
In surgical strike #2, you lost 2 jets and got one captured alive named Abhinandan Varthaman.

You can try to mention any gains for your country, other than making stupid Indian ridiculously stupid.

 

[Jungibaaz]

I don’t think they’re dead, sure there’s another layer of air defences. But that’s what you have modern SEAD/DEAD and ARM/CM and other SOWs etc.

However in the Indo-Pak scenario, the balance is nowhere near as one sided as it is with Israel vs any of its Arab neighbours. In that 1967 particular case it was as much about professionalism and poor leadership, as about numbers of modern aircraft, training and tactics. Also in the Indo-Pak scenario a 1967 like strike on Pakistan would lead to nuclear war in short order. This is the ultimate reason why it can’t happen or should not be attempted in the subcontinent. We’ve got a few red lines on nuclear threshold, this would be crossing at least one of them.

@PanzerKiel @Joe Shearer @Socra @notorious_eagle @Nilgiri @airomerix ... thoughts?

 

[The Maverick]

Israel Air Strike was over a very short radius ie about . The Radius of combat was small. And Israel completely knocked out three Air Forces. This was the TEXT BOOK pre emptive air strike . Before the strike Israel had barely 260 planes The 3 arab airforces Eygpt Syria and Jordan had 600combined.

Indo Pak is different I think

Don't be confused with Swift Resort PAF barely came 10km across the LOC to strike a real pre emptive blow you need to come 10 times that distance .

in 1967

There was no long range radar OR satalite coverage.

Having said the only country that launch a pre emptive strike and knock out IAF or PAF in one go is USA

Why … beacause we wont see them coming with stealth bombers stealth fighters and long range cruise missles.

Anybody ELSE no chance NOT even China cannot do this . Not in the devastating style of USA. Nobody else has the training doctrine combat record or technology to do it.

THIS IS WHY Israel is so higly rated they have carried ot other devastating smaller raids without detection IE Iraqi nuclear reactor raid I the 1980s

THE KEY IS NOT GETTING DETECTED

 

[Rusty]

Starting a conflict is easy,
predicting it's course single handed, is next to impossible.

A very Wise PM once told Indians that.
But true to form they could not tell what wisdom was if it shot them down and fed them tea

 

[TheTallGuy]

Some how i am afraid that Nazi Modi has calculated that total war is not going to happen same mistake Gen.Ayub made..when he approved Dewa-Chamb-Akhnur offensive in 1965. look what happened then...May be this perception is developed after the new Normal...Any indo-Pak Skirmish will be just a skirmish we shall not see Armour moving inside Indian nor theres moving inside Pakistan.

Train has left the station.

 

[litman]

in case of india pak war scenario no country will go for any sort of pre emptive strike.pre emptive strikes means a full scale war and a full scale war means a nuclear war so no sane mind will think about carrying out a nuclear war. the chances of full scale war between ind and pak are very low. at max some increased intensity LOC firing. even a limited war in kashmir is highly unlikely. the indian generals talking about AJK and GB is just a rhetoric for public consumption. india has 8 lac military in IOK and if they invade AJK most likely they will over run pakistani defences in AJK. so pak will be left with no other option but to invade india some where else with all the might and air force will also be used which will be the last war in the subcontinent as after such a war human beings wont be able to live in sub continent.

 

[maverick1977]

Couple of decades back for initiation of any war a solid pre-emptive air strike was considered as the very best strategy. But with advances in air defence systems and AWACS, are big scale daring pre-emptive air strikes (like Israel - 1967) even possible? Can countries go for pre-emptive air strikes against air defence systems first and then against military targets or can the same be targeted simultaneously.

Today are pre-emptive air strikes dead or the same only possible between unequal adversaries (mighty on the weak)?

very important.. the initial TNT tonnage on critical infrastructure and adversary’s offensive weaponry is critical to success

for PAF 30% to 50% of indian air assets need to be decimated in initial strike, then even indian armor cannot penetrate pakistan .. ..

 

[gambit]

Yes, even with today's advances in air defense systems, particularly in radar detection, preemptive strikes are still possible and even preferable.

No radar net is comprehensive, even when said net claimed to have overlapping coverage. Simple physics. Radar coverage that overlaps each other contaminates each other, especially if the net's components are on the same freq, which they must be in order for coordination to work. Overlapping in altitudes is one option, but that leave gaps in altitudes that the penetrators can exploit. The F-111 excels at literally hilltop altitude. AWACS requires extensive resources to maintain constant coverage and not many countries can afford that.