MiG-21 Bison shoots down F-16 in Kashmir

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 08 Mar 2019 18:30

Pratyush wrote:But who killed the MiG-21. Why won't the TSP credit that kill to PAF.

I thought that was what the Hassan Siddiqui celebration video was about, no? JF-17 shooting down a MiG-21. All official records from Pakistan state that the PAF shot the MiG-21 down.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 08 Mar 2019 18:31

i was struck by the fact that they fielded 24 aircraft, after we sent 12
not entirely a coincidence I think...

eechendee oh eechendee...

Hari Nair · Post by **Hari Nair** » 08 Mar 2019 18:32

Karan M wrote:
naird wrote:https://www.livefistdefence.com/2019/03 ... -shot.html

What does this even mean ? Doesnt make sense
The second (ROE) is the likely reason. The Su-30s maneuvered and used countermeasures to break lock. Question is why didn't they lock and fire themselves? PAF jamming is not the answer, nor is maneuvering alone. We all know how aggressively the IAF has done BVR in ECM heavy environments (including Red Flag and Indra). ROE about don't provoke a fight etc came into play as with the 10km band across the LOC.

Chalo. Next time, even that won't be there.

I would tend to take our twirled moustachioed self-styled defence expert-cum-journo and his 'sources' with a large pinch of salt or two. Quite a few things do not add up in his narrative:
-"initial pick-up was by ground radars" - however he also mentions earlier that a Phalcon and a Netra were also airborne in the sector. Huh??
- He points a finger that none of the other IAF fighters launched weapons or generated BVR solutions. The question is: the deciding factor is where those Porki fighters were - still on their side of LC or had they crossed over? Do we go in for BVR missile launches even when their fighters are on their side of the LC? In which case, we are forcing the escalation (with a nuclear overhang) to a higher level!
- On one hand he states that the Su-30s were kept busy avoiding the AMRAAM lock-ons. In that case, how come all the SA Raptors (H-4 in Porki parlance) fired from (most likely) the Mirage-IIIs missed their targets? The Porkis are not exactly nincompoops to have fired expensive PGMs and deliberatley missed. If one argues that was indeed their objective, then they could have gone and dropped dumb bombs, instead. The Raptor, it is understood needs continuous guidance and the Mirage-IIIs were obviously forced to discontinue their attacks.
- He points a finger as to how" even a large strike package managed to were able to test the ‘air superiority’ capabilities of the Su-30 MKI, the flagship of the Indian Air Force". Well, its not exactly rocket science, is it? If there is a trade-off between moving up the escalatory ladder and BVR engagement on hostile Porkis still on their side, then its a higher leadership call - definitely not to be taken either by the Fighter Controllers or the pilots on the scene. So what's he going on to state " Had Abhinandan’s MiG-21 not managed to bring down a PAF jet, the proceedings above Sunderbani sector on February 27 would likely attract far more sweeping scrutiny. Experts believe it still should."
- Which experts ? armchair journos? And .. 'sweeping scrutiny' - really!?
-I would put it the other way round - that lets not forget that one of the objectives of their strike was to bait and down our assets- which they did manage. Its more than a saving grace that we managed to get an F-16, and that too by the same Bison that they had trapped! It could have easily gone worse!

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 08 Mar 2019 18:34

Lalmohan wrote:i was struck by the fact that they fielded 24 aircraft, after we sent 12
not entirely a coincidence I think...
eechendee oh eechendee...

They have to do double of what we do. It is a manhood thing for them.

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 08 Mar 2019 22:21

wig wrote:
Austin wrote:The Mystery of the Missing F-16
this video is from Shiv

This is "pinned" from Shiv - https://twitter.com/bennedose/status/11 ... 2679549953
(As expected there are another such videos - I have posted it here from his tweet).

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 08 Mar 2019 23:46

manjgu wrote:1) whats paki parlance in the vid?? i dont see any such thing 2) I am wondering will a Mig 21 which is on interception mission carry a drop tank? maybe the gurus can clarify?? however a F 16 which is doing some deception, flying from a distant bases , merging and then escaping may feel the need to carry a drop tank? 3) if i am not wrong, the Mig 21 wreckage was available for public viewing for quite a few days... though it seems there was much alacrity in carrying off the other wreckage.

Mig 21 droptanks are a pretty simple shape, needle sharp and designed for supersonic flight.

http://www.exarmyvehicles.com/offer/oth ... for-mig-21

The drop tank being loaded onto that truck looks very 'curvy' and looks like an F16 Conformal Fuel Tank.

From what angle does this blunt, curvy drop tank look like a Mig21 supersonic droptank? Its neither pointy, nor does it have the 'fins' seen on the tanks for the mig.

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 09 Mar 2019 01:08

CFTs are strap on, and cannot be jettisoned away.

That thing there is not a CFT, and it’s not a Migh 21 drop tank either.

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 09 Mar 2019 01:13

Whenever you get a chance to read Hindustan Times, remember this pathetic newspaper that published important details on Abhinandan before he was released.

The article is still there (dated Feb 28)
IAF pilot captured by Pakistan is the son of a retired air marshal

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 09 Mar 2019 01:33

Sid wrote:CFTs are strap on, and cannot be jettisoned away.

That thing there is not a CFT, and it’s not a Migh 21 drop tank either.

As far as I know, a CFT is only attached to the plane at a couple of points, and in a violent crash, it is possible for it to come loose from the plane and bounce about on its own. Whatever it is, its most unlike a Mig 21 drop tank, thats for sure.

nam · Post by **nam** » 09 Mar 2019 01:40

Is it possible to geo locate this location or mig21 crash?

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 09 Mar 2019 02:01

Rakesh wrote:....
The PAF - like their PA and PN counterparts - have proved that they can come up with a half baked tactical plan, but have no strategic outlook. They were hoping for a shoot down to reclaim their lost honour - IAF Mirage 2000s entering their airspace, while they were helpless to stop it.

Pakis value optics above everything else.

To begin with, why even try this the very next day when IAF is ready and expecting you to strike back?

That too in broad day light?

Result: you lose a F-16 and there are youtube videos with your pilot floating down. Worst your pilot is beaten up by the local populace. You don't achieve any military aim and even fire off expensive BVR missiles and stand off weapons hitting nothing but grass.

The only positive from all of this is that nobody questioned them as to how the IAF got in despite the high alert

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 09 Mar 2019 02:21

Another account.....analyze (& critique) away!

We need one of our BRFites to do a write up. Who wants to volunteer?

Retelling the dogfight over Nowshera
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... 312209.cms

That last sentence is cut off in the image, but the article (link above) states at the end, "One eyewitness says a ‘Sikh pilot’ was caught by locals and handed over, possibly mistaking a bearded Pak Air Force officer for a Sikh. Indian pilots are not allowed to sport a beard while PAF officers are permitted a trimmed one."

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 09 Mar 2019 02:23

https://twitter.com/aloysius34/status/1 ... 7635845120 ---> 1. Media reports India-Pak air battle 27 Feb, IAF warplanes were constrained by ‘rules of engagement’ that restricted pilots from crossing the LoC & firing first, if true the absurdity of the decision led the Su-30MKI & Mirage-2000 on to an 'aerial dance' dodging F-16 AMRAAM's.

https://twitter.com/aloysius34/status/1 ... 9174792192 ---> 2. IAF it appears engaged the enemy with restraint for unknown reasons, Su-30MKI's were forced into an 'aerial dance' dodging multiple AMRAAM's launched by PAF F-16's. the IAF Mirage-2000 role was passive, leaving ORP scrambled MiG-21's to engage the enemy which they hotly did.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 09 Mar 2019 02:58

Hari Nair sir!

Thanks for confirming!! Glad to have your input here.

My thoughts exactly! In exercise after exercise our pilots "exchange" locks, maneuver aggressively for advantage, manage to acquit themselves well in the Su-30 MKI (and other platforms) & suddenly in this incident, according to our self proclaimed expert defense analyst, they didn't do so.. and yet, the Raptors were jettisoned or missed their targets entirely (so why were the 2 seater Mirages maneuvering aggressively)? For kicks?
LIke you said, it was just ROE/ careful consideration on our part that prevented the F-16s/JF-17s/Mirages whatsoever from getting multiple BVR missiles their way and I would take the IAF pilots capabilities in BVR anyday given their extensive training in the art & science over the past couple decades..
About why ground radar... I can only believe that if the PAF stuck to some valleys etc to slip into the Indian side (low flying strike packages) and a low level radar picked them up at short notice, but even that seems dodgy.
I also reiterate (my personal guess work) that they didn't just fire Raptors but probably threw much more at us.. chances are even those went awry and landed here & there.
I suspect this was a strike intended to cause maximum casualties on our side with least risk to the PAF side.. they wanted big "PR fireballs" and "shock and awe" on our side.. while scampering back .. but even that flopped because of the sheer speed of IAFs response & the aggressiveness of their pilots who didn't just "exit the area" on being outnumbered but made a heavy fight of it, maintained locks on the Mirages & JF-17s forcing them to disengage & one of our guys even downed a F-16.
I have grave doubts about the PAFs judgement and professionalism as well now, because after not exactly succeeding in their mission objectives, they are busy awarding officers awards, feting them in Parliament without the slightest iota of fact checking (even keeping aside the F-16 loss).

Hari Nair wrote:
Karan M wrote:
The second (ROE) is the likely reason. The Su-30s maneuvered and used countermeasures to break lock. Question is why didn't they lock and fire themselves? PAF jamming is not the answer, nor is maneuvering alone. We all know how aggressively the IAF has done BVR in ECM heavy environments (including Red Flag and Indra). ROE about don't provoke a fight etc came into play as with the 10km band across the LOC.

Chalo. Next time, even that won't be there.
I would tend to take our twirled moustachioed self-styled defence expert-cum-journo and his 'sources' with a large pinch of salt or two. Quite a few things do not add up in his narrative:
-"initial pick-up was by ground radars" - however he also mentions earlier that a Phalcon and a Netra were also airborne in the sector. Huh??
- He points a finger that none of the other IAF fighters launched weapons or generated BVR solutions. The question is: the deciding factor is where those Porki fighters were - still on their side of LC or had they crossed over? Do we go in for BVR missile launches even when their fighters are on their side of the LC? In which case, we are forcing the escalation (with a nuclear overhang) to a higher level!
- On one hand he states that the Su-30s were kept busy avoiding the AMRAAM lock-ons. In that case, how come all the SA Raptors (H-4 in Porki parlance) fired from (most likely) the Mirage-IIIs missed their targets? The Porkis are not exactly nincompoops to have fired expensive PGMs and deliberatley missed. If one argues that was indeed their objective, then they could have gone and dropped dumb bombs, instead. The Raptor, it is understood needs continuous guidance and the Mirage-IIIs were obviously forced to discontinue their attacks.
- He points a finger as to how" even a large strike package managed to were able to test the ‘air superiority’ capabilities of the Su-30 MKI, the flagship of the Indian Air Force". Well, its not exactly rocket science, is it? If there is a trade-off between moving up the escalatory ladder and BVR engagement on hostile Porkis still on their side, then its a higher leadership call - definitely not to be taken either by the Fighter Controllers or the pilots on the scene. So what's he going on to state " Had Abhinandan’s MiG-21 not managed to bring down a PAF jet, the proceedings above Sunderbani sector on February 27 would likely attract far more sweeping scrutiny. Experts believe it still should."
- Which experts ? armchair journos? And .. 'sweeping scrutiny' - really!?
-I would put it the other way round - that lets not forget that one of the objectives of their strike was to bait and down our assets- which they did manage. Its more than a saving grace that we managed to get an F-16, and that too by the same Bison that they had trapped! It could have easily gone worse!

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 09 Mar 2019 03:05

Prem Kumar wrote:It might also have to do with the confidence in R-77 in long range engagement & the need to preserve missiles during CAP as parshuram mentioned above.

All the more reason to induct Astra in numbers right away!

Let me just say it would be extremely pointless on our part to assume the CAGs adverse remarks against the first batch of R77s ordered in the late 90's, early 2000s after Kargil apply to the entire IAF inventory.

I thought long and hard before posting the above, the reason I do so is this. I dont want the next round of myth making in the internet to start about how Su-30s are defenseless in BVR and hence PAF will win etc etc. You know how it is.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 09 Mar 2019 03:12

Thank you for that info Karan. And best not to connect the dots for the enemy.

Folks, our satisfaction is inconsequential. The safety of IAF pilots come first and their ability to hit the enemy effectively.

Somethings are never to be said on an open forum or even at a BR meet.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 09 Mar 2019 03:13

Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/aloysius34/status/1 ... 7635845120 ---> 1. Media reports India-Pak air battle 27 Feb, IAF warplanes were constrained by ‘rules of engagement’ that restricted pilots from crossing the LoC & firing first, if true the absurdity of the decision led the Su-30MKI & Mirage-2000 on to an 'aerial dance' dodging F-16 AMRAAM's.

This guy has no clue of what he is talking about. Talk about scoring one more PR own goal.
Our guys dont need to cross down the LOC to lock on to the Pakistanis and deterring them. They can detect from afar and deter from afar.

https://twitter.com/aloysius34/status/1 ... 9174792192 ---> 2. IAF it appears engaged the enemy with restraint for unknown reasons, Su-30MKI's were forced into an 'aerial dance' dodging multiple AMRAAM's launched by PAF F-16's. the IAF Mirage-2000 role was passive, leaving ORP scrambled MiG-21's to engage the enemy which they hotly did.

More idiocy from this aloysius. What were the Mirage 2000s doing, hovering over the Indian side? Does he even know or understand whats on the Mirages? The PAF certainly does, they tried their hardest to purchase them, got detailed briefings and even put the same avionics and weapons fit on the JF-17. There is a good reason the JF-17s were deterred as well.

2nd Life For the Mirage 2000, Interavia, Pierre C wrote: The processing capacity of the RDY is eighttrack simultaneous TWS, like its American counterparts. However, in the case of the RDY, this capacity is genuinely available to the pilot, since the tracks are positioned automatically. Once the track-while-scan mode is engaged, the radar evaluates the threat represented by each track (according to its range and speed), in order to produce a firing scenario for the pilot. For the four tracks with the highest threat priority, antenna scanning is configured automatically to avoid losing these tracks in the event of evasive manoeuvres or closing, which could move them out of the angular detection field.... Thanks to the Thales RDY radar, the pilot can track eight targets at once and engage four simultaneously. (Inset shows cockpit displays) Thales and Matra BAe Dynamics at the beginning of the 1990s, for the Mirage 2000s ordered by Greece.

The Mirage 2000-5 Mk2 will feature a new version of the ICMS known as the Mk3, characterised by greater use of digitally programmable components, rendering the frequency-measuring, signal-detection and jamming functions more flexible and more precise. The Mirage 2000-9 variant ordered by the United Arab Emirates will be equipped with a more complete system still - the (MEWS (Integrated Modular Electronic Warfare System), developed in co-operation with Italy's Elettronica, which also includes a more powerful low-band jammer.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 09 Mar 2019 03:23

Our idiot journalists are making a mockery out of aviation awareness and dont even have the slightest details of how the IAF fights or trains to fight.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 09 Mar 2019 03:34

Get this.

This is for all you "defence analysts" and journalists lurking on the forum and trying to write up about the recent air clash.

One does NOT need to cross the LOC to either track the opponent or GET a firing solution.

Our pilots are trained to A) Break BVR lock B ) Engage their own WCS C ) Maneuver for effective Pk

Just because we don't launch our BVR missiles to knock down the enemy does not mean that they didn't have a weapons control system solution.

The PAF will never know, but can at best guess!!!

Check the whole Line of Duty bit about training, debriefing, etc.
https://youtu.be/rmtQFF4tUOk?t=1824
The senior pilot in the debriefing whose voice gets cut out in this video originally makes the point, that the point we are making is just don't hit, make sure you don't get hit either. In other words maneuver to break lock and hit back.

From Kargil, 1999.

Check Squadron Leader John's comment about typical CAP missions.
https://youtu.be/Zu5gzo_wXko?t=87

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 09 Mar 2019 03:50

Pakistanis have flown mirage 2k’s in the gulf so they are aware of what they can do, ofcourse doesnt mean that the line fizzler knows much about it

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 09 Mar 2019 03:56

Yes, but they would have been briefed about it, and very very careful. Same with the Su-30 MKI.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 09 Mar 2019 03:57

Excellent job Karan of refuting these tweets. Keep it up!

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 09 Mar 2019 04:06

Question I have is did we fire SAMs at the attacking force?

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 09 Mar 2019 04:26

The above source is the only reference so far on sam engagement

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 09 Mar 2019 04:31

I would also suggest that the mirage 3/5 and the bandars did not even get in to the hot zone and they probably didnt fire any of their weapons... they were loitering looking for an ingress that was not contested and they never got the opportunity or had the cojones - their awacs would have been directing. And maybe they were bait for the su30’s which would then be hit by the tp cover.

The f16’s were going to be the tip of the spear and they managed a prod with a fall back plan of baiting a chase;

its the cap over mangla dam that becomes of interest in this whole game

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 09 Mar 2019 04:39

I have to believe that there were strict ROE given to the SU30 and Mirage pilots and maybe the Mig 21s also. Given the IAF raid into Balakot, Pakistan was humiliated and enraged. i have no idea what the typical SU30 load out is for for air defence mission. But with 12 hardpoints I have to believe that each SU30 would be carrying at least 4 R77 and 6 R73 missiles. That would be 40 missiles between the 4 SU-30s alone not counting the Mirage 2000s. If they had let loose a salvo of 20 missiles there is no way that 6-10 PAF aircraft including their vaunted F16s would not be khima. In that event things would have really escalated with Pakistan readying nukes.

The combination of signals emanating from India i.e. calling the Balakot raid a non-military event and then these apparent strict ROE for the IAF probably means that India has calibrated it's response very carefully so that escalation does not spiral out of control.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 09 Mar 2019 04:44

Exactly - someone in the iaf has been reading their game theory books

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 09 Mar 2019 04:54

Hari Nair wrote:
Karan M wrote:
The second (ROE) is the likely reason. The Su-30s maneuvered and used countermeasures to break lock. Question is why didn't they lock and fire themselves? PAF jamming is not the answer, nor is maneuvering alone. We all know how aggressively the IAF has done BVR in ECM heavy environments (including Red Flag and Indra). ROE about don't provoke a fight etc came into play as with the 10km band across the LOC.

Chalo. Next time, even that won't be there.
I would tend to take our twirled moustachioed self-styled defence expert-cum-journo and his 'sources' with a large pinch of salt or two. Quite a few things do not add up in his narrative:
-"initial pick-up was by ground radars" - however he also mentions earlier that a Phalcon and a Netra were also airborne in the sector. Huh??
- He points a finger that none of the other IAF fighters launched weapons or generated BVR solutions. The question is: the deciding factor is where those Porki fighters were - still on their side of LC or had they crossed over? Do we go in for BVR missile launches even when their fighters are on their side of the LC? In which case, we are forcing the escalation (with a nuclear overhang) to a higher level!
- On one hand he states that the Su-30s were kept busy avoiding the AMRAAM lock-ons. In that case, how come all the SA Raptors (H-4 in Porki parlance) fired from (most likely) the Mirage-IIIs missed their targets? The Porkis are not exactly nincompoops to have fired expensive PGMs and deliberatley missed. If one argues that was indeed their objective, then they could have gone and dropped dumb bombs, instead. The Raptor, it is understood needs continuous guidance and the Mirage-IIIs were obviously forced to discontinue their attacks.
- He points a finger as to how" even a large strike package managed to were able to test the ‘air superiority’ capabilities of the Su-30 MKI, the flagship of the Indian Air Force". Well, its not exactly rocket science, is it? If there is a trade-off between moving up the escalatory ladder and BVR engagement on hostile Porkis still on their side, then its a higher leadership call - definitely not to be taken either by the Fighter Controllers or the pilots on the scene. So what's he going on to state " Had Abhinandan’s MiG-21 not managed to bring down a PAF jet, the proceedings above Sunderbani sector on February 27 would likely attract far more sweeping scrutiny. Experts believe it still should."
- Which experts ? armchair journos? And .. 'sweeping scrutiny' - really!?
-I would put it the other way round - that lets not forget that one of the objectives of their strike was to bait and down our assets- which they did manage. Its more than a saving grace that we managed to get an F-16, and that too by the same Bison that they had trapped! It could have easily gone worse!

Hari, I lost respect once he started tweeting Abhinandan pictures published by Pakis before the GOI could inform the family.
Very disloyal to the services on whom he makes a living.
Same with that Somless guy.
I don't forward or read anything he has to say.

Vips · Post by **Vips** » 09 Mar 2019 05:01

ldev wrote:I have to believe that there were strict ROE given to the SU30 and Mirage pilots and maybe the Mig 21s also. Given the IAF raid into Balakot, Pakistan was humiliated and enraged. i have no idea what the typical SU30 load out is for for air defence mission. But with 12 hardpoints I have to believe that each SU30 would be carrying at least 4 R77 and 6 R73 missiles. That would be 40 missiles between the 4 SU-30s alone not counting the Mirage 2000s. If they had let loose a salvo of 20 missiles there is no way that 6-10 PAF aircraft including their vaunted F16s would not be khima. In that event things would have really escalated with Pakistan readying nukes.

The combination of signals emanating from India i.e. calling the Balakot raid a non-military event and then these apparent strict ROE for the IAF probably means that India has calibrated it's response very carefully so that escalation does not spiral out of control.

In other words they play to kill, we only after much blood has spilled do something and then like a good boy carry the weight of not doing something heavy and also leave the window open for them to do a riposte and let off more steam. Sort of offering your enemy the other cheek after he has already stuck you once. How much more ridiculous and predictable can we be?

It is time we let the world know that rationality should not be expected only from us and if it means a very grave war then so be it.Our absurd predictiveness has to end somewhere.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 09 Mar 2019 05:18

UB, I had a great collection of Biggles books and had to leave them in desh and went to raddiwala!!!

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 09 Mar 2019 05:19

Vips, Why did not Sri Krishna use Sudarshan chakra on Sishupal right away?
I think to ensure people realize it was after restraint was overcome.
Pak will get its due and very soon.
Fikar not.

Sanju · Post by **Sanju** » 09 Mar 2019 07:04

ramana wrote:UB, I had a great collection of Biggles books and had to leave them in desh and went to raddiwala!!!

While it does not replace your collection...This may fill the void.

Bishwa · Post by **Bishwa** » 09 Mar 2019 07:09

Y. Kanan wrote:
Rakesh wrote:No Saar, all Pakistani F-16s use the Pratt & Whitney F100 engine. Even the ones bought from Jordan use the P&W engine as well.

And as per picture below, the P&W engine has a honeycomb structure. See below...
Thank you for the clarification. So, it seems most likely that an F-16 was not, in fact, shot down.

The IAF has officially credited the kill of a F16 to the pilot. Do you think they would do that without being sure? Dont you think they have radar evidence of the plane going down?

Sanju · Post by **Sanju** » 09 Mar 2019 07:40

Y. Kanan wrote:
Rakesh wrote:No Saar, all Pakistani F-16s use the Pratt & Whitney F100 engine. Even the ones bought from Jordan use the P&W engine as well.

And as per picture below, the P&W engine has a honeycomb structure. See below...
Thank you for the clarification. So, it seems most likely that an F-16 was not, in fact, shot down. Which shouldn't be surprising, and certainly nothing <snip>

Saar why score a self goal? IAF has verified and credited the PAF F-16 kill to WingCo Abhinandan. There is a video by our esteemed Hakimji linked in the earlier posts or you can go to his twitter account where the vid is pinned.

Let us end this discussion on the F-16 kill. The IAF should have the last word on this matter - as they are the domain experts.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 09 Mar 2019 07:55

UBC(T)N is now reporting that IAF has been given "shoot at sight" orders. In fact it is "shoot b4 sight" because BVR shots are specifically approved. Stock of Proctor&Gamble, makers of Pepto Bismol hit very close to 52-week high, driven by demand from Sargodha and Peshawar.
PAF has been allowed to "SoS" (Scoot on Sight).

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 09 Mar 2019 08:07

Y Kanan had a "Perry Mason" moment here..

Youknow... the well known thing about Perry Mason stories? Perry Mason strikes down just one argument of the defendant, and the defendant immediately concedes and confesses everything in court.

IAF have evidence of the F16 being down. The fact that the kill is attributed to WgCo Abhi is proof. End of discussion.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 09 Mar 2019 08:11

All the stuff about engine type assumes that the photos of wreckage of something that looks like an engine casing is (a) recent and (b) came from crash in the general area. Both are unsupported assumptions. Why would Pak allow pics of any F-16 wreckage to be posted on Internet? Truth&Accountability & Anti-Blasphemy Court would order head chopped off anyone posting such pics. The ISI are not amateurs at such things.

For instance, here is some F-16 wreckage showing the engine wreckage(it can't be from the Cessna, hain?) I have no idea whether it is P&W or GE.

Closeup:

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Mar 2019 08:19

ramana wrote:UB, I had a great collection of Biggles books and had to leave them in desh and went to raddiwala!!!

everyone claims that. few if any have managed to hold on to their old tintin and asterix collections - I had them hard bound in bunches of 5 as a kid and they are still around for my kids to enjoy.
I had a large pile of "commando" comics which all fell apart though. as did my "target" collection with inspector moochwalla.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 09 Mar 2019 08:24

Y. Kanan wrote:
Thank you for the clarification. So, it seems most likely that an F-16 was not, in fact, shot down..

. I think we came off second-best in this little exchange....

I have reported this agenda driven post...

IAF has stated f16 shot down, they have the evidence on aew&vs too by electronic signature of f16.

Bishwa · Post by **Bishwa** » 09 Mar 2019 08:52

AVM Kapoor in the Joint Press Conference specifically said the drop tank was not of a Mig 21.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hypnYPsPh-w around 17 minutes in

It maybe best to focus on that aspect. Shivs video does that