What's new

Smaller but Capable: How Pakistan Air Force Deters Indian Air Force

In previous conflicts between India and Pakistan, Pakistan has been armed with superior American weapons and still been defeated militarily. Now the tide has turned.

As far as deterrence is concerned, India has no intention of undertaking an offensive war. Even if there is a war and the existensce of Pakistan is hypothetically threatened, nukes are enough of a deterrence.
 
when? would love to know more.
The East Med is a bone of contention b/w Turkey and Greece for Turkey wants to explore it for hydrocarbons. The French Navy came to the aid of it's naughty brother a couple of years back. One French frigate was inside the Turkish EEZ posing quite a threat. Suddenly it's crew found out that their radars/EW/data-links etc. weren't working. They sent SOS to their base, and the entire comm was intercepted by the Turkish side to their great amusement.....

On another occasion the Greek F-16s and French Rafales came in damn close contact to the Turkish F-16s over the East Med. The latter took extremely aggressive moves (reminiscent of the PAF tactics) against the Greek F-16s, which were counting on the French Rafales to give the BVR cover. But to their bewilderment the Rafales moved away fast from the scene leaving the Greeks at the mercy of the Turks.....

As for the Aklman, this much Isharet is Ka'fi.....

*Now, the USN has deployed her largest a/c carrier, The Gerald Ford, along with its entire fleet in the East Med as the Turkish seismic fleet has started exploring hydrocarbons.
**A squadron of Qatar's Rafales are deployed in Turkey for a long duration.
***Following the procurement of Rafales by Greece, Prof Ismail Demir, the former Turkish Defense Industries boss, said: let them bring whatever they want, we'll show them their places at the Meydan-i Jenk.
 
Last edited:
Unless the Airforce is willing to take out the GHQ along with the generals, very few people care about this stuff.
waisay wo bhi sem sem hai, mm alam was like I would impose a good martial law, go read what shahid latif had to say about rco. inka dna mutate hota hai academies main jaa kay.
 
In previous conflicts between India and Pakistan, Pakistan has been armed with superior American weapons and still been defeated militarily. Now the tide has turned.
only in 65. and was still heavily outnumbered by india. in 71, india had the upper hand as the sanctions had hobbled pakistan's ability to maintain its equipment for past 6 years.
 
Last edited:
only in 65. and was still outnumbered by india. in 71, india had the upper hand as the sanctions hobbled pakistan's ability to maintain its equipment for past 6 years.
Shhhhhh.. This is not what they teach in Indian schools.
 
Shhhhhh.. This is not what they teach in Indian schools.
indians and hindus, in general, have a habit of glorifying even their defeats (recent bollywood movies about panipat and alauddin are an example), and portray their victories as if they were Sri Lanka fighting against USA (a david vs goliath like portrayal). they are masters of storytelling and myth-making.
 
only in 65. and was still heavily outnumbered by india. in 71, india had the upper hand as the sanctions had hobbled pakistan's ability to maintain its equipment for past 6 years.
In between the wars, Pakistan had acquired Mirage IIIs . Which plane did India have that was superior ?
 
In between the wars, Pakistan had acquired Mirage IIIs . Which plane did India have that was superior ?
how many were inducted? were they enough to counter the overwhelming superiority of numbers fielded by IAF? besides, it was used as a ground attack plane. not an air superiority fighter.
 
how many were inducted? were they enough to counter the overwhelming superiority of numbers fielded by IAF? besides, it was used as a ground attack plane. not an air superiority fighter.
India always had a numerical edge, even in 1965. We were discussing quality of equipment. Israel had managed to destroy the Arab air forces on the ground with their Mirages in 1971 and the Pakistanis had hoped to replicate it with Operation Chengiz Khan, but I guess there was a huge difference in the quality of pilots in the two cases.
 
With an edge in integration/synergy + intel/surveillance, Pakistan will always be a force to be reckoned with even if the enemy has superior aircraft.
Integration/synergy between all PAF assets and between all forces is probably the most important thing. With this you can easily concentrate a superior force in a small area against the enemy even if your enemy has superior numbers on paper.
 
Even today Our forces are better equipped than the Indians.

Our Agosta submarines have AIP while Indian scorpenes do not

Our nuke tests were a grand success while Indian nuke tests failed

We have MIRV strategic missiles while India does not.

We have Tactical nuclear misslles while India does not

We have UCAV while Indians do not.

Our JF-17 Block III are far more superior to their Tejas.
we have nuclear subs.. and for a costal neighbour like pakistan, we dont need AIP subs

your MIRV is not tested, .. we have two BMD systems in operation

we dont need tactical nukes, in retaliation to any nuke attack by pakistan, we will go full kaa- boom ..

baki points ka koi matlab nehi hain,, all feel good. so I am letting you feel good
 
A war is amalgam of military, diplomatic, economic etc etc capabilities of a nation. The loss or win is always judged as a whole and not in just one odd battle or domain. When a war is lost or won, there are tales of few battles, where the loser also may have had upper hand. But, who won the war?

A nation that starts a war or a conflict has the advantage of choosing the timing and place. It should have also worked out, if, it has the capability to bring the conflict to an end with it’s aim being achieved. It should work this out, by using each and every thing that it can use. If that aim is not achieved, then, it is not a victory. It may not have lost territory or gained any territory, but the mere fact, that, the war was started with an aim that wasn’t achieved is a failure and a loss.

Major conflicts between India and Paksiatn have been 1948, 1965, 1971 and 1999.

We all know, who started which one and what was the final outcome. Was aggressor able to achieve it’s aim, or, ended up defending it’s own territory? And then celebrated it’s successful defence of territory as a victory. Defence day it is.

There have been enough discussions and fights, over all these wars. Last few comments are a reflection of similar sentiments. Paksiatn hasn’t been able to achieve it’s aim, in any of the conflicts, that it started. India started only one - 1971.

Members here celebrate battles and domains. They are either unaware or don’t want to ask tough questions, from the establishment and politicians, for failing them in so many conflicts and wars.

As far as this thread goes - PAF has always displayed professionalism and is a worthy opponent. They have also maintained themselves well, inspite of a small budget. Would they be able to continue to do that with dwindling resources, is the moot point.

Collaboration with Turkey or China can be helpful, only to a certain extent, due to lack of resources. These countries can’t keep giving the best tech, without adequate monetary contribution from Paksiatn.
 
Last edited:
we have nuclear subs.. and for a costal neighbour like pakistan, we dont need AIP subs

your MIRV is not tested, .. we have two BMD systems in operation

we dont need tactical nukes, in retaliation to any nuke attack by pakistan, we will go full kaa- boom ..

baki points ka koi matlab nehi hain,, all feel good. so I am letting you feel good
Sure, Pakistan is a walkover for india. Maybe tell your army to free “Azad Kashmir”. We’re waiting here with some fantastic tea.
 

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom