SipahSalar
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2014
- Messages
- 3,162
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
And what relevance did that have to Kargil? The only relevance to Kargil is IAF losing its Migs and PAF did not.I was 'boasting' of IAF BVR capability on mig-29s.
So you are comparing 1973 to 1999? Do you know how much the world changes in 25 years in terms of technology?You somehow think its a matter of poor skill to lose planes to ground fire,lol.In 1973 israeli air force lost 120 aircraft to grund fire and less than 10% of that to enemy aircraft,so losing to ground fire is hardly equivalent of losing to enemy aircraft,nor a testament of skill.
Secondly, the reason they lost more planes to ground fire is not because of ground fire being more effective than fighter jets, but the fact that there was very little Arab Air Force left to oppose them. It's like saying US Army lost more tanks to IEDs in Afghanistan than to other tanks, thus IEDs are better than Tanks. I hope my explanation is not too complex for you to grasp.
That's the whole point I am making. If you guys lost Migs to lightly equipped irregular soldiers, imagine if you were facing the full force of Pak Fauj and Pak Fizaiya. And your Mirage-2000s' did nothing to the irregulars. After losing the Migs the IAF limited itself to fly sorties for Zee News clips.At least IAF had the courage to show up over the battlefield,unlike PAF which never came while the 'mujahideen' on the peaks were being destroyed by mirage-2000s from above.
Even your own leaders claim that it wasn't Indian military that caused them to leave the hills but rather international pressure.