India Lucky Not To Lose More Than Four Rafales

[side-winder]

His subordinates are as shameless and lack dignity just like him

So I don't think he faces any issues while facing other IAF officers

Wanna know a little fun thing? Apologies to anyone who feels offended.

This punishment is very common in all armed forces' training academies. Body weight on head with ass wide and up.

Guess what they call it at PAF academy? "indians"

 

[airomerix]

I have no issues with claims and counter claims.

The idea or the proposal of count of aircraft is a juvenile one. And the cheerleader party wants only the counting of aircraft.
Should it be restricted to aircraft or an inventory of each and every claim be verified? And who would do it?

Would Pakistan or India allow a third party access to various secure facilities to verify the claims of the other side? Some of these could be highly classified. I doubt that.

This challenge of only the aircraft count is with a hope that Indian government would officially accept the losses. It ain’t happening. If they had to, then it would have already happened.

The loss of Saab came out due to that interview by the retired Air Marshal. ISPR had only accepted loss of life and damage to equipment.
I doubt that Pakistan would come out with exact list of damages to other assets either.

I do not believe that attack on that hangar would wipe out an entire F-16 Squadron but it is highly possible to have a couple of aircraft under maintenance in that hangar.

ISPR hasn’t come out with exact details of damages at Nur Khan and other bases. At Nur Khan, it was your input that a fuel truck had caught fire.

I do not expect or demand the exact nature of damages because of obvious reasons.

Not defending Indian government’s refusal to declare the number of fighters lost. Just describing the futility of this head count demand.

If you think during war time PAF would station its HVAA assets inside a standard hangar then probably this subject (defense) is beyond you.

If some folks remember, it was PAF's learning from Kamra Attack 'not' to flock HVAA assets 'together' and inside standard hangars during high alert periods.

Now what is HVAA? F-16s, J-10s, C-130s, SAABs, Falcon and ZDKs are considered HVAA.

F-7s, Mirages and JF-17s are not.

Now coming to PAFs losses- all the losses parroted by your media, government and surplus naalyak defense experts is a list of 'wish list' that you wanted destroyed because:

a) To save your own reputation (tit for tat- tits are your rafales going bluster)
b) Underscoring Pakistans limited financial muscle to re-acquire these HVAA assets)

Now coming to the facts of the losses as an inside.

1) Saab 2000s (0 damaged, 0 destroyed- all airframes are serviceable)
2) C-130s (0 damaged, 0 destroyed- all airframes are serviceable)
3) F-16s (0 damaged, 0 destroyed- all airframes are serviceable)
4) ZDKS (0 damaged, 0 destroyed- all airframes are serviceable)

PAF Asset Damage

1) Wing/Wing root damage to 1x JF-17 Block 2 due to falling hangar debris at Bholari - The aircraft since has been repaired at Kamra and will be soon joining the squadron. Pakistan manufactures the JF-17 wings inhouse- News flash.

Isnt it odd, that your defense experts believe a SAAB was damaged at Bholari, where as your Air Chief believes to have shot down one 'large aircraft' that was airborne by an S400. lol. Even your misinformation campaign is not on the same page because lies dont have feet.

Digest this. Come back again if you'll have questions.

 

[Hayabusa]

If you think during war time PAF would station its HVAA assets inside a standard hangar then probably this subject (defense) is beyond you.

If some folks remember, it was PAF's learning from Kamra Attack 'not' to flock HVAA assets 'together' and inside standard hangars during high alert periods.

Now what is HVAA? F-16s, J-10s, C-130s, SAABs, Falcon and ZDKs are considered HVAA.

F-7s, Mirages and JF-17s are not.

Now coming to PAFs losses- all the losses parroted by your media, government and surplus naalyak defense experts is a list of 'wish list' that you wanted destroyed because:

a) To save your own reputation (tit for tat- tits are your rafales going bluster)
b) Underscoring Pakistans limited financial muscle to re-acquire these HVAA assets)

Now coming to the facts of the losses as an inside.

1) Saab 2000s (0 damaged, 0 destroyed- all airframes are serviceable)
2) C-130s (0 damaged, 0 destroyed- all airframes are serviceable)
3) F-16s (0 damaged, 0 destroyed- all airframes are serviceable)
4) ZDKS (0 damaged, 0 destroyed- all airframes are serviceable)

PAF Asset Damage

1) Wing/Wing root damage to 1x JF-17 Block 2 due to falling hangar debris at Bholari - The aircraft since has been repaired at Kamra and will be soon joining the squadron. Pakistan manufactures the JF-17 wings inhouse- News flash.

Isnt it odd, that your defense experts believe a SAAB was damaged at Bholari, where as your Air Chief believes to have shot down one 'large aircraft' that was airborne by an S400. lol. Even your misinformation campaign is not on the same page because lies dont have feet.

Digest this. Come back again if you'll have questions.

Where are you getting your source from that JF-17 wing was damaged?

 

[side-winder]

If you think during war time PAF would station its HVAA assets inside a standard hangar then probably this subject (defense) is beyond you.

If some folks remember, it was PAF's learning from Kamra Attack 'not' to flock HVAA assets 'together' and inside standard hangars during high alert periods.

Now what is HVAA? F-16s, J-10s, C-130s, SAABs, Falcon and ZDKs are considered HVAA.

F-7s, Mirages and JF-17s are not.

Now coming to PAFs losses- all the losses parroted by your media, government and surplus naalyak defense experts is a list of 'wish list' that you wanted destroyed because:

a) To save your own reputation (tit for tat- tits are your rafales going bluster)
b) Underscoring Pakistans limited financial muscle to re-acquire these HVAA assets)

Now coming to the facts of the losses as an inside.

1) Saab 2000s (0 damaged, 0 destroyed- all airframes are serviceable)
2) C-130s (0 damaged, 0 destroyed- all airframes are serviceable)
3) F-16s (0 damaged, 0 destroyed- all airframes are serviceable)
4) ZDKS (0 damaged, 0 destroyed- all airframes are serviceable)

PAF Asset Damage

1) Wing/Wing root damage to 1x JF-17 Block 2 due to falling hangar debris at Bholari - The aircraft since has been repaired at Kamra and will be soon joining the squadron. Pakistan manufactures the JF-17 wings inhouse- News flash.

Isnt it odd, that your defense experts believe a SAAB was damaged at Bholari, where as your Air Chief believes to have shot down one 'large aircraft' that was airborne by an S400. lol. Even your misinformation campaign is not on the same page because lies dont have feet.

Digest this. Come back again if you'll have questions.

Dude your own post is full of inaccurate statements :-

1. ZDKs are not HVAs. No ZDK is being used as AWACS.

2. SAAB damage is real and fact. The one aircraft that AVM Aurangzeb mentioned in press briefing on 11th was actually SAAB at Bholari.

3. IAF Chief claimed to have shot down large body aircraft in air in addition to 1 SAAB on ground at Bholari.

4. You have been gravely misinformed about the JF-17 and only feeding more propaganda to indians who already believe there were fighters in hangars. No fighters were inside the hangars at Jacobabad, Sukkur and Bholari. You go on making claims of wing damage due to falling debris is itself illogical. The debris fell around the entry point of missile only. An aircraft anywhere at that location won't just suffer wing damage. The only aircraft hit was SAAB and not JF-17.

5. What's the logic of JF-17 not qualifying as HVA while putting every other frontline fighter in HVA league. Does it come free of cost? Or is it because of "indigenous stuff"?

Welcome back to forum - btw.

 

[Panzerkiel]

I seriously wonder how the IAF's Chief goes around showing his face to his own officers and Air Force personnel after making blatantly false statements which would not be known to the general public but would definately be known to most of the IAF personnel.

Haven't you heard regarding half a dozen IAF officers who were arrested immediately after MeH? Reports are that they spoke a bit more passionately in front of IAF chief during one of visits....

 

[airomerix]

Dude your own post is full of inaccurate statements :-

1. ZDKs are not HVAs. No ZDK is being used as AWACS.

2. SAAB damage is real and fact. The one aircraft that AVM Aurangzeb mentioned in press briefing on 11th was actually SAAB at Bholari.

3. IAF Chief claimed to have shot down large body aircraft in air in addition to 1 SAAB on ground at Bholari.

4. You have been gravely misinformed about the JF-17 and only feeding more propaganda to indians who already believe there were fighters in hangars. No fighters were inside the hangars at Jacobabad, Sukkur and Bholari. You go on making claims of wing damage due to falling debris is itself illogical. The debris fell around the entry point of missile only. An aircraft anywhere at that location won't just suffer wing damage. The only aircraft hit was SAAB and not JF-17.

5. What's the logic of JF-17 not qualifying as HVA while putting every other frontline fighter in HVA league. Does it come free of cost? Or is it because of "indigenous stuff"?

Welcome back to forum - btw.

Inaccurate for you maybe. I dont blame you. Its okay.

1) You're mistaken. ZDKs had their fair share of reliability issues. Doesn't mean Pakistan will let go 4 assets that gives it eyes in the skies. KJ-500 will be its replacement and its not here yet.

2) Isnt it funny. You're accusing me of feeding into enemys narrative yet you're doing the same thing. AVM mentioned no such thing. Unless you're quoting a dubbed version by the likes of republic tv.

3) So what?

4) Lets agree to disagree. Try visiting an operational PAF base some day. I do not want to educate you on how, when and where HVAA assets are stationed.

5) I have a better idea, lets call everything HVAA because it costs something. You're missing the point. Force multipliers that are difficult to obtain are classified as HVAA. It took Pakistan decades to acquire additional C-130 despite having the money, i'm sure you're aware of the F-16 saga, Sweden is under pressure from India not to sell any more AEW&Cs- we are still awaiting a few more systems to modify the remaining Saabs that were acquired recently from commercial operators. All this makes these assets HVAA. So yes, they are expensive, both diplomatically and financially.

 

[Trailer23]

Inaccurate for you maybe. I dont blame you. Its okay.

1) You're mistaken. ZDKs had their fair share of reliability issues. Doesn't mean Pakistan will let go 4 assets that gives it eyes in the skies. KJ-500 will be its replacement and its not here yet.

2) Isnt it funny. You're accusing me of feeding into enemys narrative yet you're doing the same thing. AVM mentioned no such thing. Unless you're quoting a dubbed version by the likes of republic tv.

3) So what?

4) Lets agree to disagree. Try visiting an operational PAF base some day. I do not want to educate you on how, when and where HVAA assets are stationed.

5) I have a better idea, lets call everything HVAA because it costs something. You're missing the point. Force multipliers that are difficult to obtain are classified as HVAA. It took Pakistan decades to acquire additional C-130 despite having the money, i'm sure you're aware of the F-16 saga, Sweden is under pressure from India not to sell any more AEW&Cs- we are still awaiting a few more systems to modify the remaining Saabs that were acquired recently from commercial operators. All this makes these assets HVAA. So yes, they are expensive, both diplomatically and financially.

Well..., look at what the cat dragged in...

Its been a while. Why'd it take you so long to signup?

​

@Waz

 

[Trailer23]

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

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

​

@Oscar @Waz @Windjammer @Irfan Baloch @Agnostic Muslim
@airomerix @airwolf137 @Ali_Baba @alphapak @Arsalan45 @Areesh @ARMalik @Aziqbal @baqai @Bilal @Bratva @Cookie Monster @Dalit @DESERT FIGHTER @Dil Pakistan @Distant_Observer @Falcon26 @FuturePAF @GriffinsRule @Gripen9 @HRK @HAIDER @Hakikat ve Hikmet @I*R*A @Jango @Jungibaaz @Khanivore @Khansaheeb @KingQamaR @Liquidator @M. Sarmad @Maarkhoor @Master Chief @Meengla @Mobius @maverick @Mighty_Dragon_Strike @Mrc @mythbuster @NA71 @NGAD IS THE BEST @Olympus81 @PakAl @Pak Defender @PakistaniDefender @PakShaheen79 @Path-Finder @Panzerkiel @peagle @PK781 @pwfi @r3alist @Raja Porus @redgriffin @Reichmarshal @SaadH @SD 10 @side-winder @SiliconBit (silicon0000) @SteppeWolff @StormBreaker @Starlord @super falcon @TAC @That_Guy @TOPGUN @TopGun786 @Truth Seeker @UndercoverJIX @Vapnope @Vortex @Yasser76 @Zarvan

 

[Oscar]

I have no issues with claims and counter claims.

The idea or the proposal of count of aircraft is a juvenile one. And the cheerleader party wants only the counting of aircraft.
Should it be restricted to aircraft or an inventory of each and every claim be verified? And who would do it?

Would Pakistan or India allow a third party access to various secure facilities to verify the claims of the other side? Some of these could be highly classified. I doubt that.

This challenge of only the aircraft count is with a hope that Indian government would officially accept the losses. It ain’t happening. If they had to, then it would have already happened.

The loss of Saab came out due to that interview by the retired Air Marshal. ISPR had only accepted loss of life and damage to equipment.
I doubt that Pakistan would come out with exact list of damages to other assets either.

I do not believe that attack on that hangar would wipe out an entire F-16 Squadron but it is highly possible to have a couple of aircraft under maintenance in that hangar.

ISPR hasn’t come out with exact details of damages at Nur Khan and other bases. At Nur Khan, it was your input that a fuel truck had caught fire.

I do not expect or demand the exact nature of damages because of obvious reasons.

Not defending Indian government’s refusal to declare the number of fighters lost. Just describing the futility of this head count demand.

But here you have an airforce with a history of allowing headcounts - including back in 71 when India claimed Mirages - and one that is obfuscating it.

You cannot hide a damaged F-16 that easily. I have a picture from Bholari - someone I call an elder brother since I was 18 was 100 meters from it and spoke about it here first.

Jacobabad isn’t a case of F-16s in Hangar for maintenance - they all go to hardened shelters regardless of status. Its standard operating procedure not a happenstance.

Now if IAF never considered how big its shelters were when it ordered the MKi that is IAFs problem but your jaguars and other frontline deployed aircraft sit in hardened shelters regardless of their status and any maintenance is the performed there.

So it is not a case of “might be some” - operational practices within the PAF make that a highly unlikely outcome.

Now the Saab is a big aircraft - PAF doesn’t have a hardened shelter for it and they made a mistake by leaving it at Bholari and not moving it to the rear so it was impacted.

Your problem is you want to walk the line between balance and also giving your country credit which is fine and we all do but plain probability based on routine isn’t favorable when making F-16 claims.

 

[Oscar]

If you think during war time PAF would station its HVAA assets inside a standard hangar then probably this subject (defense) is beyond you.

If some folks remember, it was PAF's learning from Kamra Attack 'not' to flock HVAA assets 'together' and inside standard hangars during high alert periods.

Now what is HVAA? F-16s, J-10s, C-130s, SAABs, Falcon and ZDKs are considered HVAA.

F-7s, Mirages and JF-17s are not.

Now coming to PAFs losses- all the losses parroted by your media, government and surplus naalyak defense experts is a list of 'wish list' that you wanted destroyed because:

a) To save your own reputation (tit for tat- tits are your rafales going bluster)
b) Underscoring Pakistans limited financial muscle to re-acquire these HVAA assets)

Now coming to the facts of the losses as an inside.

1) Saab 2000s (0 damaged, 0 destroyed- all airframes are serviceable)
2) C-130s (0 damaged, 0 destroyed- all airframes are serviceable)
3) F-16s (0 damaged, 0 destroyed- all airframes are serviceable)
4) ZDKS (0 damaged, 0 destroyed- all airframes are serviceable)

PAF Asset Damage

1) Wing/Wing root damage to 1x JF-17 Block 2 due to falling hangar debris at Bholari - The aircraft since has been repaired at Kamra and will be soon joining the squadron. Pakistan manufactures the JF-17 wings inhouse- News flash.

Isnt it odd, that your defense experts believe a SAAB was damaged at Bholari, where as your Air Chief believes to have shot down one 'large aircraft' that was airborne by an S400. lol. Even your misinformation campaign is not on the same page because lies dont have feet.

Digest this. Come back again if you'll have questions.

I believe it was Saab that was hit.
Have first hand account of the hangar hit - including confirmation of loss of life.

You can ascertain which aircraft was hit by correlation of which unit the martyrs belonged to.

 

[Olympus81]

What was the extent of the Saab AWACS damage at Bholari?

From what I hear, there was damage to the wing.

 

[TAC]

But here you have an airforce with a history of allowing headcounts - including back in 71 when India claimed Mirages - and one that is obfuscating it.

You cannot hide a damaged F-16 that easily. I have a picture from Bholari - someone I call an elder brother since I was 18 was 100 meters from it and spoke about it here first.

Jacobabad isn’t a case of F-16s in Hangar for maintenance - they all go to hardened shelters regardless of status. Its standard operating procedure not a happenstance.

Now if IAF never considered how big its shelters were when it ordered the MKi that is IAFs problem but your jaguars and other frontline deployed aircraft sit in hardened shelters regardless of their status and any maintenance is the performed there.

So it is not a case of “might be some” - operational practices within the PAF make that a highly unlikely outcome.

Now the Saab is a big aircraft - PAF doesn’t have a hardened shelter for it and they made a mistake by leaving it at Bholari and not moving it to the rear so it was impacted.

Your problem is you want to walk the line between balance and also giving your country credit which is fine and we all do but plain probability based on routine isn’t favorable when making F-16 claims.

Your knowledge, contacts, insights and honest reporting & that of members like you makes this forum what it is. Can never be enough gratitude for u all.

 

[TAC]

What was the extent of the Saab AWACS damage at Bholari?

From what I hear, there was damage to the wing.

Oscar previously confirmed it was to the nose area and would cost $1m tops to repair. PAF was very lucky.

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

Wanna know a little fun thing? Apologies to anyone who feels offended.

This punishment is very common in all armed forces' training academies. Body weight on head with ass wide and up.

Guess what they call it at PAF academy? "indians"

View attachment 144272

It's no easy punishment by the by! In my cadet college days we had a sadistic adjutant fresh from the COIN ops at the Chittagong Hill Tracts. He used to generously shower such punishment on us....

 

[side-winder]

It's no easy punishment by the by

Yes Lol. Have the honor of going through it countless times, too. Fun days - though.