Pakistan-India Conflict 2025: News Updates and Discussion

[Psyko70]

Ahm ahm.... dam

 

[hasssanali8998]

fair trade they get aq special, we get f35

 

[ghazi52]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[hasssanali8998]

ust because you put a few holes in the ground it doesnt mean PAF is disabled.. PAF has many runway repair teams as an example

even if you disable all the runways PAF just like any other modern AF trains to use public roads to take off .
only way to disable a af is to do what paf did to iaf at Pathankot

 

[LC150]

even if you disable all the runways PAF just like any other modern AF trains to use public roads to take off .
only way to disable a af is to do what paf did to iaf at Pathankot

correct

more importantly if you studied Battle of Britain , German attacks on run ways didnt do much... what they should have attack was hangers that planes under repair, supply depots, fuel dumps , spare part centre etc. like Israelis did in 1967

ie destroy the airforce capacity to make war...

IAF was unable to do that be it with it's missile force.

 

[ghazi52]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Corax]

The fact is that neither side can really do much damage to the other - PAF's technical and tactical superiority is offset by larger mass of the IAF, and IADS on both sides limits the effectiveness of long range ground based weapons. Both sides will claim tactical victory for every hit, but however many times you play out this scenario, neither side can achieve an overwhelming outcome on the other, which leaves both sides claiming victory based on "damage scores", and on that account Pakistan comes out ahead given the number of assets destroyed, whereas the indians didn't destroy any assets, just minor damage to infrastructure, which is easier and quicker to repair and replace than assets such as expensive fighters.

 

[ghazi52]

 

[Corax]

This was by far the most significant practical and real achievement of the IAF in the conflict in that they managed to take out Sarghoda airbase for a few hours of flight operations while its main runway was repaired. Look at the strike below, that hurt. Given how large Sarghoda and important is to the PAF, the fact that it only has 1 main runway (and 1 child runway that for some odd reason crosses the same main runway), is strategically significant. The missile landed at the intersection of the two. Pakistan needs to rethink the design of this base, and other bases by adding additional parallel runways to minimise the possibility that flight operations are not halted ( pretending you can use "taxi ways" is absurd, they are far too narrow to be used..).

In the age of ultra precise SOW, base design needs to be revisited for the PAF given it has no strategic depth, and missiles like Storm Shadow have changed the game alot. There needs to be runway redundancy built in now.

View attachment 160681

Look at how well the Nevatim Airbase is designed, that is what Pakistan needs to start moving towards (Iraq had very good airbases that took very sustained and precise operations of a long period of time to take out because of their design).

View attachment 160683

The Al Udeid Airbase is very well design. That is a difficult airbase to knock out.

View attachment 160685

And if you look at all those other air bases, they are in remote regions away from dense population centres. I've always said that the PAF should relocate it's major bases further west in remote regions, preferably surrounded by mountains, as that not only makes it more difficult in terms of low level attack vectors but also reduces the threat of terrorist attacks emanating from population centres. In addition, radars and other sensors, as well as air defence systems, placed on high elevation surrounding air bases provides greater ability to see and defend against incoming attacks by increasing line of sight.

 

[hnn]

The main point we all are missing out on in Pak-Ind conflict is that India used CMs (BrahMos and SCALP-EG) to do the main damage - Pakistan at best only used F1 and F2 (both of which are GMLRS and not CMs)

So Pakistan not only had India pinned down, but did so with using lower tiered systems while India used their highest tier below Nuclear Threshold.

This time around (if it happens) and there will be Lenticular Clouds above India, they won't ever again feel the need to ask for "satellite evidence"

 

[Sam6536]

The main point we all are missing out on in Pak-Ind conflict is that India used CMs (BrahMos and SCALP-EG) to do the main damage - Pakistan at best only used F1 and F2 (both of which are GMLRS and not CMs)

So Pakistan not only had India pinned down, but did so with using lower tiered systems while India uses their highest tier below Nuclear Threshold.

The main thing that matters is the number of such cruise missiles you possess and your industrial capacity to manufacture them. And the economics of scale as they are costly missiles. Brahmos variants have been in production since 2006 or so, there are atleast a couple thousand of such variants in service.

One manufacturing facility solely for production of Brahmos was just set up, second one is one the way.

Brahmos NG and Brahmos 2 which is likely hypersonic is in production. Nirbhay a domestic hypersonic variant has cleared tests recently.

India's ballistic arsenal in Agni, Prithvi and Pralay. These are nuclear equipped missiles with MirV and MarV. Brahmos is a conventional missile.

 

[Ali_Baba]

even if you disable all the runways PAF just like any other modern AF trains to use public roads to take off .
only way to disable a af is to do what paf did to iaf at Pathankot

If the jets are "stuck" at the airbase, they wont be going anywhere else, right ?

 

[hnn]

The main thing that matters is the number of such cruise missiles you possess and your industrial capacity to manufacture them. And the economics of scale as they are costly missiles. Brahmos variants have been in production since 2006 or so, there are atleast a couple thousand of such variants in service.

One manufacturing facility solely for production of Brahmos was just set up, second one is one the way.

Brahmos NG and Brahmos 2 which is likely hypersonic is in production. Nirbhay a domestic hypersonic variant has cleared tests recently.

India's ballistic arsenal in Agni, Prithvi and Pralay.

Why do you people keep on having brain fart moments?

You already used your top tier systems (below Nuclear Threshold), we didn't - but we still came out on top - we brought a knife to a gun fight and still WON - let that reality sink in for a moment

 

[Sam6536]

Why do you people keep on having brain fart moments?

You already used your top tier systems, we didn't - but we still came out on top - we brought a knife to a gun fight and still won - let that reality sink in for a moment

What type of analogy is that?
Why exactly didn't you use your cruise missiles then? Quantity issues?

Also let's consider a hypothetical scenario where in the next round Pakistan launches its cruise missiles, then in a protracted war who would have the advantage? Who has more missiles in stock and a larger industrial footprint to manufacture them in scale?

Then you'd say Brahmos facilities will be targeted and yes then that would lead to equal destruction of Pakistani facilities.

Whenever India and Pakistan have engaged in larger battles India always has has the advantage in the longer run due to geography and basic economies of scale.

That's why Pakistan stresses so much on making any war really costly for India and on MAD. This is to deter India from agression.

 

[hnn]

What type of analogy is that?
Why exactly didn't you use your cruise missiles then? Quantity issues?

Why use a Hook when we can K.O. you with a Jab?

Also let's consider a hypothetical scenario where in the next round Pakistan launches its cruise missiles, then in a protracted war who would have the advantage? Who has more missiles in stock and a larger industrial footprint to manufacture them in scale?

Then you'd say Brahmos facilities will be targeted and yes then that would lead to equal destruction of Pakistani facilities.

Whoever India and Pakistan have engaged in larger battles India always has has the advantage in the longer run due to geography and basic economies of scale.

That's why Pakistan stresses so much on making any war really costly for India and on MAD. This is to deter India from agression.

Yes, you can argue that India has an advantage in the longer conflict but at what cost? It's only a "plus" on papers