Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12029
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya_V » 23 May 2020 12:35

Looks like the PAF world beater JF-17 does not have aerial refueling yet, PAF has made their IL-78 Tankers are cargo carriers and made them fly to Massa to get parts for the F-16's

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3421
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya G » 23 May 2020 13:17

Whatever be the case, PAF was able to acquire these second hand airframes. I wonder what prevents us from doing the same to shore up our IFR capability.

Wickberg
BRFite
Posts: 255
Joined: 01 Jul 2008 18:45

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Wickberg » 31 May 2020 05:00

It seems like PAAF is currentrly trying to buy a bunch of SAAAB2000 and fit them with GlobalEye trough a third party.

basant
BRFite
Posts: 212
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby basant » 31 May 2020 09:42

Wickberg wrote:It seems like PAAF is currentrly trying to buy a bunch of SAAAB2000 and fit them with GlobalEye trough a third party.

It has placed orders, actually.

Saab PRESS RELEASE

Saab has signed a contract and received an order for the Airborne Early Warning and Control solution Saab 2000 Erieye AEW&C. The order value is 1.553 billion SEK. Deliveries will be made between 2020 and 2023.

The industry’s nature is such that due to circumstances concerning the product and customer, further information about the customer will not be announced.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12029
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya_V » 31 May 2020 16:35

Any idea how many, I really hope we can integrate RVV BD with Su 30MKI s and use the range of its Radar

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2835
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby abhik » 31 May 2020 20:03

Order value as per the press release is ~160m USD - So how much does does an Erieye cost exactly? It's hard to believe that they would be getting more that 1 for than one for that amount. If it actually costs less than that (would be surprising), that would make our wait for gold plated Phalcon or India AWACS (which cost 500+ USD and have nearly order of magnitude greater operating cost) even more egregious.

basant
BRFite
Posts: 212
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby basant » 31 May 2020 20:23

abhik wrote:Order value as per the press release is ~160m USD - So how much does does an Erieye cost exactly? It's hard to believe that they would be getting more that 1 for than one for that amount. If it actually costs less than that (would be surprising), that would make our wait for gold plated Phalcon or India AWACS (which cost 500+ USD and have nearly order of magnitude greater operating cost) even more egregious.

Not really. PAF would be getting multiple AWACS for 160M USD. It is also pertinent to note that UAE bought the same (?) at 500M per a/c! My view, with absolutely no evidence to support, is that these are sponsored by someone else. Your guess is as good as mine! See the link for details.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8759
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby brar_w » 31 May 2020 20:31

abhik wrote:Order value as per the press release is ~160m USD - So how much does does an Erieye cost exactly? It's hard to believe that they would be getting more that 1 for than one for that amount. If it actually costs less than that (would be surprising), that would make our wait for gold plated Phalcon or India AWACS (which cost 500+ USD and have nearly order of magnitude greater operating cost) even more egregious.


You are comparing apples to oranges. The capability fielded by the Phalcon and the Erieye isn't the same so they can't be directly compared. While there could be an assessment of whether a smaller, less capable platform should be preferred over a more expensive, more capable platform, the evaluation would obviously look into how the combat capability is impacted, how much airspace they control, how much other support they need, and what size fleet is needed. Same for what operational impact occurs across both offensive and defensive scenarios. Large Air-Forces probably can justify both types. PAF can probably just about afford the lower end stuff.

Wickberg wrote:It seems like PAAF is currentrly trying to buy a bunch of SAAAB2000 and fit them with GlobalEye trough a third party.


Which third part will magically upgrade them to "global Eye"? How many third parties are certified to even do that upgrade? And what will it cost and how will the PAF pay for it?

basant
BRFite
Posts: 212
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby basant » 31 May 2020 20:33

brar_w wrote:
abhik wrote:Order value as per the press release is ~160m USD - So how much does does an Erieye cost exactly? It's hard to believe that they would be getting more that 1 for than one for that amount. If it actually costs less than that (would be surprising), that would make our wait for gold plated Phalcon or India AWACS (which cost 500+ USD and have nearly order of magnitude greater operating cost) even more egregious.


You are comparing apples to oranges. The capability fielded by the Phalcon and the Erieye isn't the same so they can't be directly compared. While there could be an assessment of whether a smaller, less capable platform should be preferred over a more expensive, more capable platform, the evaluation would obviously look into how the combat capability is impacted, how much airspace they control, how much other support they need, and what size fleet is needed. Same for what operational impact occurs across both offensive and defensive scenarios. Large Air-Forces probably can justify both types. PAF can probably just about afford the lower end stuff.

I agree with you, so I did put a question mark. However, given the base price of 80M per a/c even without radar, the a/c cost are undervalued at 160M.

Edit: The official press release says the order (probably for PAF) is for Saab 2000 Erieye AEW&C, not just the base a/c to be given to 3rd party to fit radar and other equipment.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8759
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby brar_w » 31 May 2020 20:46

$160 Million would be about right for the capability. The UK E-7 purchase comes with a unit cost of around $390 Million, and an older Erieye costing about 40% of that would be just about right (granted that the E-7 purchase as a bit of local work thrown in so the price probably accounts for that).

basant
BRFite
Posts: 212
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby basant » 31 May 2020 20:51

brar_w wrote:$160 Million would be about right for the capability. The UK E-7 purchase comes with a unit cost of around $390 Million, and an older Erieye costing about 40% of that would be just about right (granted that the E-7 purchase as a bit of local work thrown in so the price probably accounts for that).

The key phrase in the press release is, "Deliveries will be made between 2020 and 2023." To me, it translates to multiple a/c, probably 3-4 but at least 2. What's your take, sir?

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8759
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby brar_w » 31 May 2020 20:56

I don't know what the deliveries represent. It could be a new build and upgrade of older aircraft or it could be a an early deposit on multiple new aircraft. Who knows. This won't stay secret forever, it will eventually come out who the customer is and how many aircraft are ordered.

basant
BRFite
Posts: 212
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby basant » 31 May 2020 20:59

Some views/speculation on the same @Quwa

Quwa @QuwaGroup
If it's an existing user, the order could cover two Erieye AEW&C systems. If #Pakistan, it would mean a significant expansion of the Erieye AEW&C fleet from the original six intended in 2007

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2835
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby abhik » 31 May 2020 21:27

brar_w wrote:
abhik wrote:Order value as per the press release is ~160m USD - So how much does does an Erieye cost exactly? It's hard to believe that they would be getting more that 1 for than one for that amount. If it actually costs less than that (would be surprising), that would make our wait for gold plated Phalcon or India AWACS (which cost 500+ USD and have nearly order of magnitude greater operating cost) even more egregious.


You are comparing apples to oranges. The capability fielded by the Phalcon and the Erieye isn't the same so they can't be directly compared. While there could be an assessment of whether a smaller, less capable platform should be preferred over a more expensive, more capable platform, the evaluation would obviously look into how the combat capability is impacted, how much airspace they control, how much other support they need, and what size fleet is needed. Same for what operational impact occurs across both offensive and defensive scenarios. Large Air-Forces probably can justify both types. PAF can probably just about afford the lower end stuff.

Going for quality over quantity is a moot point when you cant actually afford it. We are now in a disadvantage with the Packies on actual coverage we can put up, forget about a 2-front war.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8759
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby brar_w » 31 May 2020 21:39

It isn't a moot point because the IAF isn't buying any of those types right now beyond what's already been placed. A one for one comparison isn't reasonable. A larger more capable AWACS brings capability that a single smaller, cheaper and less capable aircraft cannot replicate. So instead of looking at it unit for unit, a proper assessment would include what the mission demands and how you can best satisfy it. Most large AF's would probably find a sweet spot with a mixed fleet as opposed to a single fleet of fewer highly capable aircraft or similarly a larger single fleet of cheaper, less capable aircraft. You field something because you need a particular capability. If it was just about cost and affordability everyone would still be operating turbo props right now instead of jet aircraft. But at the end of the day you have to look at what you are going to be using these things for, what unique challenges they help solve and then architecture a fleet capability around that.

The IAF with its high-low mix has done a pretty good job. More platforms of both types are needed. With how far technology has evolved in terms of mission computing and high bandwidth data-links, this mission set is ripe to go unmanned over the next decade or so. There is a chance here to field much lower cost unmanned systems and use automation and in the future AI to do the battle management and get the right data across to the right platform in time. Those could be your high volume, lower cost AEW platforms that can operate in more risky environments where you can't afford to put the more expensive manned platforms because you don't have as many of them and because the risk of losing them.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5249
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Kartik » 02 Jun 2020 04:57

basant wrote:
abhik wrote:Order value as per the press release is ~160m USD - So how much does does an Erieye cost exactly? It's hard to believe that they would be getting more that 1 for than one for that amount. If it actually costs less than that (would be surprising), that would make our wait for gold plated Phalcon or India AWACS (which cost 500+ USD and have nearly order of magnitude greater operating cost) even more egregious.

Not really. PAF would be getting multiple AWACS for 160M USD. It is also pertinent to note that UAE bought the same (?) at 500M per a/c! My view, with absolutely no evidence to support, is that these are sponsored by someone else. Your guess is as good as mine! See the link for details.


PAF gets their Erieyes on Saab-2000s. Those were out of production for a long time and all current PAF Saab-2000s were basically second-hand used Saab-2000s that were re-worked and overhauled before having the Erieye sensor added on. These had plenty of life left on them before they were re-worked and converted into AEW&C platforms. Hence, they were also a lot cheaper than new build platforms.

Broadly speaking, the Netra AEW&C is equivalent to the Erieye in all respects. Just wish the IAF places another order for 3-4 more Netra systems since they won't get the Phalcons and AWACS-India will not be ready by 2030.

Article on Erieye - Project Horizon for PAF

On April 30, Saab achieved a significant milestone with the first flight of the Saab 2000 Erieye airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft, developed under Project Horizon for the Pakistan air force. The two-hour flight from Linköping, Sweden, was used to check out general handling and aircraft systems, and encountered no problems. The maiden flight came a month after the aircraft was officially rolled out in front of Pakistani commanders.

Pakistan first contemplated the acquisition of an AEW system in the early 1980s, when Soviet and Afghan air force aircraft regularly intruded into Pakistani airspace. Other priorities, and the later U.S. arms embargo, meant that the requirement went unfulfilled. However, events in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks–plus ongoing tensions with India–placed renewed emphasis on the AEW requirement.

Pakistan selected the Erieye in 2005 and later revised the initial requirement for six platforms to five as a cost-reduction measure. It is buying a complete surveillance package, including ground-based systems, logistics support and mission training systems.

The Saab 2000 AEW&C is the latest iteration of the Saab Microwave Systems Erieye concept. The five-operator system has increased command and control capabilities, including the Swedish Link-E system.

The radar itself, which consists of 192 transmit/receive modules, has been improved with an extended early warning mode and the ability to spot hovering helicopters. Coverage has been increased to two 150-degree sectors (from 120-degrees, still with a 1-degree beamwidth), with range out to the horizon (typically 199 to 217 miles). The radar offers a fully fused air/sea capability, and can spot maritime targets as small as jet-skis.

Virtually all of the radar components have been replaced since the Erieye was first fielded in 1996, and all of the computer systems are COTS-based for cost-effective and rapid upgrade. Power output is around 20 percent greater than it was previously, although power requirements, and thus cooling, for the mission system have decreased by 30 percent. The effects of improvement can also be seen in a 53-percent reduction in system weight and 78-percent reduction in floor space. At the same time, computing power has increased a hundredfold.

Backing up the radar is a sophisticated Saab Avitronics HES-21 ESM/protection suite that uses interferometer antennas and digital receivers for highly accurate tracking and ranging of emitters. HES-21 data is fused with that from the radar to provide detailed tracking, and it can generate its own tracks at ranges greater than that possible with the radar. The system also includes a comprehensive self-protection function, automatically controlling the launch of chaff and flares.

Commuter on Patrol
The choice of basing Erieye on a regional airliner has obvious benefits in terms of high reliability, cost-efficiency and low maintenance requirements, but also offers significant mission benefits. The type’s hot-and-high performance is critical in the Pakistani operational environment. The aircraft has a balanced field length of 4,593 feet, allowing it to use many small airports, and it can reach 25,000 feet in 16 minutes.

Mission endurance is nine to 10 hours thanks to extra tanks in the cabin, and it can operate at up to 30,000 feet. At cruise power, the aircraft flies at about 340 knots, impressive for a turboprop. Using a 60-degree bank, the aircraft can complete a 180-degree turn at the end of a racetrack pattern in less than 30 seconds, with little interruption in track coverage.

Crew comfort is a consideration for long-endurance patrols, and through its active noise cancellation system, the Saab 2000 offers very low cabin noise levels. A 7,500-foot cabin pressure can be maintained at operational altitude. The Pakistani aircraft have a galley and rest area, with a mission display in the latter so that resting crew can stay informed of emerging situations. The flight deck is a very modern airliner-style working environment, with a six-tube Collins ProLine 4 electronic flight information system.

Erieye Conversions
Saab Aerotech performs conversions in its facilities at Linköping. For the first aircraft, the work took less than a year to complete. The conversion comprises several airframe structural modifications, including strengthening the upper rear fuselage to mount the Erieye radar.

The sensor is mounted higher than on the Saab 340 so it can “see” over the longer wings of the Saab 2000. The vertical fin is enlarged and strengthened to offset the aerodynamic effects of the radar and its support struts, while the wingtips are rebuilt and reinforced to carry antennas and chaff dispensers. The belly fairing is reworked and enlarged to mount elements of the self-protection system.

Although the aircraft are pre-owned, structural life is not a factor. The airliner was designed with an initial structural life of 75,000 hours, and on average, the fleet has used less than 20 percent. Based on typical use rates, the remaining life of the AEW&C is more than 35 years, with options for further re-lifing. Modification work on the second aircraft was already under way at the time of the rollout.

basant
BRFite
Posts: 212
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby basant » 02 Jun 2020 13:38

From Twitter
ACE of PAF @ACEofPAF
PAF Receives Another Saab 2000 ERIEYE Airborne Early Warning and Control (AEW&C) Aircraft delivery flight to Pakistan from Linköping City Airport (Sweden) via Athens (Greece) and Riyadh (Saudi Arabia) Photographed on 27.5.2020.

Image

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12029
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya_V » 02 Jun 2020 14:05

Its quite clear like our Netra, these dont have 360 degree coverage, we must quietly inter grate RVV-BD with our Su30 and conduct a surgical strike on these from the blind 120 degrees, that will be the revenge of firing Amraams at our aircraft well within our territory.

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2342
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby VinodTK » 02 Jun 2020 20:53

What-If Nuclear War? This Is How America Could Wage War On Pakistan

In the U.S. television series Homeland, the United States and Pakistan are brought to the brink of war. In real life, the two countries are allies, albeit strained ones at that, and many Americans believe Islamabad often actively works against Washington’s interests. If the relationship turned poisonous, how would the United States prosecute a war against Pakistan?

In order to proceed, let’s sketch out two war scenarios. In one, we’ll assume that the United States is pursuing an air-only campaign, in order to punish the country or strip it of some vital capability—nuclear weapons being a prime example. In the second scenario, the United States seeks to topple the country’s government entirely, including the occupation of the capital, Islamabad.

A prolonged U.S. air campaign would be a difficult proposition. Unlike past campaigns against Iraq, Somalia, Yemen, and Afghanistan, Washington would find regional allies who could provide air bases a difficult proposition. Pakistan enjoys warm relations with most of the Sunni states, particularly the United Arab Emirates and Qatar, both of whom have air bases capable of hosting U.S. tactical aircraft, as well as Saudi Arabia and Oman.

A U.S. air campaign directed against Pakistan would largely consist of bomber, carrier, and cruise missiles strikes. Strategic bombers, including the B-1, B-2, and B-52 would conduct strikes from the continental United States and the American base on Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. Only these aircraft have the range to strike targets in Pakistan from friendly bases. Depending on the level of international support, long-range bombers could also launch from the United Kingdom, including RAF Fairford, improving sortie rates.

The U.S. Navy would play a major role. U.S. forces would neutralize the relatively weak Pakistani Navy. While the Pakistani Navy operates about one hundred ships, it has only a handful of surface combatants of frigate size or larger, and just five aging diesel-electric submarines. Once these are neutralized the U.S. Navy could bring its aircraft carriers closer to the coastline, conducting airstrikes against military targets. Surface warships and nuclear-powered attack submarines would contribute by launching swarms of Tomahawk land-attack cruise missiles against highly defended targets.

An air campaign against Pakistan would be slower and more fraught with difficulty than past campaigns. Pakistan’s Air Force has nearly four hundred fighters, including American F-16 Fighting Falcons, and would need to be quickly destroyed. U.S. Navy and Air Force aircraft could see their first significant air to air combat since the 1991 Persian Gulf War.

An all-out invasion of Pakistan would be much more difficult, bordering on impractical. An invasion would require securing the city of Karachi, a coastal city of 14 million, then a march upcountry of approximately 700 miles. Securing Karachi alone would be an immense effort dwarfing efforts to secure Baghdad in the late 2000s, one that required more than 100,000 U.S. troops and the cooperation of local militias.

The Pakistani Army consists of nearly 800,000 active-duty personnel, with significant reserves totaling more than a half-million. Much if not most of this force is arrayed against the border with India, but the U.S. invasion route would actually pass through many of Pakistan’s forward-deployed forces. While U.S. forces would be qualitatively superior, it would be a grinding fight that could be interrupted at any time by Pakistani nuclear weapons.

Of course, there is one regional power that can provide everything the U.S. needs, including local air bases and a large army, navy, and air force, already positioned in the theater with well-sketched battle plans: India. India could help with an air campaign, providing runways for U.S. fighter bombers to operate from, or even contribute its own airpower. Indian ground forces have a far shorter route to Islamabad and overmatch Pakistani forces on the ground.

The question is whether or not India would join a U.S.-led coalition against Pakistan. India has seldom cooperated with the United States in military operations, declining to send troops to Iraq and Afghanistan, among others. India’s cooperation would largely depend on the circumstance, the most likely being the U.S. joining an Indian-led coalition against Pakistan.

Another power that could join such a conflict is China. China and Pakistan enjoy warm relations, and the rhetoric between the two countries suggests a relationship nearing that of a mutual defense pact. But it isn’t, and it’s not clear that China would risk direct conflict with the United States if Pakistan in some way overreached. China might, on the assumption that a U.S. puppet state in neighboring Pakistan would diminish China’s power and influence abroad. It’s worth remembering that the last time Chinese forces fought Americans was after the U.S.-led United Nations forces advanced into a state neighboring Beijing.

A U.S. war with Pakistan would be extremely difficult to wage and fraught with difficulty. It would also be forced to proceed under the assumption that some Pakistani nuclear weapons would survive a sustained effort to destroy them, to be used against U.S. forces or targets in some way later in the campaign. This is the sort of uncertainty that can veto military action and makes a war between Washington and Islamabad an absolute conflict of last resort.
:

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9058
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Rakesh » 10 Jun 2020 20:44

https://twitter.com/FrontalAssault1/sta ... 12039?s=20 ----> Update: There are unconfirmed reports coming in from Pakistan that 1 PAF F-16 has not reported back on PAF base Masroor since 3AM last night. Searches began in Arabian Sea.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9058
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Rakesh » 10 Jun 2020 21:19

Reported by Pakistan's Dawn as well....

But Dawn is now stating that the image below is doctored ---> https://www.dawn.com/news/1562612/fake- ... cial-media

Image

basant
BRFite
Posts: 212
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby basant » 10 Jun 2020 22:17

It is doctored, I am sure. I checked the website almost immediately after I saw on Twitter post, and found none. Plus see the 812 comments! I then deleted my post in another thread of the tweets. Sadder, but wiser.
Last edited by basant on 10 Jun 2020 22:31, edited 1 time in total.

wig
BRFite
Posts: 1841
Joined: 09 Feb 2009 16:58

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby wig » 10 Jun 2020 22:22

https://airpowerasia.com/2020/06/10/pak ... sive-look/

Pakistan Air Force Operational Airbases – A Comprehensive Look

a comprehensive write up - worth going through

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1816
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby sudeepj » 11 Jun 2020 06:51

basant wrote:It is doctored, I am sure. I checked the website almost immediately after I saw on Twitter post, and found none. Plus see the 812 comments! I then deleted my post in another thread of the tweets. Sadder, but wiser.


Dont be sad.. :D We all play a role in the propaganda wars.. For a few minutes at least, the NR-Porkis shat their pants. :rotfl:

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12029
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya_V » 11 Jun 2020 10:54

All fantasy, but imagine IN or ICG pick up the body of dead or alive PAF pilot- it would be nice.

Back to reality.

khan
BRFite
Posts: 830
Joined: 12 Feb 2003 12:31
Location: Tx

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby khan » 11 Jun 2020 11:33

Regarding that "missing" PAF F-16, to me it is clearly Indian spy-ops. The doctored page came out very quickly, and the Pakistaini's took debunking it very serioulsy.

It seems some lessons were learnt after Balakot.

SBajwa
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5361
Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Location: Attari

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby SBajwa » 11 Jun 2020 17:01

Pakistani abandoned their border posts in Baluchistan


dinesh_kimar
BRFite
Posts: 449
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby dinesh_kimar » 11 Jun 2020 18:28

^ Saar, what are you saying !

There were no casualties among the Pakistanis, and no border posts were abandoned !!!

SBajwa
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5361
Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Location: Attari

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby SBajwa » 11 Jun 2020 19:14

Here is another report.


Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9058
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Rakesh » 11 Jun 2020 21:32

:lol:

https://twitter.com/majorgauravarya/sta ... 48007?s=20 --->

1. US Air Force entered Pak airspace at night & reached Abottabad.

2. Indian Air Force entered Pak airspace at night & reached Balakot.

3. IAF entered Pak airspace at night & reached Karachi

This proves PAF is highly professional & they only work from 9 am to 5 pm.

Via Whatsapp

wig
BRFite
Posts: 1841
Joined: 09 Feb 2009 16:58

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby wig » 06 Jul 2020 09:54

https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-ne ... 3LSzI.html

China to supply 4 attack drones to Pak, prompts India to revive Predator-B plan
China has already been selling the reconnaissance and strike drone Wing Loong II to several countries in Asia and West Asia and emerged as the largest exporter of armed drones.
extracts
China is in the process of supplying four armed drones to Pakistan, ostensibly to protect the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor and the People’s Liberation Army Navy’s new base at Gwadar port, according to people familiar with the development said on Sunday.

Gwadar, in the highly restive southwestern province of Baluchistan, is described as the crown jewel of China’s $60 billion investment in Belt and Road Initiative projects in Pakistan.

The supply of two systems (each has two drones and a ground station) comes ahead of Beijing’s plan to jointly produce 48 GJ-2 drones, the military version of Wing Loong II, designed in China for use by Pakistan’s air force.


and
China’s attack drone, said to be armed with 12 air-to-surface missiles, are currently being used by UAE-backed forces in Libya against the Turkish-backed government in Tripoli with limited success. Four of them were shot down in the last two months in Libya, according to data compiled by non profit Drone Wars UK.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DrRatnadip, manish singh, Raveen, ravikr, sgopal and 58 guests