What's new

The JF-17 is a truly remarkable plane

.
F35 , has vertical landing so I imagine future tactics would rely on disabling enemy airports

Uncle is not an idiot to invest billions into a stealth plane that has vertical landing

Military warfare against a "Equal" foe , would certainly involve active operation to not destroy the planes but disable airfields

13th or 14th century Sea Dominance was won by mere fact that one Empire had boats that were just a bit more faster then the enemy state and that difference changed the course

WW2 was decided by mere tiny fact one group could , decode the other's messages

Never underestimate the vertical landing and ability to engage 6 planes simultaneously
 
Last edited:
.
F35 , has vertical landing so I imagine future tactics would rely on disabling enemy airports

Uncle is not an idiot to invest billions into a stealth plane that has vertical landing

Military warfare against a "Equal" foe , would certainly involve active operation to not destroy the planes but disable airfields

13th or 14th century Sea Dominance was won by mere fact that one Empire had boats that were just a bit more faster then the enemy state and that difference changed the course

WW2 was decided by mere tiny fact one group could , decode the other's messages

Never underestimate the vertical landing and ability to engage 6 planes simultaneously
You are right on the VSTOL capabilities.
The harrier proved its worth many times, so you are right on the VTOL. I have always liked the Harrier, or more precisely the technology behind it; the engine and the exhaust, it was a unique design, difficult to achieve and the US got its hands on it as the well known AV8Harrier 2. The F-35 VSTOL variant (original design) was pretty much inspired by the Idea of the Harrier, while the technology involved in the F-35 VSTOL is completely new and American. The other difference is that the Harrier/Sea Harrier was subsonic while the F-35 is supersonic and stealth.

I might ask the question then, if somehow a variant of the JF-17 can be made VSTOL in the future or at least a STOL like the Swedish Gripen in the future? My guess is yes for the STOL (Short Take-off And Landing) where it take only a few hundred meters (around 500m) for take-off and for landing.
 
Last edited:
.
Go ask your military that.

After decades of development, if Tejas are still not inducted as operational units in air force, then the whole project has failed miserably.

JF-17s are flying as operational fighter jets, Tejas are not.

Case over.
--
thanks for reply...
give me one country who made world class jet by own in less than decade..
give me one 3rd world country made jet less than decade ...
compare spects vs role and responsibility of lca tejas and jf 17 ....
---
let me give small example...
why IAF still did not cleared LCA
1. IAF main foucs is Su30mki and not LCA tejas
2. role of LCA tejas was ..
replace mig21...
yes.. LCA failed to achive that .. but for good reason... be better than Mig
3. IAF have and taken option of D. Rafael for mig 21 ..
let me play devil adovate..
those who know how indian bureacry work..it will go like this
Burecrat : IAF, why you want to replace migs .. its flying...
IAF: MOST migs are old and completed their life so need to go.. even it FLYING but Dangeruly..
B: so take LCA .. home made and cos effective ...
IAF: not ready .. still in development
B: so ...
IAF: we selected D. rafael..
B: haaaa... you want to repalce mig with 4th genrartion D.rafel.. see cost
it like asking to replace maruti 800 with mercedez S class ...
NO...
IAF: then give LCA .. Completed one ...
B: call DRDO, ADA, HAL...
they say as per IAF standards .. its still not COMPLETED.....
IAF: so what should i do.. give D. rafael or LCA ..
B: Ok .. take rafael...
-----------------

its called strategy if IAF cleared LCA tejas now.. they will geth that ..
but if it delays it by hooke and crook .. it will get D.Rafel..and then in few yrs they can induct LCA tooo
its called Double game ..
---
LCA is good but not g8
Rafael is close to g8
so first to be g8 than go for good ..
and lets not forget Rafael TOT will help LCA alot .....alot..
---
so all fanboys so say LCA tejas is failure becuase not inducted ...
eihtet you are dumb or IAF top brass is too smart .. too smart even better than our IAS guys in bureaucracy
---
children play game for mins
professional play game for hrs
vetertan for yrs
masters own the game...
legend our game itself...
so most PDF guys come on childrena nd professional category
few in veteran class
rare . in Masters...
but
Legends are in top brass of IAF ...
(do include PAF brass too.. as still with small budget and all caos around . they made it happend JF17)
--
quoting again
santa and banta have old vehicle whihc need to be replace.. maruti 800 (mehran in pak)
case 1.
santa ..
owns mehran..
he owns Ford ENDEAVOUR .. but company not reliable and spare parts alos problem ..
mehran is getting old and old... so need to buy new ASAP
so buys new suzuki sx4 ...asap as its avaible with less wiaitng (development ) period

---
Banta
have Toyota land cruser ...its reliable.. no much issue..even upgrading it with company with new tech toys and fundamental body
he own maruti 800.. do odd job but get breakdown many times..
he wanted to replace with sx4 liek stuff but aspire for future genration toyota prius
instead now he say i want both
he book sx4 like stuff and add custom made modification which delyas delived by yrs
so not avaible...NOW..but surely LATER
and
now BOOKED for new prius .. with it TOT. which he will get SOON..
then
he can use that TOT
for land cruiser modification and SX4 develpoment
---
santa : banta you are failure .. my sx4 is running on growund geeting cool breez
banta::-):welcome:
 
Last edited:
.
--
thanks for reply...
give me one country who made world class jet by own in less than decade..
give me one 3rd world country made jet less than decade ...
compare spects vs role and responsibility of lca tejas and jf 17 ....
---
let me give small example...
why IAF still did not cleared LCA
1. IAF main foucs is Su30mki and not LCA tejas
2. role of LCA tejas was ..
replace mig21...
yes.. LCA failed to achive that .. but for good reason... be better than Mig
3. IAF have and taken option of D. Rafael for mig 21 ..
let me play devil adovate..
those who know how indian bureacry work..it will go like this
Burecrat : IAF, why you want to replace migs .. its flying...
IAF: MOST migs are old and completed their life so need to go.. even it FLYING but Dangeruly..
B: so take LCA .. home made and cos effective ...
IAF: not ready .. still in development
B: so ...
IAF: we selected D. rafael..
B: haaaa... you want to repalce mig with 4th genrartion D.rafel.. see cost
it like asking to replace maruti 800 with mercedez S class ...
NO...
IAF: then give LCA .. Completed one ...
B: call DRDO, ADA, HAL...
they say as per IAF standards .. its still not COMPLETED.....
IAF: so what should i do.. give D. rafael or LCA ..
B: Ok .. take rafael...
-----------------

its called strategy if IAF cleared LCA tejas now.. they will geth that ..
but if it delays it by hooke and crook .. it will get D.Rafel..and then in few yrs they can induct LCA tooo
its called Double game ..
---
LCA is good but not g8
Rafael is close to g8
so first to be g8 than go for good ..
and lets not forget Rafael TOT will help LCA alot .....alot..
---
so all fanboys so say LCA tejas is failure becuase not inducted ...
eihtet you are dumb or IAF top brass is too smart .. too smart even better than our IAS guys in bureaucracy
---
children play game for mins
professional play game for hrs
vetertan for yrs
masters own the game...
legend our game itself...
so most PDF guys come on childrena nd professional category
few in veteran class
rare . in Masters...
but
Legends are in top brass of IAF ...
(do include PAF brass too.. as still with small budget and all caos around . they made it happend JF17)

Despite such a stalwart attempt, no proper English sentence was written that day.
 
. . .
You are right on the VSTOL capabilities.
The harrier proved its worth many times, so you are right on the VTOL. I have always liked the Harrier, or more precisely the technology behind it; the engine and the exhaust, it was a unique design, difficult to achieve and the US got its hands on it as the well known AV8Harrier 2. The F-35 VSTOL variant (original design) was pretty much inspired by the Idea of the Harrier, while the technology involved in the F-35 VSTOL is completely new and American. The other difference is that the Harrier/Sea Harrier was subsonic while the F-35 is supersonic and stealth.

I might ask the question then, if somehow a variant of the JF-17 can be made VSTOL in the future or at least a STOL like the Swedish Gripen in the future? My guess is yes for the STOL (Short Take-off And Landing) where it take only a few hundred meters (around 500m) for take-off and for landing.


JF17 Thunder can't be made into vertical landing plane because the engineering behind the technology is immense hence
the colossal budget for the plane, center of gravity of the plane and weight distribution to keep the plane balanced

That does not means F35 can't be countered by any nation who do not have a VTOL plane

S300 series is an ample defense , and also having lethal planes in air (as is case during war time) its not easy for a plane to breach security. Once their are visuals vs opposing plane , Sukhoi series do have more credentials in Dog fight vs F35
and not to mention various high speed interceptors can chase down reported intruders with numerical advantage


Most experts judge F35 below Sukhoi in actual air - air combat but the improvements made on F35 are worth while specially the helmet and avionics package which makes it easy to engage targets and dispatch a missile.


What JF17 offers is , ample presence in air for Security role that is enough for Pakistan's security's need, meaning we can build as many units as we want and enhance the capabilities to our needs (Ground / Air/ Sea)

We were stuck in 70's with our technology in Airforce and JF17 takes us to 90's level which is good improvement for us and Block 2 would significantly improve this capability further.


Also you don't need stealth plane to disable any airfield , it can be done with conventional strategies as well etc, so you don't need 5 billion dollar air craft carrier and 1 billion dollar plane etc

Aircraft carriers do make great golfing stations or may be playing tennis on the deck
 
Last edited:
.
IAF went in 37 times into PAF airspace without being challenged, pakistani soldiers were so fearful seeing IAF over them in Pakistan, they even complained. So says one of your own Paf senior officer. :lol:

Learn something new everyday kid.

Source- Aeronaut Blog.

Mostly bullshit. The article by Tufail is well balanced analysis and has nothing that you allude to. According to him there were minor border violations by IAF during recce missions during which they lost two planes. Any time F16s were on CAP there were no violation. There were a few cases of both PAF F-16s and IAF Mirage-2000s locking their adversaries with the on-board radars and was never a one sided affair as the Indian think it was. One of the reasons IAF did not loose more planes was that Pakistan forces were under strict orders to make sure that the wreckage fell inside Pakistan. Following are some of these incidents. These incidents were verified by independent observers as the HUD movies were made available to them. How come the IAF never invited independent observers to look at its HUD movies?

#1 IAF Mirage-2000 aircraft attempted a lock-on at a PAF F-16A. The PAF F-16 immediately dropped down from 20,000 ft to hardly 5000 ft over the terrain and deployed a cloud of chaff. His A/A radar went in standby mode. The Mirage pilot thought that the F-16 had ran away when the F-16 tried to close in on him using the cover of the mountains and valleys. The F-16 closed in on the Mirage but at 15 nm distance the Mirage pilot again tracked the Viper closing in fast. Equipped with only two Magic-2s, the Mirage pilot banked sharply increasing the range to 20 nm and disengaged with full afterburners.

# 2 Armed with four AA-10 and two Magic-2 or probably AA-11 missiles, Gaurav Chibber a MiG-29 pilot acquired a lock on at two PAF F-16As orbiting over Skardu. The F-16s at once repeated their drill of engine to idle thrust, deploying a cloud of chaff and dropping down from 20,000ft to 5000ft AGL with AA Radar on standby mode. Gaurav tried all methods and probably had his A/A Radar functional again when he saw no sign of any aircraft in his radar. He felt something suspicious and decided to move out. As he started his way back to the base he saw two tracks appearing suddenly on his A/A Radar from behind. He quickly took evasive action but was relieved that he is well inside his territory and the tracks turned back in Pakistan. As fate would have it, F/L Gaurav Chibber met his end when the same Mig-29, he was flying in the above mission, crashed in Bilaspur distric of Himachal Pardesh on August 6, 1999.

# 3 In what was a classic pre-dawn interception, air defence interceptors of the Pakistan Air Force, comprising of two PAF F-7MP fighter jets, intercepted and engaged intruding IAF fighter jets which crossed the Line of Control in Jammu & Kashmir and violated Pakistan's airspace by several kilometres. The IAF fighters were believed to be two MiG-27ML ground-attack aircraft and two Mirage 2000H fighters providng top cover. The event took place in the early hours of Thursday, 8 July 1999, at approximately 0230 hours PST.

PAF F-7MP fighters were supported by two F-16 Fighting Falcons providing back-up which conducted electronic jamming of the intruder IAF 'bandits'. The F-16s were scrambled whereas the F-7MPs were already on Combat Air Patrol (CAP) duty when the incursion occurred.

The PAF F-7MP air defence interceptors were immediately vectored by GCI towards the intruding 'bandits' within seconds of their crossing into Pakistan airspace. The PAF fighters intercepted the Indian fighters and 'locked' on them with their missiles. In fighter terms, this is an invitation for a dogfight. However, the IAF fighters refused to engage in return and instead fled straight back into the airspace of Indian-held Kashmir in what PAF pilots perceived was sheer panic. "It was not a very orderly or dignified exit", remarked a PAF officer.

According to PAF sources, even the Dynamic Launch Zone perimetres had been met for launching of the air-to-air missiles which means that the PAF pilots had gotten the AAM tone indicating the bandits were well within shoot-down range of the PAF fighters. A missile tone is achieved when the missile's infrared heat-seeker or its radar has picked up the hostile aircraft. PAF fighters did not shoot down the Indian fighters even though they were within range of the air-to-air missiles of the PAF fighters. The Indian fighters were perilously close to the Line of Control and their wreckage may have fallen inside Indian-held Kashmir territory which, going by their track record, would have given the Indian authorities the opportunity to blame the PAF for the intrusion.

According to the PAF Rules of Engagement (ROE), three conditions have to be met in peacetime before an enemy aircraft can be shot down: (i) the enemy aircraft must violate Pakistan's airspace; (ii) it must be a combat aircraft and (iii) its wreckage must fall inside Pakistani territory.

#4 A second intrusion occured seven and a half hours later, at approximately 10:00 a.m. (1000 hours) PST, when two IAF fighter jets violated Pakistan's airspace in the Mushkoh-Olding sector in Jammu & Kashmir. Two F-7MPs were immediately scrambled from a forward PAF air base to intercept the two intruders. However, the IAF MiG-21BiS, sensing the PAF fighters fast approaching them, turned back and fled into Indian-held Kashmir before the PAF interceptors could get a missile lock-on them.


Indian media in their over enthusiasm started to target PAF. According to the Indian media, IAF Mirages and MiG-29s usually locked on PAF F-16s with BVR missiles, due to which the F-16s fled, with their pilots shaken off and some of them resigning from the PAF. The PAF CAS invited all the international millitary attaches and observers which were in Pakistan, and responded to this news by showing all the F-16 pilots in front of the them and the media. None of them had retired, and neither of them was low on morale. Infact they had something to show to the attaches and observers, the HUD movie of two instances when Indian Aircraft actually tried to lock PAF F-16s.

In addition to the above, history and reality tells a different story starting from the Canberra in 1959; the surrender of Ouragan and Gnat, in one piece, in 1964 and 1965, respectively; no balls to do any thing after the parliament and Mumbai incident.
 
Last edited:
. .
Mostly bullshit. The article by Tufail is well balanced analysis and has nothing that you allude to. According to him there were minor border violations by IAF during recce missions during which they lost two planes. Any time F16s were on CAP there were no violation. There were a few cases of both PAF F-16s and IAF Mirage-2000s locking their adversaries with the on-board radars and was never a one sided affair as the Indian think it was. One of the reasons IAF did not loose more planes was that Pakistan forces were under strict orders to make sure that the wreckage fell inside Pakistan. Following are some of these incidents. These incidents were verified by independent observers as the HUD movies were made available to them. How come the IAF never invited independent observers to look at its HUD movies?

#1 IAF Mirage-2000 aircraft attempted a lock-on at a PAF F-16A. The PAF F-16 immediately dropped down from 20,000 ft to hardly 5000 ft over the terrain and deployed a cloud of chaff. His A/A radar went in standby mode. The Mirage pilot thought that the F-16 had ran away when the F-16 tried to close in on him using the cover of the mountains and valleys. The F-16 closed in on the Mirage but at 15 nm distance the Mirage pilot again tracked the Viper closing in fast. Equipped with only two Magic-2s, the Mirage pilot banked sharply increasing the range to 20 nm and disengaged with full afterburners.

# 2 Armed with four AA-10 and two Magic-2 or probably AA-11 missiles, Gaurav Chibber a MiG-29 pilot acquired a lock on at two PAF F-16As orbiting over Skardu. The F-16s at once repeated their drill of engine to idle thrust, deploying a cloud of chaff and dropping down from 20,000ft to 5000ft AGL with AA Radar on standby mode. Gaurav tried all methods and probably had his A/A Radar functional again when he saw no sign of any aircraft in his radar. He felt something suspicious and decided to move out. As he started his way back to the base he saw two tracks appearing suddenly on his A/A Radar from behind. He quickly took evasive action but was relieved that he is well inside his territory and the tracks turned back in Pakistan. As fate would have it, F/L Gaurav Chibber met his end when the same Mig-29, he was flying in the above mission, crashed in Bilaspur distric of Himachal Pardesh on August 6, 1999.

# 3 In what was a classic pre-dawn interception, air defence interceptors of the Pakistan Air Force, comprising of two PAF F-7MP fighter jets, intercepted and engaged intruding IAF fighter jets which crossed the Line of Control in Jammu & Kashmir and violated Pakistan's airspace by several kilometres. The IAF fighters were believed to be two MiG-27ML ground-attack aircraft and two Mirage 2000H fighters providng top cover. The event took place in the early hours of Thursday, 8 July 1999, at approximately 0230 hours PST.

PAF F-7MP fighters were supported by two F-16 Fighting Falcons providing back-up which conducted electronic jamming of the intruder IAF 'bandits'. The F-16s were scrambled whereas the F-7MPs were already on Combat Air Patrol (CAP) duty when the incursion occurred.

The PAF F-7MP air defence interceptors were immediately vectored by GCI towards the intruding 'bandits' within seconds of their crossing into Pakistan airspace. The PAF fighters intercepted the Indian fighters and 'locked' on them with their missiles. In fighter terms, this is an invitation for a dogfight. However, the IAF fighters refused to engage in return and instead fled straight back into the airspace of Indian-held Kashmir in what PAF pilots perceived was sheer panic. "It was not a very orderly or dignified exit", remarked a PAF officer.

According to PAF sources, even the Dynamic Launch Zone perimetres had been met for launching of the air-to-air missiles which means that the PAF pilots had gotten the AAM tone indicating the bandits were well within shoot-down range of the PAF fighters. A missile tone is achieved when the missile's infrared heat-seeker or its radar has picked up the hostile aircraft. PAF fighters did not shoot down the Indian fighters even though they were within range of the air-to-air missiles of the PAF fighters. The Indian fighters were perilously close to the Line of Control and their wreckage may have fallen inside Indian-held Kashmir territory which, going by their track record, would have given the Indian authorities the opportunity to blame the PAF for the intrusion.

According to the PAF Rules of Engagement (ROE), three conditions have to be met in peacetime before an enemy aircraft can be shot down: (i) the enemy aircraft must violate Pakistan's airspace; (ii) it must be a combat aircraft and (iii) its wreckage must fall inside Pakistani territory.

#4 A second intrusion occured seven and a half hours later, at approximately 10:00 a.m. (1000 hours) PST, when two IAF fighter jets violated Pakistan's airspace in the Mushkoh-Olding sector in Jammu & Kashmir. Two F-7MPs were immediately scrambled from a forward PAF air base to intercept the two intruders. However, the IAF MiG-21BiS, sensing the PAF fighters fast approaching them, turned back and fled into Indian-held Kashmir before the PAF interceptors could get a missile lock-on them.


Indian media in their over enthusiasm started to target PAF. According to the Indian media, IAF Mirages and MiG-29s usually locked on PAF F-16s with BVR missiles, due to which the F-16s fled, with their pilots shaken off and some of them resigning from the PAF. The PAF CAS invited all the international millitary attaches and observers which were in Pakistan, and responded to this news by showing all the F-16 pilots in front of the them and the media. None of them had retired, and neither of them was low on morale. Infact they had something to show to the attaches and observers, the HUD movie of two instances when Indian Aircraft actually tried to lock PAF F-16s.

In addition to the above, history and reality tells a different story starting from the Canberra in 1959; the surrender of Ouragan and Gnat, in one piece, in 1964 and 1965, respectively; no balls to do any thing after the parliament and Mumbai incident.
--
Air combat
provide proof..to back your claim..without that its good story of hot air
---
HUD movie
These incidents were verified by independent observers as the HUD movies were made available to them
you means PAF allowed its HUD movies displae to indepndent obervers right ?
just prove this ....
----
parliament and Mumbai incident.
The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting( physical war/bullet) . --Sun Tzu
did you ever relasied after 1999 kargil war ... how pakistan is evaluated in world.. ?
sometime you just have to put finger where its hurt most and make damage of magnitude of scale ... than fighitng all the way.. india did just that..
----



Who told you JF-17 is manufacturing JV b/w PAF and AVIC? JF-17 Project director or Chinese FC-1 project director ?

LOL on SU-30 manufacturing JV where 10,000 parts are made in India out 30,000 that is not even 50 percent, things still come in knockdown kits and you guys just assemble them and all the rivets, basic manufacturing material is still outsourced from Russia directly , SU-30 has to go to Russia STILL for maintenance. (MARCH 2014), Were India involved in SU-30 from inception ?,,,, AND CAN INDIA SELL SU-30 on it's own ?


Now compare all this manufacturing JV of SU-30 with JF-17 project. Can PAF sell JF-17 on it's own, YES, Does JF-17 get serviced and maintained wholly instead of sending it to china as well as all the spares are built locally? YES.

It's not the first time we are having debate with YOU on this particular subject. I vividly recalled you were shown JF-17 project director interview where he explained in detail about Pakistan participation in JF-17 from it's inception

You and @Alfa-Fighter are both cut from same cloth. Both post with habitual and repeated lies despite knowing the original facts from previous debates
---
Su30mki
did we claim its built by india it JV
yes india is 2nd to russia in Su30 support
Su30 maintenance done in india .. some time may be it goes to russia
if you can support your claim aka alegation that Su30mki full bathc servie only in russia with proof will accept
india own it because made as per indian spec .. so MKI like chinese MKK
Su 30mki own by india yes
su 30mki made by india no
su 30mki develpoed by india .. yes but partialy
---
Jf17
how many countiry you exported it ?
 
Last edited:
.
--
Air combat
provide proof..to back your claim..without that its good story of hot air
---
HUD movie
These incidents were verified by independent observers as the HUD movies were made available to them
you means PAF allowed its HUD movies displae to indepndent obervers right ?
just prove this ....
----
parliament and Mumbai incident.
The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting( physical war/bullet) . --Sun Tzu
did you ever relasied after 1999 kargil war ... how pakistan is evaluated in world.. ?
sometime you just have to put finger where its hurt most and make damage of magnitude of scale ... than fighitng all the way.. india did just that..
----




---
Su30mki
did we claim its built by india it JV
yes india is 2nd to russia in Su30 support
Su30 maintenance done in india .. some time may be it goes to russia
if you can support your claim aka alegation that Su30mki full bathc servie only in russia with proof will accept
india own it because made as per indian spec .. so MKI like chinese MKK
Su 30mki own by india yes
su 30mki made by india no
su 30mki develpoed by india .. yes but partialy
---
Jf17
how many countiry you exported it ?

I am only interested in bold part in the end of your post. What is the purpose of last line?
 
.
I am only interested in bold part in the end of your post. What is the purpose of last line?
--
bold part
its reference to meber sayig PAF allowd it HUD movie vrified by independent source ..
so asking him to back it with proof
--
last line
reference to aother member claim of Su30mki and owing JF -17
 
.
Mostly bullshit. The article by Tufail is well balanced analysis and has nothing that you allude to. According to him there were minor border violations by IAF during recce missions during which they lost two planes. Any time F16s were on CAP there were no violation. There were a few cases of both PAF F-16s and IAF Mirage-2000s locking their adversaries with the on-board radars and was never a one sided affair as the Indian think it was. One of the reasons IAF did not loose more planes was that Pakistan forces were under strict orders to make sure that the wreckage fell inside Pakistan. Following are some of these incidents. These incidents were verified by independent observers as the HUD movies were made available to them. How come the IAF never invited independent observers to look at its HUD movies?

#1 IAF Mirage-2000 aircraft attempted a lock-on at a PAF F-16A. The PAF F-16 immediately dropped down from 20,000 ft to hardly 5000 ft over the terrain and deployed a cloud of chaff. His A/A radar went in standby mode. The Mirage pilot thought that the F-16 had ran away when the F-16 tried to close in on him using the cover of the mountains and valleys. The F-16 closed in on the Mirage but at 15 nm distance the Mirage pilot again tracked the Viper closing in fast. Equipped with only two Magic-2s, the Mirage pilot banked sharply increasing the range to 20 nm and disengaged with full afterburners.

# 2 Armed with four AA-10 and two Magic-2 or probably AA-11 missiles, Gaurav Chibber a MiG-29 pilot acquired a lock on at two PAF F-16As orbiting over Skardu. The F-16s at once repeated their drill of engine to idle thrust, deploying a cloud of chaff and dropping down from 20,000ft to 5000ft AGL with AA Radar on standby mode. Gaurav tried all methods and probably had his A/A Radar functional again when he saw no sign of any aircraft in his radar. He felt something suspicious and decided to move out. As he started his way back to the base he saw two tracks appearing suddenly on his A/A Radar from behind. He quickly took evasive action but was relieved that he is well inside his territory and the tracks turned back in Pakistan. As fate would have it, F/L Gaurav Chibber met his end when the same Mig-29, he was flying in the above mission, crashed in Bilaspur distric of Himachal Pardesh on August 6, 1999.

# 3 In what was a classic pre-dawn interception, air defence interceptors of the Pakistan Air Force, comprising of two PAF F-7MP fighter jets, intercepted and engaged intruding IAF fighter jets which crossed the Line of Control in Jammu & Kashmir and violated Pakistan's airspace by several kilometres. The IAF fighters were believed to be two MiG-27ML ground-attack aircraft and two Mirage 2000H fighters providng top cover. The event took place in the early hours of Thursday, 8 July 1999, at approximately 0230 hours PST.

PAF F-7MP fighters were supported by two F-16 Fighting Falcons providing back-up which conducted electronic jamming of the intruder IAF 'bandits'. The F-16s were scrambled whereas the F-7MPs were already on Combat Air Patrol (CAP) duty when the incursion occurred.

The PAF F-7MP air defence interceptors were immediately vectored by GCI towards the intruding 'bandits' within seconds of their crossing into Pakistan airspace. The PAF fighters intercepted the Indian fighters and 'locked' on them with their missiles. In fighter terms, this is an invitation for a dogfight. However, the IAF fighters refused to engage in return and instead fled straight back into the airspace of Indian-held Kashmir in what PAF pilots perceived was sheer panic. "It was not a very orderly or dignified exit", remarked a PAF officer.

According to PAF sources, even the Dynamic Launch Zone perimetres had been met for launching of the air-to-air missiles which means that the PAF pilots had gotten the AAM tone indicating the bandits were well within shoot-down range of the PAF fighters. A missile tone is achieved when the missile's infrared heat-seeker or its radar has picked up the hostile aircraft. PAF fighters did not shoot down the Indian fighters even though they were within range of the air-to-air missiles of the PAF fighters. The Indian fighters were perilously close to the Line of Control and their wreckage may have fallen inside Indian-held Kashmir territory which, going by their track record, would have given the Indian authorities the opportunity to blame the PAF for the intrusion.

According to the PAF Rules of Engagement (ROE), three conditions have to be met in peacetime before an enemy aircraft can be shot down: (i) the enemy aircraft must violate Pakistan's airspace; (ii) it must be a combat aircraft and (iii) its wreckage must fall inside Pakistani territory.

#4 A second intrusion occured seven and a half hours later, at approximately 10:00 a.m. (1000 hours) PST, when two IAF fighter jets violated Pakistan's airspace in the Mushkoh-Olding sector in Jammu & Kashmir. Two F-7MPs were immediately scrambled from a forward PAF air base to intercept the two intruders. However, the IAF MiG-21BiS, sensing the PAF fighters fast approaching them, turned back and fled into Indian-held Kashmir before the PAF interceptors could get a missile lock-on them.


Indian media in their over enthusiasm started to target PAF. According to the Indian media, IAF Mirages and MiG-29s usually locked on PAF F-16s with BVR missiles, due to which the F-16s fled, with their pilots shaken off and some of them resigning from the PAF. The PAF CAS invited all the international millitary attaches and observers which were in Pakistan, and responded to this news by showing all the F-16 pilots in front of the them and the media. None of them had retired, and neither of them was low on morale. Infact they had something to show to the attaches and observers, the HUD movie of two instances when Indian Aircraft actually tried to lock PAF F-16s.

In addition to the above, history and reality tells a different story starting from the Canberra in 1959; the surrender of Ouragan and Gnat, in one piece, in 1964 and 1965, respectively; no balls to do any thing after the parliament and Mumbai incident.

First , Yes IAF was clearly order not to cross LoC at any cost and for rest i need a link especially a sanction hit F-16 going agressive (I agree both locked on each other ) .. Which was Grounded during war . And F-7 can really do that as it lacked an intercept radar .
 
Last edited:
.
--
bold part
its reference to meber sayig PAF allowd it HUD movie vrified by independent source ..
so asking him to back it with proof
--
last line
reference to aother member claim of Su30mki and owing JF -17

We have financed 50% of the JF-17 project so yes we do own JF-17. What is difficult to understand?
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom