If F-16s are defeated, then what's the point in buying a similar class of aircraft like the J-10? They will have to invest in much more advanced tech instead.
But what it will do for sure is end Pakistan's defence cooperation with the West.
India - Pakistan Standoff 2019
- Thread starter nair
- Start date
- Status
If F-16s are defeated, then what's the point in buying a similar class of aircraft like the J-10? They will have to invest in much more advanced tech instead.
But what it will do for sure is end Pakistan's defence cooperation with the West.
Pakistan's gone down a road where it's impossible for them to recognise Israel. Not to mention, it will further complicate their relations with Iran.
How do you thwart a submarine
If its pak one, its easy....just send scuba diver to knock on their hatch.
2nd sub you do same thing....they will again open to say "we aren't falling for that again!"
Pls provide the link for the source of this article.Offensive defence
With India’s ‘Modi’fied strategy turning Islamabad excessively defensive yet again after the Uri surgical strike, the unprecedented upper hand we have got in our relentless war on terror underscores a paradigm shift in India’s strategic doctrine. The befitting air attacks deep into Pakistani territory after Pulwama Fidayeen Jihadi attacks, have sent a clear signal to Pakistan and the world that India has set a new precedent in countering the Islamabad-sponsored terror attacks on Indian soil.
A proactive strategy to neutralise Pakistan’s policy of using terrorism as an instrument of the state policy was a long overdue for a decade, especially before and after the 2008 Mumbai attacks. India suffered a series of terror attacks in the mainland before and after the Mumbai attacks, until 2014. Each time, India had to go on the defensive against ‘Bleed India with a Thousand Cuts’ doctrine of Pakistan, with the successive governments following the traditional Standard Operating Procedures of futile diplomatic exercises, refusing to explore a permanent solution to the menace of terrorism.
Since the Narendra Modi regime came to power in 2014, there has been a phenomenal change in the country’s military strategy, which experts call a paradigm shift, wherein the country sought to hit the epicentre of terrorism beyond the Line of Control (LoC) in pursuit of defining a proactive policy to contain growing Jihadism.
The new doctrine, which is essentially offensive, is named after India’s super sleuth, the National Security Advisor Ajit Kumar Doval ushered in the much-awaited shift from defensive to offensive defence. If the surgical strikes in Myanmar and Uri were defining moments when the country was at crossroads, the Balakot and its aftermath set a hugely important precedent to future India.
Though Ajit Doval had talked much about it earlier, way back in 2006, soon after his retirement as chief of the Intelligence Bureau, he has explained it lucidly in the Nani Palkhiwala memorial lecture delivered at the Sastra University on February 21, 2014. He was the director of the Vivekananda International Foundation (VIF), a New Delhi based think tank, that time after his long stint in the Intelligence Bureau. It would not be an exaggeration to call it a summary of his approach towards tackling India’s perpetual threat, i.e. Pakistan, which later laid the foundation to the nation's changing strategic response to terrorism.
Doval began his speech by narrating an anecdote when the newly elected government was eager to repeal POTA after 2004 polls, when he was the chief of IB. He said the then political establishment had placed politics above national interests. His requests to the then government not to repeal the only anti-terror law in the country was eventually downplayed and ignored, while admitting that it was a toothless law when compared to anti-terror laws in the West.
In an important observation, that would later fill a significant lacuna of our unrealistic and romanticised Pakistan policy, he asserts, ‘You can never defeat an enemy that you cannot define’.
Posing a question ‘what makes Jihadi Terror a strategic threat?’, Shri Doval said, “The biggest reason jihadi terrorism is a threat is because it’s sponsored by a country which harbours a compulsive hostility towards India, and right from day of its Independence, all its policies have had one objective.” That Pakistani objective, he said, is: “India is the enemy, destroy it. That is indeed Pakistan's objective, let us make no bones about it. Don't buy Pakistan's argument that Pakistanis are well wishers, they are not. They will continue to bleed us with a thousand cuts," Doval had said.
Warning that no one should underestimate ‘jihadi terrorism’, he stresses the need to accept the pan-Islamic dimension to the problem of terror. The ideology of terror has found some takers in Islam due to propaganda and insecurities of the community in several areas of the world. He underscores the fact that the 17 crore Muslim population in India is largely patriotic, but the exposure to the internet and the ability of some individuals to connect and sympathise with global causes and incidents puts our Muslim citizens at risk of radicalisation.
Terrorism, he says, is a tactic to achieve a political and ideological objective. Terrorists do not target the dead people in the act of terror. The people who see the death of those who die are the actual targets. This is a means to bend the enemy to accept the political or ideological objective.
Separating Islam as a religion from Jihad, he says Jihad has more to do with political agenda. He calls this agenda driven fundamentalism as ‘Political Islam’ which dates back to 13th Century, a time when a scholar named Ibn Taymiyyah issued the infamous Mardin Fatwa. This Fatwa glorified Jihad even against Muslims (in this case Mongols) to achieve a political agenda during his times. Taymiyyah was rejected during his times, but his idea lived on. The same scholar has inspired dreaded terrorists like Osama bin Laden and SIMI.
Unlike defensive strategy of giving dossiers and proofs or unlike an all-out offensive response - where nuclear war becomes a possibility – ‘offensive defence is when you go and attack the place where the offence is coming from’, he said. In this case, he clearly indicates that it is much beyond just crossing the LoC.
“In the offensive defence, we work on the vulnerabilities of the enemy. This could include diplomatic isolation, exposing the terror sponsorship and making management of internal politics difficult for the enemy. In the defensive mode, we can either get hurt or end up in a stalemate. There is no chance of victory. In the offensive defence mode, the enemy will find it unaffordable for them to continue the asymmetric terror war,” he explains.
This ‘shift’ Doval had said should have been made a long time ago. If India had gone into even a partial offensive defence, it could have "probably reduced casualties" a lot more over the years.
When India started addressing Pakistan’s atrocities in Balochistan for the first time, it was a remarkable change in India’s foreign policy. His speech also shed light on his views on the same when he said, “Pakistan's vulnerability is many many times higher than that of India's. Once they know India has shifted to offensive defence they will find it is unaffordable for them. You can do one Mumbai you may lose Balochistan.”
The suggestions by Doval, which is called ‘Double Squeeze Strategy’, is premised on the clear understanding of Pakistan. Externally, Doval recommends that India should give a hard-hitting response to terrorists and their masters. Simultaneously, India should make Pakistan bear the cost of terrorist acts sponsored by its deep state.
Doval concluded his speech with asserting the need for “A strong, decisive leadership to give a strong message to terrorists and its sponsors and provide security to the citizens.”
After five years, India's response to Pakistani terror is no more defensive. With the Indian Air Force avenging the Pulwama terror attack, India has proved it once again that for each terrorist attack hatched by Pakistan on Indian soil, ‘the place where the offence is coming from’ will have to pay a very heavy price
https://www.asiatimes.com/2019/03/article/no-proof-india-shot-down-pakistan-f-16/
Pak claims Air Marshal has no such son .
Indian author with Pak author almost follow s Pak narrative..
Why are they doing that .?
Pak claims Air Marshal has no such son .
Indian author with Pak author almost follow s Pak narrative..
Why are they doing that .?
It ended a while ago. Realistically Pakistan is married to China in every way.
Pakistan could be lying but Remember India officially claimed one PAF jet shot down & no name of pilot has been made by us
Actually, no. The offer to sell more F-16s is still there. What we need is not just end the offer for new F-16s, even used ones, it's to make the entire fleet useless.
PAF now have 75 F-16s. If support is withdrawn or becomes extremely limited, then that would be good enough. The F-16s should be removed as a threat to India. This will put tremendous pressure on them to modernise, and they do not have the money for it, and of course, an alternative access to high end tech.
If su-30 mki jammer can do this to amraam,the mig-29upg with its italian aesa jammer will be even more of a nightmare.
Once Rafale comes with spectra.
Once Rafale comes with spectra.
going by this logic,
we can spread the message of "aman ki asha" by saying:
India used a french aircraft (Christian) and a Jewish Missile.. with a Hindu Pilot saving a Muslim Kashmir from Terrorists.
If su-30 mki jammer can do this to amraam,the mig-29upg with its italian aesa jammer will be even more of a nightmare.
Once Rafale comes with spectra.
Jammers are all well and good at BVR, it's possible but quite difficult to Jam IR missile. Remember Bisons too carry that huge jammer. One observation of this standoff is, Indian theater will always have WVR action component, and you need a highly agile fighter and WVR tactics to go hand in hand with it.
My guess is the Pakistanis themselves fed information about a fictional WC, who they can later claim doesn't exist after the Indian media has made a hue and cry about this non-existent WC. I recall the source of the information was a UK based Pakistani lawyer.
There is still a need for internally-carried jammers on fighters, the podded jammers cannot and will not always be carried. In fact I have no reason to believe a single IAF aircraft in the 8 that responded had a jammer on them, with the possible exception of the Mirages, which supposedly have an internally carried one.
I don't think use of jammers for CAP flight or interceptions is widespread. These podded jammers take away a useful hardpoint and the IAF may not think of that as a worthwhile tradeoff in all circumstances. When performing roles such as escorting a strike package ofcourse, it becomes imperative that jammers are carried.
The Bisons, MKIs, Tejas Mk-1 all lack internal jammers. The Mk-1A EW suite is supposed to have an SPJ but I'm not sure if they mean to incorporate that internally or externally. Not sure if it has space for an internal solution.
As of WVR, agreed, between India-pak it will always be a paramount requirement of any fighter to be capable of, and equipped for, WVR combat. The Sura HMD/R-73E combination though I believe is a pretty terrific system. The TARGO/ASRAAM* will be even more capable. Put the latter system on a plane with MAWS and you have a killer of a WVR fighter.
* I don't expect Python-5 to pan out. ASRAAM more than likely to become go-to IR close combat missile for all IAF fighters that can be integrated with it.
Last edited:
Satellite images show madrasa buildings still standing at scene of Indian bombing | Reuters
Satellite images show madrasa buildings still standing at scene of Indian bombing
Satellite images show madrasa buildings still standing at scene of Indian bombing
On contrary, I dont think bison/MKI/Mig29 flies a CAP without without a Jammer. I dont know much about ASRAAM, I have heard about R73's from pilots, Indian american and even israeli sufa drivers, R73 is going to be a formidable system for years to come.
We have been asking repeated questions... If they ask the same questions....You will get the answer....
Let's have a separate thread on F16 story alone.... This thread has lot of post in that topic.... But spread over 3000 odd posts.... We need to have them together....
@Falcon what do you say..... the OP has to have all the events starting with first statement of ISPr
@Falcon what do you say..... the OP has to have all the events starting with first statement of ISPr
That would mean an SPJ pod is standard fit for these planes on basically 100% of combat missions.
EDIT: ...on atleast 1-2 aircraft in a flight.
- Status