India Has Lost Air Superiority to Pakistan, No Jets Left to Fight

[Mighty_Dragon_Strike]

That, with respect, is another debate, we can go into that, but in a short sharp war much of that will not be relevant. So many other variables we could go down another rabbit hole (Saudi money, Pak economy improving, Chinese help etc etc)

For the point of this thread, losing air superiority locally will do two things

1) Enable CAS to Pak Army unhindered
2) Spare many more of our aircraft to go after high level Indian assets (Ground Bhramos, S-400 radars etc)
3) Enable constant bombing of nearby bases that will be left undefended

One also has to remember, the main carrier of Indian long rage missiles will be 30 off SU-30s and 28 odd Rafales. Some of them may not be in service and some will be dedicated to other operational tasks, or in the case of Rafale kept back in reserve to protect these assets
Air launched Bhramos and SCALP numbers will always be limited too.


The flip side is lower tier PAF assets (Mirages and JF-17 I&IIs) can go around striking Indian bases worry free like they did in 2019

of course, not denying the ability to inflict damage.

but, would your answer be the same in coming 3 years given the difference of economic trajectories!


regarding rabbit hole, I hope you realize the dent, the FX rate depreciation on the rupee and our ability to have imports (without any strings from the IMF!)


is that rabbit hole, you want to ignore!


of course, India can be destroyed, and many parts of india can be taken over.... but dont miss the fact, India is not the same economy it was before!


more than that, it has now willingness to shed blood too, I see that as a danger for more, bec. we can misunderstand the realities..


further, the 'short war' argument.... this is wrong from the outset, bec. Pak. has very limited ability to fight long term war..


not denying any Pakistani ability to destroy the enemy....


sorry, i believe in risk neutrality and not in risk aversion!

 

[Yasser76]

of course, not denying the ability to inflict damage.

but, would your answer be the same in coming 3 years given the difference of economic trajectories!


regarding rabbit hole, I hope you realize the dent, the FX rate depreciation on the rupee and our ability to have imports (without any strings from the IMF!)


is that rabbit hole, you want to ignore!


of course, India can be destroyed, and many parts of india can be taken over.... but dont miss the fact, India is not the same economy it was before!


more than that, it has now willingness to shed blood too, I see that as a danger for more, bec. we can misunderstand the realities..


further, the 'short war' argument.... this is wrong from the outset, bec. Pak. has very limited ability to fight long term war..


not denying any Pakistani ability to destroy the enemy....


sorry, i believe in risk neutrality and not in risk aversion!

I dont want to ignore it, and happy to debate it, but then it takes this thread in a different direction when there are so many other threads on that very topic. Nothing to do with risk neutrality, it just makes the thread boring for people.

Anyway, back on topic.....

Lack of local air superiority will mean PAF can use small, shorter ranged and cheaper dumb bombs and LGBs on local IAF and Indian Army assets.
One also has to remember it will mean zero Indian helicopters can be deployed, zero Indian transport aircraft. One also has to take into account the fact that as Chinese air to air supplied missiles increase range IAF will be forced back to say 300-400km.
That will put PAF bases on the very edges of Brhamos/SCALP range. Another major disadvantge will be that warning times for PAF and Pak army will increase, enabling better defensive assets to be employed.

 

[Mighty_Dragon_Strike]

I dont want to ignore it, and happy to debate it, but then it takes this thread in a different direction when there are so many other threads on that very topic. Nothing to do with risk neutrality, it just makes the thread boring for people.

Anyway, back on topic.....

Lack of local air superiority will mean PAF can use small, shorter ranged and cheaper dumb bombs and LGBs on local IAF and Indian Army assets.
One also has to remember it will mean zero Indian helicopters can be deployed, zero Indian transport aircraft. One also has to take into account the fact that as Chinese air to air supplied missiles increase range IAF will be forced back to say 300-400km.
That will put PAF bases on the very edges of Brhamos/SCALP range. Another major disadvantge will be that warning times for PAF and Pak army will increase, enabling better defensive assets to be employed.

yes... a small but important question, to you, who is a military enthusiast ( I gather!)


can PAF ensure, no jets can ever fly from any IAF base?


you and I both know the answer...


further, I have conceded the point, which questions the PAF ability to hurt the enemy. Rather, I was asking, do we have the financial leverage or the economy to wage even a short war?


on that I have said, PAF's air superiority may not last as the enemy is now defining the air war scenarios in a different way..


they succeed or not is a different matter, but the fact, after such a conflict (that pre-supposes we can end such a short conflict on our terms) will we able to exercise our superiority or not, that to me is questionable!


I may be 10000000000% wrong... Im not a military analyst or enthusiast by any means


I do have very minuscule amount to knowledge and experience to understand the practicalities of strategic limitations.

 

[Master Chief]

Because your soldiers are dying at the hands of TTP as TTP thought they can replicate Afghan success against Pakistan. And in KP you just declared an emergency.

Hint: Safest place for Pak soldiers is now India Pak border and LOC for a reason.

I regard TTP as a subsidiary of TTA, so your point is actually pointless. Moreover, I do not dispute that LOC is safe for Pakistani soldiers.

Why stop at LOC?

Indeed, Indian occupied territories in Kashmir are so safe for Pakistani soldiers that the dead ones can be respawned.

 

[Yasser76]

yes... a small but important question, to you, who is a military enthusiast ( I gather!)


can PAF ensure, no jets can ever fly from any IAF base?


you and I both know the answer...


further, I have conceded the point, which questions the PAF ability to hurt the enemy. Rather, I was asking, do we have the financial leverage or the economy to wage even a short war?


on that I have said, PAF's air superiority may not last as the enemy is now defining the air war scenarios in a different way..


they succeed or not is a different matter, but the fact, after such a conflict (that pre-supposes we can end such a short conflict on our terms) will we able to exercise our superiority or not, that to me is questionable!


I may be 10000000000% wrong... Im not a military analyst or enthusiast by any means


I do have very minuscule amount to knowledge and experience to understand the practicalities of strategic limitations.

How is IAF "defining the air war"

That goes against what is actually happening in the real world

The PAF defined the air war on May 7th, pretty damn conclusively, the wreckages of IAF planes proved that. By forcing the enemy to hold back hundreds of miles away and only fire very expensive stand off missiles that we can intercept, PAF has defined the war. Just like in 2019.

So, yes, I think you are 100% wrong in this regard

 

[Master Chief]

How is IAF "defining the air war"

That goes against what is actually happening in the real world

The PAF defined the air war on May 7th, pretty damn conclusively, the wreckages of IAF planes proved that. By forcing the enemy to hold back hundreds of miles away and only fire very expensive stand off missiles that we can intercept, PAF has defined the war. Just like in 2019.

So, yes, I think you are 100% wrong in this regard

By my understanding, PAF clearly defined a no-fly zone for the IAF in May 2025. Just as our civilian authorities are now also defining an ongoing no-fly zone for Indian civilian aircraft.

 

[Yasser76]

By my understanding, PAF clearly defined a no-fly zone for the IAF in May 2025. Just as our civilian authorities are now also defining an ongoing no-fly zone for Indian civilian aircraft.

By their own admission the IAF were grounded until they could "figure things out"....

 

[Mighty_Dragon_Strike]

How is IAF "defining the air war"

That goes against what is actually happening in the real world

The PAF defined the air war on May 7th, pretty damn conclusively, the wreckages of IAF planes proved that. By forcing the enemy to hold back hundreds of miles away and only fire very expensive stand off missiles that we can intercept, PAF has defined the war. Just like in 2019.

So, yes, I think you are 100% wrong in this regard

very happy to concede, as previously mentioned.


now regarding air superiority, which needs to be established in every next engagement.


no, your assumption is not based on very sound assessment.


as can be observed, you (yourself) have admitted, even the presence of air superiority led to firing very expensive missiles(from our/your perspective only!, gutted to say this!)

 

[Yasser76]

very happy to concede, as previously mentioned.


now regarding air superiority, which needs to be established in every next engagement.


no, your assumption is not based on very sound assessment.

Lets agree to disagree on each other's assumptions here, but to use yoru very own words below, I heartily agree with.

"I do have very minuscule amount to knowledge and experience to understand the practicalities of strategic limitations."

 

[Mighty_Dragon_Strike]

Lets agree to disagree on each other's assumptions here, but to use yoru very own words below, I heartily agree with.

"I do have very minuscule amount to knowledge and experience to understand the practicalities of strategic limitations."

-military strategic 'limitations'!

 

[Yasser76]

-military strategic 'limitations'!

To use your own words again.

"Im not a military analyst or enthusiast by any means"

Best we leave it there. we disagree, you think IAF has "defined the air battle" by losing 8 planes, getting grounded and forced deep back into India.

See how hard it is to debate?

Anyway, we can move on now, been nice talking