PAF vs. InAF : The present form.

mukul

New Member
Well ...... i read a news during 1996 ,,,,,,,

One MIG-27 fly over islamabad and came back .... then pak defence mister replyed in thier parliamenet that at that time their is no plane to catch Mig-27 .

Guys Mig27 is high altitude and with the speed of 3 Match , it is the fatest plane which even dodge missiles .

India has some of these plane armed .
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
mukul said:
Well ...... i read a news during 1996 ,,,,,,,

One MIG-27 fly over islamabad and came back .... then pak defence mister replyed in thier parliamenet that at that time their is no plane to catch Mig-27 .

Guys Mig27 is high altitude and with the speed of 3 Match , it is the fatest plane which even dodge missiles .

India has some of these plane armed .
Mig 27's are not Mach 3 capable. And India is looking at replacing them as they have significant spares and maint problems.

There are only 6 Foxbats that are flying - and even those are on restricted hours due to parts issues.

The Mig 25 hasn't been immune to SAMs for about 15 years - the issue is whether Pakistan has an air launched interceptor capability.

There is some basic maths here, if you see the plane, you can start to assess its likely corridor, you can then setup kill boxes for its flight path.

The Mig 25 has not been seen as a threat by modern airforces for the last 15 years - it's a capable plane, but in modern combat its as dead as a dodo bird.

The US and its allies have known of its capabilities ever since Victor Belenko flew one to Japan as a refugee "present" in 1976. There are a number that were captured by Aust SAS in Iraq which have also shown no improvements to the core design.

Speed is no guarantor of survival.
 

Panzer

New Member
Well this seems to suggest that pakistan cannot intercept the foxbat

The Pakistani airforce later issued a statement that an Indian MIG-25 had violated its air space and they either could not, would not, intercept it. Pakistani Foreign minister Gohar Ayub Khan said that the airspace violation by an Indian Mig-25 fighter jet could not be repulsed, because Pakistan did not have any aircraft or missile or other defence capability to intercept aircrafts at 72,000 feet. Pakistan armed forces alleged that the aircraft was photographing very sensitive sites. They used this as an excuse to lobby for a hike in the defence budget. Questions were raised in Parliament, India said the intrusion into Pakistani airspace was accidental. This incident highlighted the fact that Pakistan has nothing in its inventory that can shoot down the Foxbat.

full article
http://users.senet.com.au/~wingman/recce1.html
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Panzer said:
Well this seems to suggest that pakistan cannot intercept the foxbat

The Pakistani airforce later issued a statement that an Indian MIG-25 had violated its air space and they either could not, would not, intercept it. Pakistani Foreign minister Gohar Ayub Khan said that the airspace violation by an Indian Mig-25 fighter jet could not be repulsed, because Pakistan did not have any aircraft or missile or other defence capability to intercept aircrafts at 72,000 feet. Pakistan armed forces alleged that the aircraft was photographing very sensitive sites. They used this as an excuse to lobby for a hike in the defence budget. Questions were raised in Parliament, India said the intrusion into Pakistani airspace was accidental. This incident highlighted the fact that Pakistan has nothing in its inventory that can shoot down the Foxbat.

full article
http://users.senet.com.au/~wingman/recce1.html
I'd have to accept what you quote in the absence of any confirming data, I can't speak for the PAF, only on what I know of WRT to dealing with hi speed aircraft such as the Foxbat and the SR71.

The prev scenario I outlined still stands as a way to hook the bird on its way back. Whether Pakistan can do it is something that one of the more au fait pakistani forum readers will need to address.

Typically militaries understate capability though to buy new toys (as implied in your quote) ;) It's a long standing tactic to get the kit you need.

The foxbat numbers are out though, the data I've seen indicates that only 6 are full combat capable and airworthy. the rest are being cannibalised.
 

mukul

New Member
gf0012 said:
mukul said:
Well ...... i read a news during 1996 ,,,,,,,

One MIG-27 fly over islamabad and came back .... then pak defence mister replyed in thier parliamenet that at that time their is no plane to catch Mig-27 .

Guys Mig27 is high altitude and with the speed of 3 Match , it is the fatest plane which even dodge missiles .

India has some of these plane armed .
Mig 27's are not Mach 3 capable. And India is looking at replacing them as they have significant spares and maint problems.

There are only 6 Foxbats that are flying - and even those are on restricted hours due to parts issues.

The Mig 25 hasn't been immune to SAMs for about 15 years - the issue is whether Pakistan has an air launched interceptor capability.

There is some basic maths here, if you see the plane, you can start to assess its likely corridor, you can then setup kill boxes for its flight path.

The Mig 25 has not been seen as a threat by modern airforces for the last 15 years - it's a capable plane, but in modern combat its as dead as a dodo bird.

The US and its allies have known of its capabilities ever since Victor Belenko flew one to Japan as a refugee "present" in 1976. There are a number that were captured by Aust SAS in Iraq which have also shown no improvements to the core design.

Speed is no guarantor of survival.
Mig 27

Equipping some eight operational squadrons (Nos. 2, 9, 10, 18, 22, 29, 51, 222) and one training establishment (TACDE), the MiG-27ML forms the backbone of the Indian Air Force’s strike fleet. The IAF’s MiG-27 fleet is also relatively young, with the oldest airframe at 16 years and the youngest at 4. These two factors have ensured that upgrading the MiG-27 is high on the IAF’s list of priorities. The bulk of the equipment and avionics fitted on the MiG-27 were developed in the 1970s and requires replacement. The IAF’s upgrade program aims to keep the type in frontline service till 2020. Unlike the IAF’s MiG-21 upgrade program, the MiG-27 upgrade will primarily be an in-country affair, with Hindustan Aeronautics Limited’s (HAL) Nasik Division acting as the primary contractor. To this end HAL is expanded the Design Department at the Nasik Division into a full-fledged Bureau, re-designated as the Aircraft Upgrade Research and Design Centre (AURDC), in 1996. AURDC is heavily involved in the re-design and structural modifications of the aircraft as part of the upgrade. It is believed that the first aircraft have already been taken in hand for re-building and upgradation

The capabilities of the aircraft are being enhanced by the incorporation of modern avionics systems consisting primarily of two Multi-Function Displays (MFDs) Mission and Display Processor (MDP), Sextant Ring Laser Gyros (RLG INSI), combined GPS/GLANOSS navigation, HUD with UFCP, Digital Map Generator (DMG), jam-resistant Secured Communication, stand-by UHF communication, data link and a comprehensive Electronic Warfare (EW) Suite. A mission planning and retrieval facility, VTR and HUD Camera will also be fitted. The aircraft will retain stand-by (conventional) instrumentation, including artificial horizon, altimeter and airspeed indicator, to cater for the failure of HUD and the MFDs.


Mig 27 speed is 1800 km/hour , i don;t know how much mach it is and approx
 

Panzer

New Member
We may never know(Pakistan's capability to intercept Foxbat) since India will retire MiG-25 foxbat shortly.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
I actually can't see India seriously progressing with the '27 upgrades, the aicraft would also require a complete re-harness (due to the kapton degradation).

I would have thought that unless India wants a capacity to truck tactical nukes into a theatre that it would be better of getting more Mirages. parts situation is better and has a faster and more sustainable super cruise.

India has significant probs with maintaining its Migs - (as do nearly every other owners) Add up the flying and maint costs on a Mig and compare it to a Mirage - it's a no brainer.
 

Sarmad

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #31
If we take a look at the present status of the PAF, its main air defence fighter is the F-7MP/PG. It would be flying CAP, ADA, fighter sweeps and escort missions. Would it be effective against the IAF aircraft?
 

Red aRRow

Forum Bouncer
Sarmad said:
If we take a look at the present status of the PAF, its main air defence fighter is the F-7MP/PG. It would be flying CAP, ADA, fighter sweeps and escort missions. Would it be effective against the IAF aircraft?
No, IAF has a qualitative as well as quantitative edge over PAF.
 

Indus

New Member
shamayel said:
Sarmad said:
If we take a look at the present status of the PAF, its main air defence fighter is the F-7MP/PG. It would be flying CAP, ADA, fighter sweeps and escort missions. Would it be effective against the IAF aircraft?
No, IAF has a qualitative as well as quantitative edge over PAF.
PAF is still a very formidable force.. Im sure they are planning ways to close the gap b/w their arch-rivals in terms of equipment..
 

Roger Smith

New Member
shamayel said:
Sarmad said:
If we take a look at the present status of the PAF, its main air defence fighter is the F-7MP/PG. It would be flying CAP, ADA, fighter sweeps and escort missions. Would it be effective against the IAF aircraft?
No, IAF has a qualitative as well as quantitative edge over PAF.
I agree with Shamayel, the last confortation between Pakistan and India was the Kargil episode in 1999. India Air Force utilized Mirage2000, MiG-21 and MiG-27 to bombard the hills on LoC to root off intruders and lost in the process a MiG and a helicopter, but the PAF were unable to confront Indian Air Force onslaught or to fly a single sortie during Kargil episode., this speak volume for itself.
 

Red aRRow

Forum Bouncer
Roger Smith said:
I agree with Shamayel, the last confortation between Pakistan and India was the Kargil episode in 1999. India Air Force utilized Mirage2000, MiG-21 and MiG-27 to bombard the hills on LoC to root off intruders and lost in the process a MiG and a helicopter, but the PAF were unable to confront Indian Air Force onslaught or to fly a single sortie during Kargil episode., this speak volume for itself.
You are taking the episode out of context of the whole situation.
the fighting was going on in Indian Occupied Kashmir. This meant that all the sorties being doen by the IAF were on its side of the LoC (Line of Control). At that time the official Pakistani version was that it has nothing to do with the episode so in that light sending fighter jets into India would have resulted in a full scaled war and a negation of the government's claim. That is the reason why the IAF and PAF did not come to blows with each other during the Kargil episode....not because PAF was not upto the standard. :cop
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Hopefully there is a change in the wind though. A conflict free region is in both countries interests.

India has an emerging responsibility as its military power grows
Pakistan has the capacity to act as one of the key Islamic states in bringing moderation to the table. In a real sense, even though Pakistan doesn't have the same resources clout as the Arab states, it does have influence at the table. That influence will diminish as other Islamic states develop nuclear solutions - eg Pakistans influence will be affected by a nuclear Iran.
 

Soldier

New Member
shamayel said:
Roger Smith said:
I agree with Shamayel, the last confortation between Pakistan and India was the Kargil episode in 1999. India Air Force utilized Mirage2000, MiG-21 and MiG-27 to bombard the hills on LoC to root off intruders and lost in the process a MiG and a helicopter, but the PAF were unable to confront Indian Air Force onslaught or to fly a single sortie during Kargil episode., this speak volume for itself.
You are taking the episode out of context of the whole situation.
the fighting was going on in Indian Occupied Kashmir. This meant that all the sorties being doen by the IAF were on its side of the LoC (Line of Control). At that time the official Pakistani version was that it has nothing to do with the episode so in that light sending fighter jets into India would have resulted in a full scaled war and a negation of the government's claim. That is the reason why the IAF and PAF did not come to blows with each other during the Kargil episode....not because PAF was not upto the standard. :cop
I agree with what Shamayel has said, There was no business for PAF to be in Indian side otherwise it would have been seen as agressor and may have sparked the open war between both countries crossing eachother's border.
 

mukul

New Member
Welllllll ... Kargil Air OPerations

From May 11 to May 25, ground troops supported by the Air Force tried to contain the threat, assessed the enemy dispositions and carried out various preparatory actions. Entry of the Air Force into combat action on May 26 represented a paradigm shift in the nature and prognosis of the conflict. In operation Safed Sagar, the Air Force carried out nearly 5,000 sorties of all types over 50-odd days of operations.

The Western Air Command conducted the three-week-long exercise Trishul three weeks before Kargil. During Trishul, the IAF flew 5,000 sorties with 300 aircraft using 35,000 personnel and engaged targets at high elevation in the Himalayas. The IAF claimed to have flown 550 sorties in Kargil, though just about 80 were on or close to the target. Soon after Kargil, both the commander-in-chief and senior air staff officer of the Western Air Command were mysteriously transferred to the Central and Eastern commands.

Operations in this terrain required special training and tactics. It was soon realised that greater skills and training were needed to attack the very small/miniature targets extant, often not visible to the naked eye.

The shoulder-fired missile threat was omnipresent and there were no doubts about this. An IAF Canberra recce aircraft was damaged by a Pakistani Stinger fired possibly from across the LoC. On the second and third day of the operations, still in the learning curve, the IAF lost one MiG-21 fighter and one Mi-17 helicopter to shoulder-fired missiles by the enemy. In addition, one MiG-27 was lost on the second day due to engine failure just after the pilot had carried out successful attacks on one of the enemy's main supply dumps. These events only went to reinforce the tactics of the IAF in carrying out attacks from outside the Stinger SAM envelope and avoiding the use of helicopters for attack purposes. Attack helicopters have a certain utility in operations under relatively benign conditions but are extremely vulnerable in an intense battlefield. The fact that the enemy fired more than 100 shoulder fired SAMs against IAF aircraft indicates not only the great intensity of the enemy air defences in the area but also the success of IAF tactics, especially after the first three days of the war during which not a single aircraft received even a scratch.

The terrain in the Kargil area is 16,000 to 18,000 feet above sea level. The aircraft are, therefore, required to fly at about 20,000 feet. At these heights, the air density is 30% less than at sea level. This causes a reduction in weight that can be carried and also reduces the ability to manoeuvre as the radius of a turn is more than what it is at lower levels. The larger radius of turn reduces manoeuverability in the restricted width of the valley. The engine’s performance also deteriorates as for the same forward speed there is a lesser mass of air going into the jet engine of the fighter or helicopter. The non-standard air density also affects the trajectory of weapons. The firing, hence, may not be accurate. In the mountains, the targets are relatively small, spread-out and difficult to spot visually, particularly by pilots in high speed jets.

The Indian airfields nearest to Kargil were Srinagar and Avantipur. Adampur near Jalandhar was also close enough to support air operations. Therefore, the IAF operated from these three bases. The planes used for ground attack were MiG-2ls, MiG- 23s, MiG-27s, Jaguars and the Mirage- 2000. The Mig-2l was built mainly for air interception with a secondary role of ground attack. However, it is capable of operating in restricted spaces which was of importance in the Kargil terrain.

The MiG-23s and 27s are optimised for attacking targets on the ground. They can carry a load of 4 tonnes each. This could be a mix of weapons including cannon, rocket pods, free- fall and retarded bombs and smart weapons. It has a computerised bomb sight which enables accurate weapon delivery. These planes were, therefore, ideal for use in the mountainous terrain of Kargil.

However, on May 27, the MiG-27 flown by Flt Lt Nachiketa, while attacking a target in Batalik sector, developed an engine trouble and he had to bailout. Sqn Ldr Ajay Ahuja, in a MiG-2l, went out of the way to locate the downed pilot and in the process was hit by a Pakistani surface- to-air missile (SAM). He ejected safely but his body bearing gun- wounds was returned subsequently. The state-of-the-art Mirage-2000s were used for electronic warfare, reconnaissance and ground attack. This fighter delivers its weapons with pinpoint accuracy. In addition to carrying free-fall bombs, it also fires the laser-guided bomb with deadly effects. In fact, it was this weapon that caused considerable devastation to Pakistani bunkers on the ridges at Tiger Hill and Muntho Dhalo. In the Mirage attack on Muntho Dhalo, Pakistani troops suffered 180 casualties.

Because of the need to engage Pakistani targets in the valleys and on ridges, the slower helicopter gunship became an important requirement. The load-carrying Mi-17 was modified to carry 4 rocket pods with air-to-ground rockets. This helicopter proved effective in engaging Pakistani bunkers and troops. On May 28, while attacking Point 5140 in Tololing sector, one helicopter and its crew were lost to a Stinger heat-seeking missile. Thereafter, because of the number of SAMs being fired, helicopters resorted to evasive tactics but persisted with the attacks.

The operations restricted to Kargil area did not lend themselves to the use of air power. There was a constraint of not crossing the Line of Control (LoC) to the Pakistan side. The IAF was, therefore, not at liberty to destroy the Pakistani supply lines and smash the logistic bases across the LoC. However, such attacks were done on Pakistani facilities on the Indian side of the LoC. The targets were identified along with the Army and engaged by day and by night in precision attacks by Mirage 2000s and Jaguars. Supply lines, logistic bases and enemy strong points were destroyed. As a result, the Army was able to pursue its operations at a faster rate and with fewer losses.

To obviate the threat from SAMs, bombing was done accurately from 30,000 feet above sea level or about 10,000 feet above the terrain. In these high level attacks, the infantryman does not see his own fighters and, therefore, feels that air support is not there. It is estimated that in operation Vijay, about 700 intruders were killed by air action alone. The IAF has intercepted a number of enemy wireless transmissions indicating the effectiveness of IAF attacks.

Pakistan Air Force fighters were picked up on the airborne radar of our fighters but the PAF planes did not cross to the Indian side of the LoC. Nevertheless, as a precaution, IAF , strike aircraft were accompanied by fighter escorts. After all, in the recent past no war has been won without control of the air space in which operations are conducted.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/kargil-99.htm


The conditions within which the IAF operated was very difficult and no Air war ever fought in such a anti- airforce environment. After conducting successful air operations i think the skills whise IAF is one of the best force.
 

Red aRRow

Forum Bouncer
The conditions within which the IAF operated was very difficult and no Air war ever fought in such a anti- airforce environment. After conducting successful air operations i think the skills whise IAF is one of the best force.
Anti-airforce environment???? :?
There was absolutely no aircraft opposition in the air. Only thing the IAF had to worry about were short range, shoulder fired SAMs. I think IAF used that to its fullest advantage.
 

mukul

New Member
shamayel said:
The conditions within which the IAF operated was very difficult and no Air war ever fought in such a anti- airforce environment. After conducting successful air operations i think the skills whise IAF is one of the best force.
Anti-airforce environment???? :?
There was absolutely no aircraft opposition in the air. Only thing the IAF had to worry about were short range, shoulder fired SAMs. I think IAF used that to its fullest advantage.
The terrain in the Kargil area is 16,000 to 18,000 feet above sea level. The aircraft are, therefore, required to fly at about 20,000 feet. At these heights, the air density is 30% less than at sea level. This causes a reduction in weight that can be carried and also reduces the ability to manoeuvre as the radius of a turn is more than what it is at lower levels. The larger radius of turn reduces manoeuverability in the restricted width of the valley. The engine’s performance also deteriorates as for the same forward speed there is a lesser mass of air going into the jet engine of the fighter or helicopter. The non-standard air density also affects the trajectory of weapons. The firing, hence, may not be accurate. In the mountains, the targets are relatively small, spread-out and difficult to spot visually, particularly by pilots in high speed jets.


I hope you knwo what i mean anti-plane environment and at this height SAM is also the biggest killer becase at such height plane flew close to mountains rangers .

No such Air warfare fought in such and hostile environment.
 
Top