What's new

The Fighter Gap

EagleEyes

ADMINISTRATOR
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
16,774
Reaction score
25
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
THE FIGHTER GAP

Sqn Ldr (Retd) SHUAIB ALAM KHAN gives a gripping account of the facts, hitherto largely undisclosed, that has led to the present situation with respect to fighter aircraft in Pakistan

Has the PAF performed well? There has been no critical appraisal. The PAF like the other services must have made mistakes or even blunders but these have not been debated. Truth is stranger than fiction. The PAF except for a very short period in '65, performed well below the required. It is a relatively small force, the support that it can provide to the Army and Navy must be its main role. Has the PAF provided such assistance? Why not? Because the PAFs role remains a debate. It should assist the Army and the Navy and not fight its own war. The three services must fight the same war and not their own separate battles. To enforce this should the Air Force be placed under command of the Army and Navy?

For the last few years there is a debate on buying a very expensive weapons system for the Air Force because of the 'FIGHTER GAP, is this system to be used to defend the fighter establishment, defend Pakistan or just another gimmick for the kick backs! Quoting from the 'News April 13, 1998 Ã’The most lucrative contract discovered was a $ 4 billion deal to buy 32 Mirage jets from the French company Dassault. The documents, which include letters from Dassault executives, indicate an agreement was reached to pay 5% 'remuneration about $200 million to Marleton Business, a BVI company controlled by Zardari. In a report published in the 'Hindu on 21st January 1998, the Air Chief said Islamabad needed to carefully evaluate how to 'address this (Indian) threat. According to him, India had as many as 232 'hi-tech aircraft as opposed to the 32 F-16s of the Pakistan Air Force. He said since the role of the PAF was a 'pivotal one, Pakistan must 'do something as the Air Force was losing some seven to eight aircraft every year on account of 'phasing out and partly because of attrition. The growing technological disparity between the Pakistan and Indian Air Forces has now assumed 'acute proportions, Air Chief Marshal Parvaiz Mehdi Qureshi of the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) has said. Referring to the addition of sophisticated aircraft to the Indian Air Force and the inability of the PAF to come up with a matching response, Air Marshal Mehdi Qureshi said: 'If this widening technological disparity between India and Pakistan is not plugged or narrowed down within the next 36 to 48 months, it would pose a direct threat to national security. Is this the 'Fighter Gap? Or is it more than this?

I plan to describe several unrelated incidents to show that a 'Fighter Gap exists. This 'Fighter Gap does not relate to technology and numerical disparity, but to the organization, employment and training. The incidents relate to the period, 1947 - 1971 in the employment of the Air Force in combat and discuss the causes, the resulting situation, and with hindsight suggest perhaps what should have been done.

In 1947 and 1948 the IAF provided direct support to the Indian Army, bombed Murree, attacked the Kohala bridge several times and an unarmed PAF transport. The PAF role in Kashmir was transport support, and despite IAF fighter activity it continued air transport operations but limited them to moonlit nights. Our fighters remained employed on 'watch and ward in the NWFP, quoting from the 'Story of the PAF-- 'an unarmed Fury, while engaged in leaflet dropping over a hostile area, was fired upon with a light machine gun. The aircraft sustained some damage but the pilot landed safely at Miranshah, where he quickly took another Fury, this one bristling with weapons, and went back to even the score --.. in an another sequence, '-. Exemplary punitive action-the RPAF--flew 139 sorties in which 72 bombs, 108 rockets and 4600 rounds of 20 mm ammo were expended. The 500-lb high explosive bombs proved useful against mountain hideouts and mud houses - this employment was termed as heaven on earth - 'Was a dream base in many respects- far enough from Peshawar to be free of daily nagging by supervisory authority, a detachment could really let its hair down and dispense with all those nuisances which were collectively labelled bullshit -.

The PAF was also a circus outfit and it performed many air displays, always very good ones. Should we not have flown air combat, strike and ground support missions in Kashmir instead of 'watch and ward and air displays?

As soon as the US Aid started flowing the PAF assets increased to 12 F104 interceptors, 104 F86 fighter bombers, 26 B57 bombers, 6 C130 cargo, some RT/ T33 recce / jet trainers and some T37 trainer aircraft. We also had two very high altitude RB 57F recce, 4 SA 16 amphibious long range maritime search and rescue aircraft and helicopters. By 1959/60 the PAF was fully trained and competent in the use of its aircraft. In 1959 the last, all PAF exercise 'JANUS was held. Little or no training was conducted with the Army and Navy. We did train with the USAF, RAF, Turkish and Iranian Air Forces who visited Pakistan regularly. Watch and ward continued in Dir, Bajaur, Kalat and the downing of an IAF Photo Recce (PR) Canberra were added to the PAFs battle honors.

I was posted to Air HQ Plans Directorate in the summer of 1964. This meant about half an hours work a week. Others had less. I was comparatively over worked, but who is complaining. Air HQ was a great place, we had endless samosa and tea sessions, visits to the library and calling on friends. Those were the good old days. 1964 slipped into 1965 and one Monday morning we learnt through the 'rumor channel that the Pakistan Army was being deployed against the Indians in the Rann of Kutch. To make matters worse the C-in-C was in Bangkok attending a SEATO meeting and would be away until Sunday. To further compound the issue we had three war plans, war against India, war against Afghanistan and the third war against both India and Afghanistan. The alert phase was also- 'total, either you were at peace or on full alert. The war plans had no provision for limited action. Finally at about mid-day, orders came through that we were to update and revise all existing plans, meetings were held and work started in earnest which continued until the 'top secret typists were exhausted. There was a great demand for security, since the previous Director Plans had been court-martialed, and some of the officers summarily retired. The day would start at 0730 and continue until 2200 or 2300 hours. On Wednesday evening the Assistant Chief Air Staff (Operations) (ACAS(O)), Director Operations and the Director Plans met us to check progress, at the end of the meeting the ACAS(O) remarked that he did not understand why the Indians had not attacked us yet. There was silence, since no one else said anything, I ventured to say that the Indians were waiting for us to complete our war plans. The meeting came to an abrupt end, and no one disagreed with me!

On Saturday, our revision was complete, we were as ready as could be expected, and the Director Operations took the responsibility and placed the Air Force on alert. The C-in-C returned in the night, called us to work and reversed all the orders. He took one other action -- spoke to his counterpart in India offering that he would not use the PAF if Air Marshal Arjun Singh did not use the IAF! Arjun Singh flew one of his PR Canberras, took photographs of US Aid supplied equipment, when these were seen by the Americans, military aid to Pakistan was stopped!

The fighting in the Rann of Kutch finished, the matter was referred to The Hague and Lal Bahdur Shastri vowed that the next bout would be on a battlefield of their choosing. We did learn some lessons from this--the alert was phased and we prepared for contingencies. These plans permitted flexible response without going into full-scale war. Besides, ammunition and stores had moved despite the reversal of the alert actions.

In July, the C-in-C PAF and Managing Director PIA exchanged positions and AVM Nur Khan assumed command of the PAF. The usual presentations were made. At Plans Directorate we were discussing the returning of stores and ammunition back to their depots. On Monday morning in late July the ACAS(O) returned from Pindi to report that the Army was to engage in a 'do in Kashmir. Since no further details were available, the C-in-C flew up to Pindi to find out for himself. The Army Chief informed him that 'Gibralter Force was to be launched into Kashmir which would create insurrection in the occupied valley leading to its secession to Pakistan. He said that details were with the 12 Div Commander in Murree. Nur Khan flew to Murree in a helicopter and met the operation commander. After the briefing the Air Chief asked whether any air effort was required, the answer was that the entire plan was prepared without any requirements of air support!

On his return from Murree Nur Khan lost no time in calling in Operations and Plans directorates and ordered that plans be drawn up based on the following premise 'IN VIEW OF THE PAKISTAN ARMY INITIATIVES IN KASHMIR AND IF THESE WERE SUCCESSFUL THE INDIAN ARMY WOULD ATTACK ACROSS THE INTERNATIONAL BORDER.

Recall of stores and ammunition was forgotten and working hours again were extended to 'until the days target was achieved. While this was underway only plans and operations directorates discussed war, what we expected and the comparison of our orders of battle was endless. Watching changes on the Indian side, their moves usually involved squadrons. When a single F86 was released from 102 Maintenance Unit, Operations Directorate would call a meeting with plans at Astt. Dir level who would recommend that the aircraft be placed at Sargodha. Then the Deputy Directors would meet and recommend that the aircraft be sent to Sargodha, the Directors would repeat the exercise and place their recommendations with the ACAS(O), who would go to the Chief and get his blessings to send the F86 to Sargodha. This was serious business!

Towards the middle of August '65, the Army sent an SOS that the 'Gibralter Force was in trouble and required immediate air drops of food and ammunition. It was decided that a C130 carry out a night drop. The Air Chief, Base Commander Chaklala and the OC 35 Wing were a part of this crew. The weather was terrible, rain, low clouds, yet the mission flew and satisfactory results were achieved.

Air Force 'Forward Headquarters were activated on 30th August and I joined 7 Squadron. On 1st September the army attacked in Chamb, no air effort was requested or planned, but the C-in-C Air was over the battle field in an L 19, to see the complete rout of the Indian forces, he placed Sargodha on high alert. In the afternoon, flights of Indian Vampires started attacking Pakistani troops, the army requested help and 4 Vampires were shot down. The Indian air action stopped as suddenly as it had started. Still no planned tactical air support was requested! The army stopped four kilometers short of Akhnur!

Were Asghar Khan and Musa on speaking terms? Will we have a one sided story now? Why did Asghar Khan speak to Arjun Singh? Was Asghar Khan under orders to speak or was it initiative on his part? Did he speak? This is contained in John Frickers book 'Battle for Pakistan and in the 'Story of the PAF and also reported in the press without contradiction by Asghar Khan.

So it is a fact that Asghar Khan did speak to Arjun Singh. Did he do so because he was directed or whether it was initiative on his part- if the former is a fact then he should have committed 'hara kiri, if the latter is true then he should have been court-martialled, for 'cowardice in the face of the enemy and shot.

Was this the only problem? Asghar Khan claimed that there was no effort to spare for the Army as such the Army doctrine of not to include the PAF in the preparation plans. Asghar Khans policy was dictated by : 'It is true that the PAFs primary role, in essence, is to assist the Army in every possible way to achieve its objectives. But in order to be able to do this the PAF must first achieve a high degree of air superiority over the land battle areas, and it must be equipped to do this effectively. The Army seldom understood or recognised this precondition.

The Air Force according to the war plan attacked the IAF forward bases on the opening day of the war in West Pakistan. Air action in East Pakistan was delayed to the second day since a dusk strike was anticipated. The plan included a single F104 conducting a 'recce over Halwara, followed by F86s, attacking 'guns only Halwara, Adampur, Pathankot and the various forward radars in the north, with T33s in the south, followed by all available B57s after sunset.

After attacking the Indians on the 6th, the Air Force expected retaliation by the IAF on the 7th. No effort was made to launch dawn strikes instead the PAF requested the Army to launch paratroopers against the IAF forward bases on the night 6/7th . Three companies of SSG were launched.

The decision to launch the Special Service Group (SSG) was taken late on the 6th; they left without maps, proper briefing and worst of all with no planning or preparation! The results were disastrous, only a handful returned, most of them were captured or killed. Then every PAF base in Pakistan experienced Indian commando attacks and in their defence thousands of rounds of small arms ammunition was expended at imaginary commandos and the SSG were summoned to save Sargodha!

The operational statistics for 1965 are as under:
Sorties %Effort
Air Defence 1303 55%
Army / Navy 647 27%
Day Strike 100 4%
Night Strike 165 7%
Photo/Recce 148 6%

On the opening day of the '71 war, I had just returned from Jaisalmir, on entering the crew-room, I saw Gp.Capt. Rashid Rehman and Captain Bhombul the Director Naval Operations. They said that they had sighted an Indian convoy at about 1800 hours from a PIA Fokker, consisting of two merchant men escorted by six warships. Their position was 150 nautical miles south of Karachi, steaming south-east at about 15 knots. The OC Wing joined us and we found that 7 serviceable B57s were available and after modification of the weapons load to include parachute flares and rockets we could strike this convoy several times before dawn and before it could gain the security of friendly air cover. With this information plotted on a chart we moved to the base ops-room and briefed the Base Commander recommending that we attack the convoy or set up a standing patrol of a single B57 about 70/80 nautical miles from Karachi, outside Indian radar/fighter air cover and wait for the Indian Navy. The Base Commander spoke to the Air Chief who said 'LET THE NAVY FIGHT ITS OWN BATTLES!

The Navy got the message despite all our excuses. There were no more missions that night. The Indians bombed us by the hour and we got a taste of our own medicine. In the early morning we had a completely different type of attack-missiles,- the missiles struck without warning, no air raid alert, suddenly the dawn sky was filled with light and Karachi oil terminal started burning, punctuated with its own explosions. It seems that the Indian convoy reversed course and returned towards Karachi, launched its full complement of 'Osa boats. These boats were capable of speeds of 35/45 knots and armed with missiles with a range of 25/30 miles. Osa boats returned to Karachi again, they sank two naval vessels, two merchant men, captured a merchant vessel from our coastal waters, damaged PNS Dacca and the oil terminal. The Pak Fleet returned to harbor, off loaded its heavy ammunition and remained docked for port air defense for the rest of the war.

The Army deployed 18 Division in the Sukkur - Rahim Yar Khan area and the Air Force was to provide air support from Jacobabad. This forward base was equipped to house and maintain 6, F86s. The Army launched the operation, caught the enemy completely by surprise only to be beaten back by 4 IAF Hunter aircraft based at Jaisalmir. Jacobabad was activated after the cease-fire!

On 16th December a tank battle developed in the Zafarwal area, where an Indian armored brigade consisting of four tank regiments broke the protective cordon of our minefield and massed to attack. When air support was requested, support was not provided, could the answer have been: 'LET THE ARMY FIGHT ITS OWN BATTLES?

The battle raged all day, 13th Lancers and 31st Cavalry lost most of their tanks, the enemy was held despite the Air Force. Over a 100 serviceable F86s, F6s, B57s or Mirages were available at Murid, Peshawar, Mianwali, Shorkot, Faisalabad and Sargodha but remained grounded.

The Air Force provided air support to the Navy at Karachi, on a report from a PIA aircraft flying reconnaissance for the Navy, the morning CAP (combat air patrol) at Masroor was asked to investigate, the result was that PNS Zulfiqar took 900 hits of point 5 inch ammo killing several officers and men, with many more injured.

The ship was at anchor, it was not going anywhere! Had the pilots not been so trigger happy, the ships identity could have been established with just two radio calls, and had the pilots had been trained in ship recognition they would have reported back that it was the PNS Zulfiqar!

The operating statistics for 1971 war are as under:
Sorties %Effort
Air Defence 1748 58%
Army / Navy support 951 32%
Day Strike 160 5%
Night Strike 130 4%
Photo / Recce 38 1%

Now that I have compiled a survey of PAF disasters, incompetence and achievements covering about 25 years, what conclusions can be drawn? Could it that there is no defined role for the Air Force? Or is it that the PAF defines its own role? Or is it Air Force incompetence? When such incompetence / disasters do occur they are immensely costly; which is why the next part of the article is written with no holds barred.

The PAFs role was not cleared even by the British Chiefs, who understood the role of air power in the light of WWII, and they became involved in a concepts struggle. In August 1950, General Gracey the then Army C-in-C wrote: 'The small PAF should be primarily trained for the tactical support of the Army and Navy--.. Army / Air and Navy / Air cooperation must be perfected especially as regards air recce, production of air photos and the direct support of Army, in conjunction with artillery, in the destruction of enemy tanks. However, the C-in-C Air AVM R.L.R. Atcherly was of the opinion: '-I am not inferring that you dont know your job; I am saying that you dont know mine. Air must be left to the airmen; even Monty preaches that.

By the time the Rann Kutch started there was no training for forward air controllers, no testing of communication with the Army and Navy. The war plans did not assign, specify support to the Army and Navy. Horizontal communications at various levels of the Army, Navy and the Air Force were non-existent. Even after the IAF had flown over the Kutch battle area, joint action did not result. The PAF could only venture 10 miles from the recognised border. Even though we had two high altitude RB57F recce aircraft, these were not used. We put them to aggressive use only after the '65 war. With such a situation as far as recce was concerned, then the question of direct support was entirely out of question!

With the start of operation 'Grand Slam this situation persisted. The IAF did intervene in the land battle, the PAF restricted itself to air defence. On 6th September the Director Operations PAF was in Aden, enroute to the UK, accompanied by his wife, presumably for a belated honeymoon! However, as the war progressed the Army did call and receive tactical air support, but no pre-planned combined operations took place, either with the Army or the Navy. Not even when the Navy visited Dawarka!

Between the '65 and 71 wars some Army/Air Force co-operation took place, but the Navy was left high and dry. The Navy had no defence against the Osa boat. The Egyptian Navy using the Osa had sunk an Israeli destroyer. The PN approached the Air Force, but no solution was suggested nor were any joint plans agreed upon. The Air Force phased out its only Long Range Maritime Search and Rescue aircraft the SA16! The Osa defence plan is quite simple, identify the convoy or boats and zap them with fighters in the day or bombers by night. The B57 crews had been extensively trained in night operations. The use of parachute flares, night gunnery, rocket attack or skip bombing had all been practiced. The Osa had little or no air defence capability. As far as finding and recognition of the Osa is concerned the C130 was available for long range maritime patrol, its navigation radar was adequate and with an endurance of 10 to 12 hours at patrol altitude, the lack of specialist maritime recce aircraft would not be felt. Our highly sophisticated Electronic Intelligence B57 was also an available asset at PAF Masroor, it should have scanned the Arabian Sea daily, starting well before the war, finger printing all Indian naval ship and shore radars! This aircraft did not get airborne throughout the war and was lost due to enemy night bombing! However, Naval support required will, training, co-ordination and the earnest desire to help and not fight over the budget! Even on the night of the 3rd, the Director Naval Operations had sighted the Indian convoy from a PIA Fokker, all that was needed was that the B57s mop them up. Air effort was available. The Air Force / Navy co-operation that had resulted in the shooting up of an anchored Naval vessel borders on criminal negligence. The Indian version of the Osa attack is: '.. The main attack on Karachi harbor would be launched by tiny PT-15 missile boats-. without air cover -these boats were designed for coastal defense and not for long range offensive action-.The Indian Navy accomplished the task assigned to it within a few days of the war. No enemy shipping could move in or out of its harbors. Control of the sea around both wings of Pakistan was with the Indian Navy.

The Air Force blames the Army for not informing them or giving sufficient notice of its operations in the desert and on this basis denied support to 18 Division. What alternatives did the PAF have even if Jacobabad was not activated? There were 8 B57 at Masroor and perhaps 9 at Mianwali, Jaisalmir was within range of both B57 bases. Instead of going any where else the B57s should have been concentrated only on Jaisalmir. Starting with a 4 B57 dusk strike, continuing with half hourly raids through the night and following up with a 4 ship B57 dawn strike. Some 20 or 30 B57 missions could have been flown daily, until the Hunter force had been destroyed. The F104s were sent to Utarlai, Jamnagar and even ordered to Jodhpur, but if its attacks were concentrated against Jaisalmir, this would result in significant help to the Army. The Indian version: 'The Battle for Longewal, fought in the deserts of the Indian state of Rajastan, merits inclusion in any account of the 1971 India-Pakistan war because of the sheer audacity of the Pakistani generals who had planned it. Had it succeeded, India would have lost thousands of kilometers of a vast expanse of desert. But there is a fine line between the daring and the foolhardy. Did Pakistani general cross that dividing line?

Air support was not provided in the Zafarwal sector, this defies explanation, was the C-in-C PAF drunk?

The only place where the PAF acquitted itself well was in East Pakistan, both in '65 and in '71. In '65, it struck Kalikunda twice, Bhagdogra, Hasimara and Agartala. In 71 the Dacca air base, handicapped by not having a wireless observer unit or a main radar (evacuated to West Pakistan) gave an excellent account for itself. It lost only four aircraft in air combat, including the present Chief of Air Staff who became a prisoner of war. The IAF was severely punished in its day attacks and despite, the Indian preponderance of 10 or 20 to 1, they stopped day raids and concentrated their air effort to night high altitude bombing. No aircraft was damaged by these attacks, 12 or 13 aircraft remained when runway repair was given up and the pilots were evacuated, according to plan.

It will be pertinent to note that India operates Pathankot and Amritsar, both within gun range from Pakistan! Other facts are that only four senior officers took part in operations in '65, Nur Khan, Hall, Zahid Butt and Khaqan Abassi, of these pilots only Nur Khan was from fighter command. In 1971, no senior officer Group Captain or above got airborne.

Why did all this happen? Because the role of the Air Force was not clearly defined and the PAF defined its own role. If you look at the percentage effort spent on air defence, 55 and 57%, in '65 and '71 (the effort to protect air bases), and if we subtract bomber, transport and recce effort, then the resultant effect is that the PAF spent up to 70% of the available air effort to protect itself! Military action is an uncontrolled experiment, facts are often distorted, line shooting, deceiving with false appearances and covering up are common place. The Air Force is no exception, have disasters become an enduring feature of the Air Force? Where do we go from here?

Article 243 of the constitution states:

The Federal Government shall have control and command of the armed forces.

(1A)Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing provision, the Supreme Command of the Armed Forces shall vest in the President.

Article 245 states:

[(1)] The armed Forces shall, under the directions of the Federal Government, defend Pakistan against external aggression or threat of war, and, --.

The constitution thus places equal responsibility on all three services, and since the service chiefs are of equivalent ranks, there is no subordinate position! Despite the fact that the Air Force is small and its primary task is to support the Army and Navy. The Air Force, the sword arm of the services has not delivered, and like all good government institutions, it is a bureaucracy, and therefore, has every reluctance to change!

In order to fully understand the damaging effects of an independent air arm has had on Pakistan, it is necessary to explore modern management theories, the misconceptions and the biases of those who proposed the organizations and relationships amongst the forces, however, the position is that the PAF has a subordinate role since its primary responsibility is to support the Army and Navy, therefore, would it not be reasonable for the end users, the Army and Navy to decide the method, quantum, etc of support from the Air Force? Would it not be reasonable to place the Air Force under command of the Army and Navy? Here the only conflict is that of doctrine. What determines doctrine? Does equipment do it, or is equipment born of tactical doctrines. With the development of the Ghauri, and the diminished strategic role of the F 16, would it be used for tactical ground support? To do this, would we have to rewrite history and amend the constitution?
 
.
Originally posted by Ahsan Farooqui@Oct 15 2005, 06:13 AM
THE FIGHTER GAP


For the last few years there is a debate on buying a very expensive weapons system for the Air Force because of the 'FIGHTER GAP, is this system to be used to defend the fighter establishment, defend Pakistan or just another gimmick for the kick backs! Quoting from the 'News April 13, 1998 Ã’The most lucrative contract discovered was a $ 4 billion deal to buy 32 Mirage jets from the French company Dassault. The documents, which include letters from Dassault executives, indicate an agreement was reached to pay 5% 'remuneration about $200 million to Marleton Business, a BVI company controlled by Zardari.
[post=812]Quoted post[/post]​

HI!
Everyone knows that there are heavy kick backs are given every time there is any deal anywhere in globe.Recently Jane defence reported that almost all 3rd world and developing nation use mid-man ,touts in these deals.
Could anyone in this forum tell me is it possible to probe all these deals in Pakistan? how many of pakistan army officers get prison or any other punsihment for geeting bribes?
In India media/press and opposition is providing vital role and now almost every deal is under scruitny.What about pakistan's deals?

one of my pakistani friend told me that pakistani generals are most corrupted people in pakistan and they have huge some of black money . Is it true?
Regards
Abhi
 
.
one of my pakistani friend told me that pakistani generals are most corrupted people in pakistan and they have huge some of black money . Is it true?

of course not! the army generals can't take bribes nor thay need to...because of the sound facilities given to them.
 
.
Well tactics have changed, now some Mirage IIIs have been sent to help the Navy, and the A-5s can support the Army until more F-16s come. But what will the PAF have besides the JF-17 and F-16? Gripen, J-10, possilby Su-27s? Or a ground-attack fighter like the JH-7?
 
.
Challenge for Pakistan Air Force

AIR MARSHAL (RETD) Ex-PAF AYAZ AHMED KHAN

On March 25, 2005, the Bush Administration accorded its approval to sell F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan "in a major policy shift rewarding a key ally in the war on terrorism, and angering neighbouring India". A senior Bush administration official said that initial estimates called for the sale of 24 F-16s to Pakistan. But the State Department said that Washington has set no fixed limits on how many F-16 aircraft Islamabad can buy. White House spokesman said "the F-16 jets are vital to Pakistan's security as President Musharraf takes numerous risks prosecuting the war on terror".

This is good news for the Pakistan Air Force, which since October 1989 had been denied access to advanced aircraft and weapons from the US, while the Indian Air Force has procured advanced aircraft, BVR missiles, precision guided weapons, and AWACs from Russia, France, Israel and UK. During 90s the balance of air power was already four to one in India's favour. The euphoria about new F-16s for the PAF has evaporated, since Washington has announced supply of very large numbers of F-16 Falcons and F-18 Super Hornets to the Indian Air Force. The air power imbalance will tilt further in favour of India.


Washington has moved fast to placate India, which is considered a bulwark for the furtherance of US strategic and economic interests in the region. On April 21, 2005, a high level US defence team led by Lt General Jeffry B Kohler held extensive discussions with the top Indian Air Force officials and submitted detailed technical parameters of the two fighters jets that the US has offered to India. The offer includes F-16 Fighting Falcons manufactured by Lockheed Martin, and twin-engined F-18 Super Hornets being manufactured by The Boeing Aircraft Company.
After a round of meetings, the Request for Information (RFI), was provided by Lt General Kohler - Director US Defence Security Cooperation Agency to senior IAF officials. Kohler said that the two US Companies would bid for Indian fighter aircraft requirements. These US aircraft manufacturers would be offering the latest versions of their fighters to India. Both the companies have plans to bring their fighters to India for trails, and would give detailed presentations to IAF officials." Lockheed Martin had already offered 140 F16 fighters to India. Twenty two off the shelf, while 118 designed and manufactured as per IAF requirements, to be assembled by HAL at Bangalore.

India has already asked for bids for the procurement of fourth generation fighters from Dassault of France, Swedish Grippen, and Russian aircraft manufacturers. Bids have already been received form these companies. The Americans are the last of the four countries to send their bids for the expected large scale fighter procurement programme of the Indian Air Force.

A US official said that India is contemplating a "very large purchase of fighters", including US built F-16s and F-18s. Jet fighter aircraft are expensive, and India would be spending billions of dollars to purchase fighter jets for offensive action and defence against assumed enemies. With over 2000 aircraft, which include 800 combat aircraft, Indian Air Force is the fourth largest in the world. India is not faced with any external threat.

Except self made disputes, like the unsolved Kashmir problem, forcible occupation of Siachen Glacier, Sir Creek, and building of dams and barrages in Kashmir in contravention of the Pakistan India water accord. These very serious irritants in the normalisation of relations could be solved if India so willed. These are the pretext for anti-Pakistan propaganda and for the massive build-up of forces, to threaten and intimidate Pakistan.

Both Pakistani and India have declared that the peace process is irreversible. But Indian military capabilities especially deployment of 600,000 regular troops in Jammu and Kashmir, past history of wars against Pakistan, recent deployment of entire Indian Armed Forces against Pakistan, Pakistan specific military exercises, and hysteric build-up of the Indian Air Force fully expose belligerent Indian intentions towards Pakistan.

The recently revealed Indian "Cold Start Doctrine", which aims at capturing Pakistan's strategic assets through rapid deployment of Indian combatant forces, reveals the mindset of Indian strategic policy planners. Indian plan is to surprise Pakistani armed forces, by capturing Pakistani strategic assets, "before the country reacts to any war alarms." Indian Air force will be a key player in any such pre-emptive action. Recently India raised a new Command, called 'The South West Command', to be deployed to threaten southern Pakistan especially Sind. Pakistan Army, the PAF and Pakistan Navy must review and rationalise their operational strategy to defeat Indian pre-emptive attack plans.

For Pakistan Indian plans to build dams and barrages in Indian Held Kashmir is a conspiracy to steal Pakistan's water and throttle its jugular vein. Pakistanis are emotional about Indian plans to control Pakistan's water resources. The water dispute is as serious as the Kashmir dispute, and could lead to the fourth war between Pakistan and India. Jammu and Kashmir is a flashpoint because both the countries are nuclear states, and have powerful conventional forces.

Pakistan is seriously threatened by the imbalance between the IAF and the PAF. Indian air power build-up, especially enhancement of its offensive air power potential, is a challenge for the Pakistan Air Force. Pakistan can ill-afford to ignore the strike and intercept capabilities of the IAF, especially of its 190 Sukhoi (Su-30k) and 50 Mirage 2000-H multirole aircraft. The force multiplier impact of 190 Flankers, 50 Mirages and about 300 F-16 Falcons and F-18 Super Hornets, the Indian Air Force could outgun the PAF in the war for air superiority. The smaller PAF will find it difficult to clear the skies over the FDLs. Armour advances of Pakistan army could be halted in their tracks by IAF's BVR weapons. Pakistan therefore has no option, but to build a strong air force, which is not inferior to the Indian Air Force, in quality and quantity.

Despite calls for "irreversible peace," India is arming itself for possible showdown with Pakistan. China or Bangladesh are also categorised as enemy countries by Indian military strategists and politicians. Former Defence Minister George Fernandes had repeatedly declared that," China is the enemy country". Indian military is already huge, and beefing it up to settle scores with Pakistan only does not make sense.

Indian policy planners are conscious of China's military capabilities, especially that of the Peoples Liberation Army (PLA) Air force. Indian Air Force will have 190 Su-30 MK Flankers soon. But the PLA Air Force will have 400 Flanker jets; twice as many as the IAF. PLAAF's fighter arsenal comprises 78 Su-27Sk and 76 Su-30 MKK purchased from Russia. Recently PLA Air Force has received 24 advanced Sukhoi Su-30MK2 Flanker fighters.

These are naval versions of Sukhoi Su-30 MKK fighter. China is building another 200 Flankers under licence from Sukhoi. PLA's 400 Flankers constitute an formidable force for offensive operations, and for the air defence of China. According to Richard Fischer a top US defence analyst PLA's latest Flanker fighters can beat US jet fighters including the F-15 Eagle and F-16 Falcon in air combat.
The Chinese Su-30 MKK, and the Indian Sukhoi-30 MK Flankers can outgun and outrun the best USAF fighters. He reports that F-15 fighters of the United States Air Force, performed badly during air combat training engagements in Alaska with the Indian Air Force Su-30 MK's. That the F-15s equipped with latest long range high definition radars, are inferior to the Flankers is disturbing for the Pentagon and the USAF. During air combat exercises IAF's Su 30 MKs and F-15 pilots saw each other at the same time with their radars, but the Indian fighter pilots invariably got the first shot with their AA-10 Alamo air to air missiles. They won all long range (BVR) air combats.

According to Richard Fisher, who is an expert on Chinese military," PLA Chinese Flanker fighters can beat the top US jet fighters including the F-15 Eagle. In 1992 Russian Sukhoi Su-27s (earlier Flankers) arrived at US Langley Air Force base to perform. Their performance and pilot handling was impressive. Since 1992 Pentagon has known that in a close-in dog fight the Su-27 and now Mk-30s would smear the F-15 Eagle. The USAF-Indian Air Force exercises have brought home the lesson that Russian radars, BVR systems and weapons and tactics have reached a high level, in which the F-15 Eagle is being outclassed in long range engagements".

Here is a lesson for the PAF. The future air combat with the IAF Su 30 MK Flankers will be long range engagements with BVR weapons. The gap is quality, quantity and advanced weaponry must be bridged immediately to ensure that PAF fighter pilots are not at a disadvantage in a future air war.

http://nation.com.pk/daily/may-2005/4/columns5.php

Miro
 
.
Originally posted by Owais@Nov 3 2005, 07:17 PM
ofcourse not! the army generals can't take bribes nor thay need to...because of the sound facilities given to them.
[post=2194]Quoted post[/post]​

Just a brotherly advice.

Don't be too Patriot.

Miro
 
.
Originally posted by miroslav@Nov 8 2005, 01:52 PM
Just a brotherly advice.

Don't be too Patriot.

Miro
[post=2520]Quoted post[/post]​

Its infact very true, but then of course one's action can't justify a group.
 
.
Originally posted by WebMaster@Dec 4 2005, 12:39 PM
Its infact very true, but then of course one's action can't justify a group.
[post=4370]Quoted post[/post]​

I will come to the Point.

Every bunch of Generals and/or Top Brass in this world is/was/are/were Corrupt somewhere/somehow and blah blah.

Miro
 
.
Sadly i doubt you got the exact point.

General have enough corrupt money from the military funds to live like a President so they dont need to take bribe from somebody else.

BTW: i can't agree with you more.

Regards,
Ahsan F.
 
.
Originally posted by WebMaster@Dec 6 2005, 12:52 AM
Sadly i doubt you got the exact point.

General have enough corrupt money from the military funds to live like a President so they dont need to take bribe from somebody else.

BTW: i can't agree with you more.

Regards,
Ahsan F.
[post=4439]Quoted post[/post]​

It's not exact bribing like the police do.

Most of the times when Generals have to choose tanks or armaments they get commissions from the Defence suppliers to pass their weaponary and to put it as best in front of the MoD so the contract will go to them.

If it is not money. It may have some political objectives as trade.

See the IAF has to choose MRCA's from atleast 5 options.

It will be IAF who will suggest the best option and then MoD will deeide finally.

Miro
 
.
So basically, lobbies dont work in India? I doubt it.

I have read many articles, regarding lobbies for military equipment in India. Some of the articles say that Mig-35 will be picked or some other Russian fighter due to high Russian lobby in India. Now its kind of funny that IAF is (most likely) going for two different platforms, to avoid upsetting its main ally.

Also Miro do note that in the future the numbers of Mirage will be more than those of Mig-35.
 
.
The Magnificent Bomber Operations Of PAF in 1965 war

A country without a strong Air Force is at the mercy of any aggressor. Pakistan must build up her Air Force as quickly as possible. It must be an efficient Air Force, second to noneÓ. This advice by the Father of the Nation, the Quaid-e-Azam has been the principle for those who have built the PAF into what it is today and continues to inspire the young generations which follow.

It was an arduous task to build a strong and potent air force made more difficult in the case of Pakistan due to its political, technological and, above all, economic constraints at the time of its birth. Pakistan Air Force since its first day; had to, therefore, strive hard and long to develop into a modern and effective air force. The ability of our airmen was amply tested in two major wars and today we can say, with reasonable confidence, that we are in a position to meet any challenge that may come our way. But, it must be understood that in this day and age of fast-changing technological environment, the struggle ahead may be even harder, more uphill than what was faced by our predecessors.

In 1965 war, the world has seen some historic bombing operations by PAF pilots against different enemy locations. The B-57 bomber wing which was located at Mauripur Base contributed in the war by performing classical bombing operations at Jamnagar, Adampur and Pathankot. All these operations were mostly carried out at night, and required a great deal of concentration and high precision. The sole aim of these operations was to deny the enemy, the use of its airpower, by destroying the airfields from which they were supposed to takeoff.

On 6th September 1965 at 4:30 p.m., a quick twenty minutes final briefing was conducted for the B-57 attack against Jamnagar to be carried out at 6:00 p.m., the same day. This was the second attack at Jamnagar which had earlier been attacked by six F-86 aircraft.

The six B-57 set out in two waves of three aircraft each, flying at 200 feet above ground level. Following the coast line, they soon crossed over into Indian territory, descending even lower to avoid radar detection. Mandvi lighthouse beacon shining brightly, helped the B-57s to fix their position for final approach at Jamnagar, now some four minutes away. A mile short of the target the aircraft pulled up and each was able to deliver its load of 4,000 lbs of bombs on to the target. All aircraft were carrying a full load of rockets as well, and for this reason only internal bombs had been taken. The last minute orders for the mission had not allowed time for the rocket to be replaced by external bombs. The leader, however, discharged his rockets at a hangar and set it ablaze. No fighter interceptors and anti-aircraft fire were encountered.

Thereafter a Ôshuttle serviceÕ to Jamnagar was kept up all night with single aircraft sorties. During these operations, one PAF aircraft was lost which was attributed towards fatigue and bad weather. A photo intelligence report of Jamnagar after the war confirmed that a total of about fifteen bombs landed inside the airfield complex destroying two Indian Air Force Vampires on the technical area.

In another operation, four of B-57s aircraft from Mauripur were ordered to report at Peshawar. On landing at Peshawar, the leader of the formation was informed about his mission to strike Adampur at 5:30 p.m.. The aircraft had left Mauripur with internal bombs only and were to have the external stations loaded at Peshawar. However, Peshawar that evening was crowded with aircraft and arrangements had not yet been made to meet the unforeseen commitments that had suddenly arisen for the base. While the maintenance staff struggled to refuel the aircraft, time was slipping by and in order not to delay their mission further, their leader decided to drop his demand for the external bombs.

It was already dusk before they took off and pitch dark when the B-57 crossed into India flying at low level. The Initial Point, ten minutes from their target, was the bridge over the river Beas Ñ a darker streak on an already dark canvas; but they made no mistake about the attack. The anti-aircraft swung in action but the bombers repeated the attacks regardless of its hazard. Except for one aircraft, that had its left wing pierced by a 40 mm shell, no other damage was sustained. The formation landed back at Peshawar at 9:00 p.m. and was tasked for another mission against a bridge at 4:00 a.m. The formation, encouraged the success of the first mission, accept the task willingly and destroyed the target as required.

The non-stop nature of PAFÕs airfield offensive was indicated by the fact that, as the Adampur strike force was landing back at Peshawar, the other five B-57s were taking off for a follow up strike against Pathankot. The operational signal indicated four aircraft, but as five were available, so all took off. The discussed airfield at Pasrur was the IP (Initial Point) for run-in for the target. The new moon was giving a faint light and the visibility was fairly good. The Indian black out was quite good even in small villages.

There was no sign of any fire etc. of the previous F-86s attack. In fact there was a probability of missing the target. Thanks to an Indian who was kind enough to forget putting the airfield beacon off. It provided accurate pinpoint direction for the destruction of Pathankot. The enemy heard the attack and opened up with everything he had. It further assisted our pilots to see the airfield clearly. A large concentration of ground defences was reported at Pathankot. The PAF pilots were clear in their minds that once they were in an attack, they had to accomplish the mission. The enemy suffered a heavy loss. Next morning our troops intercepted an enemy radio message which said, ÒPathankot burning, immediate help neededÓ.

To conduct counter air offensive mission against enemy airfield, and to remain out of reach of their fighter aircraft, the PAF bomber wing remained elusive throughout the war. The pattern repeated was to take off from home base, strike inside Indian territory and recover at another airfield. The B-57 operations called for great skill, concentration, stamina and dedication. These qualities were found in abundance in the ever-eager crew of the wing and no task seemed impossible for them.

In 1965 Indo-Pak Pakistani C-130 transport planes also carried out Heavy Bomber operations on the indian territory:

Bombing in Ramgarh - Sialkot Sector After the Kathua bombing raid, the next target for the C-130 bombers was a concentration of enemy tanks and guns, three miles north of Ramgarh in the Sialkot Sector. Two C-130s dropped nine tons of bombs each on the night of 15 September and played a major role in shattering the enemy forces moving up for the battle of Chawinda. On the following night, a single C-130 strike was repeated against Ramgarh destroying enemy tanks and guns as well as ammunition and fuel dumps

Rurki and Pagowal Attack
On the night of 19th September, two successful C-130s sorties were made against Indian Army concentrations in the vicinity of Rurki and Pagowal, and apart from the resulting material damage, the effect on enemy morale was believed to be devastated.

Saving Lahore
In the closing stages of the 1965 War, the Indians had amassed their heavy guns close to the BRB canal to concentrate their heavy artillery fire on Lahore. On 21st September a single C-130 dropped ten tons of bombs on the heavy artillery four miles south-east of Jallo. Another C-130 dropped nine tons of bombs on Indian artillery concentration at Valtoha. On 22nd September bad weather hampered PAF strike action against the assembled Indian artillery but the inclement weather did not deter three C-130s taking off that night to find the enemy target and drop their bombs by radar. The target at Atari included an Indian AA Regiment with 72 guns, located in a strip about one mile long running parallel with and close to the BRB canal. The Army was reluctant in giving clearance to the C-130s for fear of breaching the BRB or worse still, the bombs landing on our own troops this side of the canal. Permission was finally granted and the C-130s conducted a highly accurate drop of more than 30 tons of TNT which devastated the Indian artillery. Many independent observers believe this last action by PAF set the Indians clamouring for a ceasefire. Seven officers of the Transport Wing were awarded the Sitara-e-Jurat and 2 JCOSs the Tamgha-e-Jurat.

The airfields posted above were the Indian front lines & PAF took them out & they were not used in the 65 war after that at all, infact this is why IAF failed to launch any effective agressions over PAF

Several Pakistani Christians fighter pilots also accompanied PAF in these missions Nazir Latif, who served as an air commodore, led a successful bombing mission over Ambala, India, in the 1965 war. Six years later, Latif found himself in the thick of battle once again.
Wing Commander Mervyn Middlecoat and Squadron Leader Peter Christy both men were part of a Pakistani strike force that flew over India's Jamnagar airfield and bombed it refraining IAF to use this airfield against Pakistan.Another Christian squadron leader W.D. Harney flew 14 bombing missions, some of which covered the Indian strongholds of Adampur, Halwara, Jodhpur, Pathankot and Ambala.
 
.
WebMaster said:
So basically, lobbies dont work in India? I doubt it.

I have read many articles, regarding lobbies for military equipment in India. Some of the articles say that Mig-35 will be picked or some other Russian fighter due to high Russian lobby in India. Now its kind of funny that IAF is (most likely) going for two different platforms, to avoid upsetting its main ally.

Also Miro do note that in the future the numbers of Mirage will be more than those of Mig-35.

What PAF needs is a dedicated bomber to replace the aging Fantans. If Russia ignores indians screams and opens up its arms industry to Pakistan...then PAF should SERIOUSLY look at the SU-34.!!
 
.
SU-34 (SU-27IB) FLANKER FIGHTER BOMBER AIRCRAFT, RUSSIA

The Su-34 (also known as Su-27IB) fighter bomber has been developed by the Sukhoi Design Bureau Joint Stock Company in Moscow and the Novosibirsk Aircraft Production Association at Novosibirsk in Russia. First deliveries of the fighter bomber are expected to begin in 2006 and it is planned as a replacement for Tu-23M and Su-24 aircraft. Su-34 is one of a number of Russian aircraft (Su-27, Su-30, Su-33 and Su-35) which have been given the NATO codename Flanker.
The Su-34 fighter bomber is a derivative of the Su-27 fighter aircraft. The aircraft design retains the basic layout and construction of the Su-27 airframe, with a conventional high-wing configuration and a substantial part of the onboard equipment. The Su-34 has a changed contour of the nose section to accommodate an advanced multi-mode phased array radar with terrain following and terrain avoidance modes. It has a two-seat rather than single-seat cockpit. The capacity of the internal fuel tanks has been increased with a resulting increased take-off weight. Changes have been made to the central tail boom for a rear-facing radar.

COCKPIT
The cockpit has two K-36DM zero/zero ejection seats side by side for the pilot and copilot. The seats are supplied by Zvesda Research and Production Enterprise Joint Stock Company, Moscow. The multifunction displays in the cockpit show the flight parameters, the operational status of the aircraft units and tactical data.

WEAPONS
The Su-34 is armed with a 30mm GSh-301 gun and 180 rounds of ammunition. The gun has a maximum rate of fire of 1,500 rounds per minute and the muzzle velocity is 860m/sec. The gun is supplied by the Instrument Design Bureau in Tula.
The aircraft has ten hardpoints for weapon payloads and is able to carry a range of missiles including air-to-air, air-to-surface, anti-ship and anti-radiation missiles, guided and unguided bombs, and rockets. The aircraft is fitted with a target designator.
The R-73 (NATO codename AA-11 Archer) short-range air-to-air missile is supplied by the Vympel State Engineering design Bureau in Moscow. The R-73 is an all-aspect missile capable of engaging targets in tail-chase or head-on mode. The missile has cooled infrared homing. The R-73 attacks the target within target designation angles of +/- 45 degrees and with angular rates up to 60 degrees per second. The missile can intercept targets at altitudes between 0.02 and 20km, target g-load to 12g, and with target speeds to 2,500kph.
The RVV-AE long-range air-to-air missile, also known as the RR-77 or by the NATO designation AA-12, is manufactured by Vympel. The missile can intercept targets at speeds up to 3,600kph and altitudes from 0.02 to 25km. The minimum range in the aft hemisphere is 300m and the maximum vertical separation between the host aircraft and the target is 10km. The RR-77 has inertial guidance with mid-course radio updates and terminal active guidance. A new, longer-range (150km) version of the R-77, with solid fuel ram-jet propulsion, is being tested by Vympel.
The Su-34 carries a range of precision guided and unguided bombs and rockets, including the KAB-500 laser-guided bomb developed by the Region State Research and Production Enterprise based in Moscow.

SYSTEMS
The Su-34 is equipped with an electro-optical fire control system supplied by the Urals Optical and Mechanical Plant (YOM3) and a Geofizika FLIR (forward-looking infrared) pod. Leninetz of St Petersburg supplies the passive phased array radar system and TsNIRTI the electronic countermeasures suite.

ENGINES
The aircraft is powered by two afterburning AL-31F or AL-35 turbofan engines. The engines are mounted under the wing and are equipped with all-duty fixed geometry air intakes. A rotor protection installed in the air intakes provides protection against the ingestion of foreign objects.
The aircraft can carry 12,100kg of fuel internally in two fuel tanks in the wings and four in the fuselage. Three external fuel tanks, each with a capacity of 3,000 litres, can also be fitted.
The aircraft can achieve a speed of 1,900kph (Mach 1.6) at altitude and 1,300kph (Mach 1) at sea level.
 
.
MOO said:
Why not just buy a Chinese Flanker? Not political Bullsh*t attach either. Its a whole new warplane equiped with Chinese avionics, engine, cockpit and weaponry. This new J-11 kit was the result if the PLAAF attempt to modernize their older systems for to be replaced by its own new and improved equipment. The only thing that's Russian on it is the similar hull of the body which the Chinese already has liscense to build for hehe.

http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/5093/plaj112in.jpg

Why buy these when pakistan is already gonna go for more better, cheaper and flexible J-10?

Currently the J-10 can put up a good fight against the SU-30mki but in the future when china releases its new J-10c, then pakistan will have over 100 unstopable machine ready to shoot the india MKI's and MRCA's out of the sky.
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom