Pakistan arms sales, ops, doctrine, etc

Vineet · Post by **Vineet** » 28 Mar 2011 20:59

Pakistan drops US, embraces China as new arms partner
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 808564.cms

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 29 Mar 2011 10:24

PNS Alamgir has left its US home and is not its way to Pakistan.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 29 Mar 2011 16:48

Pics on canistered Babur missile launch:

http://www.ispr.gov.pk/front/image_view ... ull_path=1

http://www.ispr.gov.pk/front/image_view ... ull_path=1

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 07 Apr 2011 15:40

DIA: WORLD WIDE THREAT ASSESSMENT
Statement before the Committee on Armed Services, United States Senate
Ronald L. Burgess, Jr. Lieutenant General, U.S. Army
Director, Defense Intelligence Agency

Pakistan continues to struggle with a resilient militancy, a feeble economy, political in-fighting and tense civil-military relations, all of which were compounded by last summer’s flooding – the worst in the country’s 60 year history. Relations between the civilian and military leadership remain tenuous Pressing issues – including economic reform, maintaining public support for counter-insurgency operations, and reconstruction of conflict-hit areas – have been and will likely continue to be a secondary priority for the government. The military will continue to maintain pressure on the civilian government to tamp down corruption and focus on service-delivery. The Army remains dominant in Pakistani national security decision-making.

Following the devastating floods in August of 2010, Pakistan’s military led rescue operations, provided relief supplies and built temporary infrastructure for refugees. Relief operations eclipsed counter-insurgency operations due to the temporary diversion of the army’s entire fleet of transport helicopters. As flood waters receded, the military has resumed low level clearing operations in the tribal areas.

Pakistan also continues to pursue conventional weapons to offset what it perceives as an eroding conventional military balance with its traditional foe, India. Pakistan’s modernization pursuits include the JF-17 multi-role aircraft as well as increasing its inventory of F-22 Frigates and the al-Khalid Main Battle Tank – weapons systems which are better suited to conventional conflict with India than to counter militants in mountainous tribal areas.

Relations between India and Pakistan remain strained despite several high level meetings in 2010. India wants future dialogue to move slowly and focus on relatively noncontroversial confidence building measures, while Islamabad wants discussions to center on Kashmir and move quickly. India continues to insist Pakistan takes meaningful steps against the perpetrators of the November 2008 terrorist attacks in Mumbai, but they have agreed to resume talks leading to a meeting between foreign ministers this year..

Kashmir remains the core dispute in the India-Pakistan relationship and political violence during the latter half of 2010 contributed to ongoing bilateral tension. New Delhi has promised a robust economic development package for the state and has offered talks with various political parties, but results have so far been modest.

The persistent India-Pakistan rivalry drives Islamabad to develop its nuclear infrastructure, expand nuclear weapon stockpiles which are based primarily on highly enriched uranium, and seek more advanced nuclear warheads and delivery systems, including cruise missiles. Once deployed, these new missile systems, along with its current ballistic missile system, will provide Islamabad the ability to strike a variety of targets at ranges of 200-2000 km with both conventional and nuclear payloads. Pakistan is able to safeguard its nuclear weapons, including protecting important segments of its nuclear program in underground facilities, although vulnerabilities still exist.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 07 Apr 2011 16:03

Aditya G wrote:Pics on canistered Babur missile launch:

http://www.ispr.gov.pk/front/image_view ... ull_path=1

http://www.ispr.gov.pk/front/image_view ... ull_path=1

Where was this Babur launched from? Any ideas?

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 07 Apr 2011 16:25

Looks like some test range

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 08 Apr 2011 13:44

I think this is some base around Jhelum town.

I've located their Tilla Jogiyan MRBM test launch site on the outskirts of Jhelum town due west. It is in a rock quarry next to the village of Malote.

Mostly missile manufacturing still goes on in Kahuta doesn't it?

vishal · Post by **vishal** » 08 Apr 2011 15:27

Looks like the PA might be getting ready for a trip to Saudi Arabia (from the Washington Post)

clicky here

Extract: Historically, in times of trouble, Saudi kings have depended on American presidents to guarantee their external security. But at this moment of crisis, Abdullah views President Obama as a threat to his internal security. He fears that in the event of a widespread revolt, Obama will demand that he leave office, just as he did to Mubarak, that other longtime friend of the United States. Consequently, Abdullah is reportedly making arrangements for Pakistani troops to enter his kingdom should the need to suppress popular demonstrations arise.

P Chitkara · Post by **P Chitkara** » 08 Apr 2011 17:24

Any such intervention by pukes will reinforce their reputation of being a country more comfortable with dictators, in addition to incurring the hostility of the population of KSA.

They will do anything for $$s wont they

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 08 Apr 2011 17:38

vishal wrote: Consequently, Abdullah is reportedly making arrangements for Pakistani troops to enter his kingdom should the need to suppress popular demonstrations arise.

Will Kiyani then be the new Zia of Jordan fame ?

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 08 Apr 2011 18:40

Any badmashi that the pakistani troops indulge in in KSA, will go into Kiyani's account.

There might be some mid level officers there who might get moved by their presence in arabia, and might go too far to prove their martial antecedents.

400% chance of some interesting things befalling the pakis there.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 08 Apr 2011 19:40

Aditya G wrote:Pics on canistered Babur missile launch:

http://www.ispr.gov.pk/front/image_view ... ull_path=1

Interesting to think which institutions, and which country, some of the younger guys are getting their technical knowledge. Two tie wearing RAPEs indicate recent phoren return.

jerrys · Post by **jerrys** » 08 Apr 2011 20:09

sum wrote:Recall reading somewhere that the Pakis have ordered few Il-78 refuellers from Uzbekistan??
Is it true or just a unmentionable site rumour??

no brother they actually brought it from ukraine
http://theasiandefence.blogspot.com/200 ... d-air.html

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 09 Apr 2011 10:14

jerrysir, your user handle has been changed to 'jerrys' to comply with forum guidelines.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 14 Apr 2011 18:35

Missile at 1:56 goes nicely through a window,
TOW? Or Hellfire?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxZYwLsvdoA

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 14 Apr 2011 19:24

pakis do not have hellfire but plenty of TOWs.

Ramin · Post by **Ramin** » 15 Apr 2011 01:59

Interview: Pakistan Air Force Viper Pilot

Q 1: What is a PAF F-16 pilot doing in Turkey?

A: The Pakistan Air Force (PAF) and the Turkish Air Force (TuAF) have a long-standing pilot exchange programme, which goes back a couple of decades under which, at any given time, two PAF pilots are in Turkey and two TuAF pilots are in Pakistan. Since the PAF and the TuAF share two common aircraft – the T-37 trainer and the F-16 – both countries exchange pilots on the each of these aircraft. So right now we have one PAF pilot flying TuAF T-37s and another PAF pilot flying TuAF F-16s in Turkey and one TuAF pilot flying PAF T-37s and one Tu-AF pilot flying PAF F-16s in Pakistan.

Q 2: How long is the duration of the secondment?

A: The average secondment is 2 years, but it could be less or more depending on various factors.

Q 3: What is the basis for PAF’s selection of a pilot for secondment to the TuAF F-16 squadrons?

A: The selection is done by the PAF and is based purely on merit. They start with your academy reports and the final report is given by your squadron commander. The TuAF requirement is that the pilot must have a minimum of 250 hours on the F-16 before joining the TuAF F-16 squadrons.

Q 4: What is the PAF criterion for selecting a pilot for its F-16 squadrons?

A: A pilot must have an outstanding record and a minimum of 500 hours on either the F-7 or the Mirages or both aircraft. Additionally, he must have the right aptitude and the ability to learn and apply his learning. The F-16 is not a simple aircraft to fly. Usually, most pilots go from the F-7 to the Mirages before coming to the F-16. This route washes out the weaker pilots.

Q 5: Which route did you follow?

A: I went straight to the F-16 after logging 450 hours on the F-7P.

Q 6: Which PAF F-16 squadron were you flying with before secondment to the TuAF?

A: No. 9 Squadron “Griffins”.

Q 7: What squadrons and what airbases do you fly out of in Turkey?

A: I have flown from different airbases with different squadrons on different F-16 types and this depends on the mission training that is being undertaken at a given time. I have served at two air bases – Mirzofen and Balekesir.

Q 8: What F-16 Blocks have you flown in Turkey?

A: I have flown all three TuAF F-16 Blocks - the Blocks 30, 40 and 50. I am the second PAF exchange pilot to have flown the TuAF Block 50 as previously the Turks did not give PAF pilots access to the Block 50.

Q 9: Why was that?

A: US restrictions. However, once the sanctions were lifted and talks began to purchase Block 52s for the PAF, it no longer remained an issue because we would be flying a more advanced version than the Turks. That’s when the US allowed the Turks to give us access to the Block 50. The Turks have been very cooperative with the PAF.

Q 10: What kind of mission training did you get on the TuAF F-16s?

A: We are trained for all types of missions since most TuAF F-16s squadrons are multi-role. However, I was primarily trained for air-to-air combat in the air defence role.

Q 11: Any BVR training?

A: Yes.

Q 12: Which BVR missile?

A: The AIM-120 AMRAAM “Charlie”.

Q 13: What are the differences in training methodologies between the PAF and TuAF?

A: There are substantial differences. TuAF follows the US and NATO training methodologies where everything is written down and you have to follow set procedures. This is not necessarily bad because these procedures are based on experience. They learnt this after their experience in air-to-air combat in Vietnam. However, the downside is that you tend to get bogged down into following procedures and you become predictable. In the PAF, pilots are given more freedom to come up with their own solutions. Our training approach is more similar to the Israelis than NATO. We do more “seat of the pants” type of flying and are required to be more creative.

Q 14: Have you taken part in any Anatolian Eagle exercise?

A: PAF has been participating in the annual Anatolian Eagle exercises since 2004. I have participated in three Anatolian Eagles – one national and two international.

Q 15: What is the difference between national and international?

A: TuAF conducts annual Anatolian Eagle exercises - one version is national, for TuAF only and the other is international, with friendly air forces. TuAF has honoured the PAF by also letting its pilots fly in the national Anatolian Eagle exercises under Turkish command and wearing Turkish flags and badges. This is a unique honour given only to PAF pilots. The exchange pilots also get to fly TuAF F-16s in the Anatolian Eagle international exercises. So you could have 6 visiting PAF pilots flying their own PAF F-16s and the one PAF exchange pilot flying with the Turks in a TuAF F-16.

Q 16: Any memorable experiences that you would like to share?

A: On one occasion – in one of the international Anatolian Eagles - PAF pilots were pitted against RAF Typhoons, a formidable aircraft. There were three set-ups and in all three, we shot down the Typhoons. The RAF pilots were shocked.

Q 17: Any particular reason for your success?

A: NATO pilots are not that proficient in close-in air-to-air combat. They are trained for BVR engagements and their tactics are based on BVR engagements. These were close-in air combat exercises and we had the upper hand because close-in air combat is drilled into every PAF pilot and this is something we are very good at.

Q 18: Israel has also participated in some Anatolian Eagles. Any opportunity to fly with or against the Israelis?

A: Turkey ensures that the Israeli AF and the PAF are kept as far apart from each other as possible and this has more to do with the Israeli AF’s reluctance to be part of any military exercise involving the PAF than vice versa. The Israelis have told the Turks that they don’t want any Pakistani on or near a base in which the Israelis are stationed.

Q 19: What are the Isrealis afraid of?

A: What they fear most is that we might learn about their tactics, especially BVR countermeasure tactics, which they have mastered.

Q 20: I heard a rumour that the TuAF once gave PAF pilots the opportunity to fly with and against the Israelis in TuAF F-16s pretending to be Turkish pilots – even letting them sit in the Turkish-Israeli ACMI de-briefs?

A: No comments.

Q 21: Are the Turks interested in the JF-17?

A: They are intrigued by it and very happy with what Pakistan has been able to achieve.

Q 22: Any chance of them placing orders?

A: There is no indication of that. They are not in the same situation as us. Being NATO members, they have many choices. They are producing the F-16, so while they are happy for Pakistan, I don’t think they will be purchasing the JF-17 as their requirements are already fulfilled by the F-16.

Q 23: What about replacing their ageing F-5?

A: They will probably replace the F-5s with F-16s and go for the F-35 as their hi-tech fighter.

Q 24: What’s after Turkey?

A: I will transfer to PAF Shahbaz, Jacobabad this summer for conversion to the Block 52s.

Q 25: Who will do the conversion training?

A: The conversion will be done by PAF pilots who are currently undergoing conversion training in the USA and will be returning to Pakistan in a few months time.

Q 26: Do you think you will have an edge over other PAF pilots are being picked from local squadrons?

A: Not only will I have an edge, I will be responsible for assisting the Block 52 instructors based on my experience with the Block 50.

Q 27: The publicly-available videos and photographs recently released by Lockheed Martin show the first PAF Block 52 C/Ds without conformal fuel tanks (CFTs). Can you confirm whether the PAF aircraft are coming with CFTs?

A: Yes. All 18 Block 52s will be fitted with CFTs when they are released to the PAF, which is expected to be in June this year. The CFTs are detachable “add-ons” and it is not necessary for the PAF to always fly with them. The CFTs can be attached and detached to suit PAF’s needs at any given time.

Q 28: One of the stories going around is that the Block 52s are coming with strings attached: (i) the PAF can only base them in one airbase, Jacobabad; (ii) they cannot be used for offensive operations beyond Pakistan’s borders; (iii) some sort of monitoring mechanisms will be put in place to monitor the location of each aircraft and (iv) PAF cannot take them outside Pakistan without the permission of the US. Are these correct?

A: To some extent, yes. However, it is important to understand the background to these conditions.
When the PAF asked for the Block 52, the initial US reaction was “no”. Their main concern was that if this potent technology could be released to Pakistan, sooner or later, it would end up in the hands of the Chinese who would reverse engineer it. It was the PAF that offered a solution. We could place the Block 52s in a separate airbase where the Chinese would have no access. This meant an airbase that had no Chinese aircraft. We could not base them in Sargodha because we would not deny the Chinese access to our most important airbase. Jacobabad was a forward base which had been revamped by the Americans for Operation Enduring Freedom, including a new first-class runway, so it was the first choice. The US agreed to this proposal provided that it would have the right to monitor the aircraft.

To recall an interesting little story: soon after the first F-16s were delivered to Pakistan in the mid-80s, the PLAAF Chief visited Sargodha. The Americans were there as well. As a gesture of courtesy, the PAF showed the PLAAF Chief one of the F-16s and let him sit in the cockpit. Some US technicians were there looking on. As soon as the PLAAF Chief sat in the F-16 cockpit, the first thing he did was to start measuring the HUD with his fingers, you know, when you extend your little finger and thumb to measure something? This worried the Americans.

Q 29: What are the monitoring mechanisms? I have heard they will have US personnel stationed at Jacobabad?

A: The US personnel stationed at Jacobabad will be transitional. They will be training PAF aircrew on the maintenance of the Block 52. Most of these US personnel will be from Lockheed Martin. The US does not need to have personnel physically present in Jacobabad to monitor the Block 52s.

Q 30: Could you elaborate?

A: They have ways of keeping an eye on the Block 52s without being personally present. The main concern is the transfer of cutting-edge technology – the avionics and radar, the Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System (JHMCS) the Sniper pod. They have put digital seals all the sensitive technologies, which can only be opened via a code, which only they know. If there is a malfunction or these parts need to be serviced, they will be taken out of the Block 52s and shipped back to the US for repairs/servicing. If we try to pry open these systems without the codes, inbuilt alarms will be relayed to the Americans, which will be a breach of the contract.

Q 31: Will the Americans be able to track the locations of the Block 52s through some sort of tracking devices hidden inside the aircraft?

A: If there are tracking devices then they will be inside the sealed systems, like the avionics suites or the sniper pods because we will not have the ability to look inside. If their Predator and Reaper drones are transmitting their GPS locations via satellite so can a Block 52 F-16.

Even though Turkey produces the F-16, there are some components that are manufactured in the US and only come to Turkey for the final assembly. In one incident, a Turkish Block 50 crashed and the pilot was killed. They salvaged the wreckage and laid it out in hanger and started putting together the pieces to find out the cause. They found a piece of sealed equipment which had cracked open and inside they found some device that looked like a bug. Upon inquiry, it turned out to be a tracking device.

Q 32: Doesn’t that worry the PAF?

A: I’m sure it does. However, the PAF considers the Block 52 a “bonus” aircraft. We are not depending on it for our entire air defence. It is a temporary force multiplier until we have enough squadrons of JF-17s and FC-20s. The opportunity to know what the latest technology is capable of is enough justification to purchase these aircraft.

Q 33: If the PAF cannot cross the border with these Block 52, what is the purpose of the Sniper pods and the air-to-ground munitions that we are getting?

A: Those are for use against terrorists who are waging a war against Pakistan. The fact is that the Block 52s will give us the capability to mount successful counter insurgency operations against terrorists taking shelter in the tribal areas.

http://www.paffalcons.com/specials/paf-viper-pilot.php

Rupesh · Post by **Rupesh** » 15 Apr 2011 03:00

^^^
Ramin
Thanks for posting

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 15 Apr 2011 04:19

I honestly thought that the rumors about US oversight with regard to the new block 52s and limitations on use were just that - rumors, and that no self respecting AF would tolerate such intrusions. But this is a real eye opener.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 15 Apr 2011 08:01

Now, we ALL can sleep well:

Q 33: If the PAF cannot cross the border with these Block 52, what is the purpose of the Sniper pods and the air-to-ground munitions that we are getting?

A: Those are for use against terrorists who are waging a war against Pakistan. The fact is that the Block 52s will give us the capability to mount successful counter insurgency operations against terrorists taking shelter in the tribal areas.

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 15 Apr 2011 08:23

Good idea about what bugs/tracing devices etc. to expect in US stuff

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 15 Apr 2011 08:30

very informative and frank interview. thanks for posting. sets at rest many speculations and theories. also gives us a heads up on the kind of things we can expect for F-18 MRCA - hope the IAF is aware of it

if they can have a transmitter beacon inside sealed housing, they can for sure have a receiver too - to nicely degrade and render the a/c ineffective by say crashing its radar SW so that the plane is grounded until that unit is sent back to US. nice. Unkil has his fingers in every orifice and wrapped around gonads of client - all they need is to modulate the pressure.

gives me a cold chill though - gripenNG/Rafale/Tiffy anything but F-18!!

the F-16 pilots seem to be the praetorian guard/Persian Immortals of the PAF system - I am not aware of the IAF imposing 100s of hrs prior exp thing on pilots before they can join a "premier" ac squadron?

sum · Post by **sum** » 15 Apr 2011 09:30

^^ Woah, the all-seeing Amir-khan rumour is true indeed. Wonder how many such bugs are in the C-130J and P-8I?

The Israelis have told the Turks that they don’t want any Pakistani on or near a base in which the Israelis are stationed.

Maybe its the fear of the Chinese which makes the Israelis keep the Poaks away

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Apr 2011 09:42

I think we need to look at American restrictions in perspective. The US is a predominant power, but not a stupid one. They will disallow Pakistan from using those F-16 against American interest but will allow those same F-16s to be used if what the Pakis do with them is in American interest.

Now parse that and see what it means for India. It means that is India was in a war with Pakistan, those F-16s could be used against us if it was in American interest to allow such usage. That means that if India fights a war with Pakistan we have to first check whether our war is for or against American interest to see what sort of force levels Pakistan can muster.

Amazing how the USA can coolly keep India in partial check merely by having a hand inside Pakistan's underpants.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 15 Apr 2011 09:45

shiv wrote:Amazing how the USA can coolly keep India in partial check merely by having a hand inside Pakistan's underpants.

They have been doing that for the past 50 odd years and quite effective at it.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 15 Apr 2011 10:39

hmmm, why is it that the 'interview' doesn't have the name or rank of the pilot ? esp given the 'we shot down 3 EF typhoons' bragging and the rather frank revelations, I kind of doubt the authenticity.

astal · Post by **astal** » 15 Apr 2011 10:55

Ramin wrote:Interview: Pakistan Air Force Viper Pilot

... snip
Q 16: Any memorable experiences that you would like to share?

A: On one occasion – in one of the international Anatolian Eagles - PAF pilots were pitted against RAF Typhoons, a formidable aircraft. There were three set-ups and in all three, we shot down the Typhoons. The RAF pilots were shocked
...snip

http://www.paffalcons.com/specials/paf-viper-pilot.php

Interesting, but is this verified externally? The Typhoons are supposed to be excellent Fighter aircraft. Theoretically would it not be difficult for an F-16 block 50 to defeat an EF-2000? Perhaps the Scenarios were one sided or the Typhoons were lacking good anti aircraft missiles.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 15 Apr 2011 11:08

I agree with Shiv. no way does this mean those F-16s cannot be used against India. mostly Pak will not initiate a open war with india, and the remote chance, only realistic change is that India opens a war, perhaps in retaliation for a joint Sino-Pak project taking a bite out of J&K. ... in that instance the self-defence argument fully applies and the F16s will be in action.

the only function of the tracking devices is to prevent some modules from being pilfered and sold to china or russia - as stated. that and nothing more. pak is not stupid enough to send them off in a crusade against israel.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 15 Apr 2011 11:21

"PAF Blk 52 cannot cross border." No where it mentioned that if their borders are breached, then it cannot be used within Pakistan. So it means it can be used against India. They can initiate a war with Chinese supplied aircrafts.

The Typhoon he mentioned can be aimed @our MMRCA. Had Paki's downed Typhoons sitting in older F solah's, Saudhis could have been alarmed. Take that with salt.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 15 Apr 2011 11:26

Who would verify such things , MKI have shot F-16 in many exercise with other AF but then beyond word of mouth , no one can verify it.

It is not impossible to for F-16 Blk 50 to defeat a Typhoon in WVR combat on a given day , recall when our folks went to france they did mention that the French were better in BVR and we in WVR , because the former practices more of BVR combat and tactics.

Most certainly the F-16 can well be used against India as well as against taliban , but with the tracking system built it , US would be able to keep track and ID the aircraft aircraft along with the type be it F-16 ,P-3C or C-130/P-8I in a real combat and build a bigger picture of who is doing what and where and if time comes they can either pass that kind of information to either parties depending who is fighting for US interest or simply use it to their benefit in real combat.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 15 Apr 2011 12:29

Here is some pandu logic.

Older F-16 shot down EF, Brit EF shot down F-22. So Paki f solah can shoot down f-22. AOA, please don't take me seriously.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 15 Apr 2011 13:34

this i thought was the most revealing statement in the paf f16 pilot interview - its not new to BRF, but nice to see it corroborated (if the source is credible)

To some extent, yes. However, it is important to understand the background to these conditions.
When the PAF asked for the Block 52, the initial US reaction was “no”. Their main concern was that if this potent technology could be released to Pakistan, sooner or later, it would end up in the hands of the Chinese who would reverse engineer it. It was the PAF that offered a solution. We could place the Block 52s in a separate airbase where the Chinese would have no access. This meant an airbase that had no Chinese aircraft. We could not base them in Sargodha because we would not deny the Chinese access to our most important airbase. Jacobabad was a forward base which had been revamped by the Americans for Operation Enduring Freedom, including a new first-class runway, so it was the first choice. The US agreed to this proposal provided that it would have the right to monitor the aircraft.

paquis are getting one in the mouth and one in the musharraf at the same time
no wonder the mango abdul is revolting!

sum · Post by **sum** » 15 Apr 2011 14:16

^^ Loved this part:

To recall an interesting little story: soon after the first F-16s were delivered to Pakistan in the mid-80s, the PLAAF Chief visited Sargodha. The Americans were there as well. As a gesture of courtesy, the PAF showed the PLAAF Chief one of the F-16s and let him sit in the cockpit. Some US technicians were there looking on.

All watching Unkil....

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 15 Apr 2011 14:18

unkil had peeps in sarghoda since the first f16's came
they have to sign-off that all eez vell every day
mostly they used to go pig sticking and whiskey drinking in cantt. clubs
but now days i suppose they have more to do

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Apr 2011 15:19

astal wrote: Interesting, but is this verified externally? The Typhoons are supposed to be excellent Fighter aircraft. Theoretically would it not be difficult for an F-16 block 50 to defeat an EF-2000? Perhaps the Scenarios were one sided or the Typhoons were lacking good anti aircraft missiles.

Or the PAF pilots were good, as they are reputed to be?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Apr 2011 15:21

chackojoseph wrote:Here is some pandu logic.

Older F-16 shot down EF, Brit EF shot down F-22. So Paki f solah can shoot down f-22. AOA, please don't take me seriously.

No. Actually JF 17 has shot down F-22 (On YouTube)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXinpChdW4M

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 15 Apr 2011 16:09

^^^^ Now nothing save the Hindus. AOA. After all Pakis Dil is made in China.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 15 Apr 2011 21:53

sum wrote:^^ Loved this part:
To recall an interesting little story: soon after the first F-16s were delivered to Pakistan in the mid-80s, the PLAAF Chief visited Sargodha. The Americans were there as well. As a gesture of courtesy, the PAF showed the PLAAF Chief one of the F-16s and let him sit in the cockpit. Some US technicians were there looking on.
All watching Unkil....

Unkil has a secret understanding with PRC. How is it possible to have a Trillion dollor business between US and PRC without such previledges

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 15 Apr 2011 22:00

Lalmohan wrote:this i thought was the most revealing statement in the paf f16 pilot interview - its not new to BRF, but nice to see it corroborated (if the source is credible)

Jacobabad was a forward base which had been revamped by the Americans for Operation Enduring Freedom, including a new first-class runway, so it was the first choice. The US agreed to this proposal provided that it would have the right to monitor the aircraft.

paquis are getting one in the mouth and one in the musharraf at the same time
no wonder the mango abdul is revolting!

What is revealing is that in the name of WOT the infrastructure and quality of the Pakistan war machine is being upgraded. This is to bring them to level of a good war readiness against another standing army and not just rag tag = Taliban or Al Q

That is the kind of perfidity which is going on.

Ramin · Post by **Ramin** » 15 Apr 2011 23:51

works for them pretty well though....

by the way what does ''poaks'' mean