PAF SAM based Air Defense System - News, Discussion & Updates

[Path-Finder]

I agree with an offensive strategy...but for that Pakistan will have to make smart use of its resources. Pakistan isn't rich enough to compete with India on a one to one basis...
...so I suggest...focus on
- quality and integration(as we saw in 2019 and 2025)
- logistics and supplies(for long drawn out wars where u assume ur production capabilities will suffer..therefore build up large stockpiles of ammunition, artillery shells, stinger and javelin types of shoulder fired cheap missiles, cheap drones, etc).
- for top of the line qualitative edge...this is where Pakistan has to make a focused effort ..bcuz as stated earlier Pakistan can't match nor outspend India. Therefore I suggest Army and Navy going A2AD route...as in have a decent enough capability to hold and bog down any Indian offensive...
...and go all out on beefing up air force. The reason being that IF PAF can achieve air superiority over IAF and maintain that in a long drawn out war(assuming attrition)...then PA and PN will no longer have to just hold the line...and can actually go on the offensive. IA and IN without air cover will lose any quantitative and qualitative advantage they will have initially.

This was how Israel was able to overcome Arab armies when far outnumbered in the past wars.

I agree up till 2 points. Something I have said before, Economy = Security. This upcoming war is going to really light a fire up the arses of those running the country from the shadows. You need money, period. If you run on IMF bailouts and on purpose keep Pakistan poor because in the vicious dog eat dog economy living hand to mouth. The population is kept in control because their day is spent trying to earn a dollar to eat! No money to buy gear is really going to hurt.

This was how Israel was able to overcome Arab armies when far outnumbered in the past wars.

this bastard child killer state runs on the combined strength of the west! they provide everything to prop up this colony. if you study some of the past wars before satellites were about. They would fly SR-71 to provide intel to them! This helping hand has kept them propped up.

 

[CSAW]

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

 

[farooqbhai]

This conflict happened only and only for one reason that conventional asymmetry between two forces grew to such an extent that India got overconfidence on its abilities about decimating Pakistani forces. While Pakistan remained focus on building PAF and PN capabilities by inducting big ticket items like J-10s, Block IIIs, Tughrul class frigate, Hangur class subs, Babar Class corvettes etc. A critical area of ADS got ignored though Pakistan did invest in top tier ADS like HQ-9 as well. With our current defense budget this is what could have been done. But real shortage appeared in our strike strength. Fatah series is good battlefield management weapons or against less defended fixed targets. Pakistan was lacking a credible surface or air launched LACM even in sub-sonic domain let alone supersonic like Brahmos and this is where all the difference in both nation's strike capabilities emerged. Plus, due to obvious issue, Pakistan had to remain very calculated in their strike. If you analyze all the Fatah launched videos you will never find a single launcher that fired all 8 missiles on it. Some fired 3 other 4. I never saw a video where single TEL launched all 8 of its missiles. F-2 was rumoured to be used but I couldn't come across a video of F-2 being used. So, both quality and quantity issues came to the fore on Pakistani side. PAF's performance in strikes is even more opaque. As per Khalid Chishti (former PAF officer) PAF delivered more tonnage in single day on 10th May 2025 than during the entire 17 days long war of 1965. But we never knew what was actually hit? BDA was completely absent from our side which added more frustration and doubts about claims made by Pakistani military.

Alot of SOW/ALCM are there but were not used. Taimur ALCM is there (Raad), on top of that PAF has a plethora of REK kits including Rocket assisted ones and ARM variants which are basically good SOWs too. Mirages have H4 SOWs as well.

Re- Fatah no F2 was used, only F1 was used. Around 3 TELs worth judging by videos, all TELs were fully used. Just because you didnt see it doesn't mean it didn't happen.
Lack of evidence does not and should not be converted into "something was not used or something did not happen".

 

[farooqbhai]

View attachment 132464

"deployed in border areas" that tells you all you need to know that this new piece of information from "OSINT" accounts is fake. In no way are they going to get deployed by 2026.
Imo a more conservative timeline would be that it enters testing by 2026 followed by PAF trials.

 

[farooqbhai]

View attachment 132631

View attachment 132632

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

Im sorry but this does not make sense at all. Neither of these radars are associated in any way with the LOMAD .... Which uses only a Multi function radar, no surveillance radars. We do not have any actual images of the said MFR apart from a place holder CGI image of a Turkish Kalkan radar.

 

[PakShaheen_79]

Taimur ALCM is there (Raad), on top of that PAF has a plethora of REK kits including Rocket assisted ones and ARM variants which are basically good SOWs too. Mirages have H4 SOWs as well.
Re- Fatah no F2 was used, only F1 was used. Around 3 TELs worth judging by videos, all TELs were fully used. Just because you didnt see it doesn't mean it didn't happen.
Lack of evidence does not and should not be converted into "something was not used or something did not happen".
View attachment 132654

You are right about the fact that lack of evidence doesn't mean something hasn't happened. But this too is acceptable to a certain extent. Bigger claims demand some sort of evidence. So far, we only know that F1 made impact on ground with NO confirmation about their actual intended target. Same goes for PAF. Don't you think a claim like made by Air Cmdr (r) Chishti on multiple TV interview must have some visual confirmation like you just post here?

 

[farooqbhai]

You are right about the fact that lack of evidence doesn't mean something hasn't happened. But this too is acceptable to a certain extent. Bigger claims demand some sort of evidence. So far, we only know that F1 made impact on ground with NO confirmation about their actual intended target. Same goes for PAF. Don't you think a claim like made by Air Cmdr (r) Chishti on multiple TV interview must have some visual confirmation like you just post here?

I think that is a far fetched claim in regards to PAF by the Cmdr (r). I might be wrong of course. Sure alot of munitions were used, but by PA and that too on the LOC by Arty units.

Now please stick to thread and move this discussion elsewhere

 

[Psyko70]

"deployed in border areas" that tells you all you need to know that this new piece of information from "OSINT" accounts is fake. In no way are they going to get deployed by 2026.
Imo a more conservative timeline would be that it enters testing by 2026 followed by PAF trials.

They were introduced in 2024. This news that it was deployed in border areas may not be true ( But also could be true ) but the system was first shown in 2024. It was displayed in IDEAS and in service, in IDEAS it was told that it was already in testing trials. Its GAN based radar system I have had good hopes on this. Its testing during 4 day conflict indo pak must have had happened. Getting deployed in border areas is no special thing. Special thing is its our own radar.

 

[farooqbhai]

They were introduced in 2024. This news that it was deployed in border areas may not be true ( But also could be true ) but the system was first shown in 2024. It was displayed in IDEAS and in service, in IDEAS it was told that it was already in testing trials. Its GAN based radar system I have had good hopes on this. Its testing during 4 day conflict indo pak must have had happened. Getting deployed in border areas is no special thing. Special thing is its our own radar.

A sole prototype was built, and the system was still in development at IDEAS, it was undergoing factory trials at the time, but I don't believe the prototype was fully developed.

You do realize there are several other indigenous Radars that are already fully developed and in service such as the GIDS G-RAD surveillance radar and NASTP's SRR.

 

[Psyko70]

A sole prototype was built, and the system was still in development at IDEAS, it was undergoing factory trials at the time, but I don't believe the prototype was fully developed.

You do realize there are several other indigenous Radars that are already fully developed and in service such as the GIDS G-RAD surveillance radar and NASTP's SRR.

I did know there were others but didn't know which one. My point was we have projects in AD role as well. I was absent in that field of knowledge so shared. having GAN based Air surveillance radar is good thing.

 

[vizier]

I think we need to study the situation in Ukraine-Russia war where Ukr uses their ad very effectively and dynamically not allowing Ru planes to enter their airspace and last Iran-israel conflict where israel used ew and other means to break through Iranian static AD vehicles. Russia also has elint to discover Ukraine radars and anti radar missiles as well as very potent ballistic missiles like iskandar to target those locations however Ukraine continiously moves their ad vehicles and radars so Russia cannot find the position of Ukraine radars-ad realtime by spy sats or elint. On the other hand Iran had a longer range more dense AD network but they were mostly static studied for a year by israel to break them one by one. Hopefully Iran gave up on this static ad doctrine by now and moves their ad equipment every hour or less to new locations. It needs dedication and more tiring to move a lot but it is the nature of current ad warfare this should be accepted instead of outdated soviet era static ad installation tactics no matter how dense they are easy to take down.

Defensive mobility and altitude is of higher importance. S300s HQ9s cannot be moved easily every hour though having longer ranges of several hundred kms these dont have defensive mobility. Medium range sams similar to Buk can be moved around frequently and can counter high altitude targets with sufficient ranges. For hunting down male drones a more lightweight system can be developed similar to Irans 358 sam system with electro-optical-ir targeting. Pantsyrs rocket which is 80kg-15km altitude is another option it can be copied and installed to a lightweight platform with electro-optical-iir targeting. Smaller radar vehicles can also be added to the mix to que these systems.

I think both countries Iran and Pakistan have complementing techs. Pakistan invested more on aircraft based air defense whereas Iran on sams based ad. It is a resource allocation issue as it was not possible to do both by both countries. You can sell Jf 17 to Iran and in return some benefits may include like tech-transfer of 358 sam, ciws, khordad or similar Iranian systems that will speed up your indigeneous ad development. Next round India will use more drone-swarm and long range a2g tactics against your airfields to keep your planes on the ground and you need to counter this possibility.

 

[farooqbhai]

I think we need to study the situation in Ukraine-Russia war where Ukr uses their ad very effectively and dynamically not allowing Ru planes to enter their airspace and last Iran-israel conflict where israel used ew and other means to break through Iranian static AD vehicles. Russia also has elint to discover Ukraine radars and anti radar missiles as well as very potent ballistic missiles like iskandar to target those locations however Ukraine continiously moves their ad vehicles and radars so Russia cannot find the position of Ukraine radars-ad realtime by spy sats or elint. On the other hand Iran had a longer range more dense AD network but they were mostly static studied for a year by israel to break them one by one. Hopefully Iran gave up on this static ad doctrine by now and moves their ad equipment every hour or less to new locations. It needs dedication and more tiring to move a lot but it is the nature of current ad warfare this should be accepted instead of outdated soviet era static ad installation tactics no matter how dense they are easy to take down.

Defensive mobility and altitude is of higher importance. S300s HQ9s cannot be moved easily every hour though having longer ranges of several hundred kms these dont have defensive mobility. Medium range sams similar to Buk can be moved around frequently and can counter high altitude targets with sufficient ranges. For hunting down male drones a more lightweight system can be developed similar to Irans 358 sam system with electro-optical-ir targeting. Pantsyrs rocket which is 80kg-15km altitude is another option it can be copied and installed to a lightweight platform with electro-optical-iir targeting. Smaller radar vehicles can also be added to the mix to que these systems.

I think both countries Iran and Pakistan have complementing techs. Pakistan invested more on aircraft based air defense whereas Iran on sams based ad. It is a resource allocation issue as it was not possible to do both by both countries. You can sell Jf 17 to Iran and in return some benefits may include like tech-transfer of 358 sam, ciws, khordad or similar Iranian systems that will speed up your indigeneous ad development. Next round India will use more drone-swarm and long range a2g tactics against your airfields to keep your planes on the ground and you need to counter this possibility.

Flawed. First of all dude stop sending text walls here. Iran does not have dense Mid to long range SAM at all. They had a handful of batteries of S300s complemented by barely 5-6 more batteries of there homegrown Mid to long range AD like Bavar 373 and Sayyad-XX(8x8 one). Iranian Air defense simply didn't have the quantity at all. If anything Pakistan has more AD than Iran when PAF, PA and PN AD is combined.

Forget S300 as we don't field it, why can't HQ9P/BE not be moved ? Do you have any evidence to support it ? How do you know HQ9 batteries weren't relocating during the recent Pk-Ind conflict? (Hint They were relocating and there's videos of that apart from HQ16s too)

 

[vizier]

Flawed. First of all dude stop sending text walls here. Iran does not have dense Mid to long range SAM at all. They had a handful of batteries of S300s complemented by barely 5-6 more batteries of there homegrown Mid to long range AD like Bavar 373 and Sayyad-XX(8x8 one). Iranian Air defense simply didn't have the quantity at all. If anything Pakistan has more AD than Iran when PAF, PA and PN AD is combined.

Forget S300 as we don't field it, why can't HQ9P/BE not be moved ? Do you have any evidence to support it ? How do you know HQ9 batteries weren't relocating during the recent Pk-Ind conflict? (Hint They were relocating and there's videos of that apart from HQ16s too)

Last year after Tp2 they managed to fend off israeli attack that includes almost everything. That negates your argument that they have only several ad sites. This time israel created an opening and destroyed much of their sam batteries through entering from those openings.

S300-HQ9 is maneuvrable but setting it up takes time with all those different radar vehicles. They can maneuver several times whereas medium range batteries can move more frequently in same time period. If they moved so easily we wouldnt be seeing too many S300 destruction videos in Crimea. But moving them even once in a while is better than statically using them that is true. HQ16s are more manuvrable lightweight systems.

 

[farooqbhai]

Last year after Tp2 they managed to fend off israeli attack that includes almost everything. That negates your argument that they have only several ad sites. This time israel created an opening and destroyed much of their sam batteries through entering from those openings.

S300-HQ9 is maneuvrable but setting it up takes time with all those different radar vehicles. They can maneuver several times whereas medium range batteries can move more frequently in same time period. If they moved so easily we wouldnt be seeing too many S300 destruction videos in Crimea. But moving them even once in a while is better than statically using them that is true. HQ16s are more manuvrable lightweight systems.

I am talking about iranians have very few mid to long range AD. And yes Iranians do have very few AD when compared with the amount of areas they have to defend.
S300 is not HQ9, HQ9 is not S300. Both are totally different systems with totally different radars incl diff config

 

[vizier]

I am talking about iranians have very few mid to long range AD. And yes Iranians do have very few AD when compared with the amount of areas they have to defend.
S300 is not HQ9, HQ9 is not S300. Both are totally different systems with totally different radars incl diff config

Hq-9 if more maneuvrable than S300s that it was initially based on then yes they can offer value to protect airbases or nuclear sites as well as some anti ballistic missile protection which mid range systems cant offer. But indigeneous production of them is still difficult whereas medium range sams can be produced locally and can be used with higher effectiveness in shoot-scoot mode against planes similar to how Ukraine uses them against Russian planes which India employs as well. You would be totally dependant on another country in case of conflict if you only field HQ9 and HQ16 certainly.