The Kashmir conflict 2025.

crazyinsane105

Junior Member
VIP Professional
How is this possible given their already disadvantaged smaller fleet size, wouldn't they be preoccupied with other missions?
If a little over a dozen J-10s and two dozen or so JF-17s can tie down the entire IAF due to the PL-15, rest of the F-16 fleet and other JF-17s can focus on cruise missile and drone interdiction. Brahmos will be very hard to hit but not impossible with correct AAMs
 

sutton999

Junior Member
Registered Member
First of all, I hope the photos are real (I'm not good at identifying PS photos). Then the guy in the first photo doesn't look like Pakistani. Finally, according to the hit sites demonstrated by Pakistan, the five scores should belong to five different jets. If you paint all five scores on one jet, it doesn't seem fair.
not a jet, it is a mockup in a park next to CAC. It is done by enthusiasts, not by officials.
 

enroger

Senior Member
Registered Member
Destruction of PAF or significant degradation of it is nuke red line threshold set by Pakistan. Unless India wants to test this out, I don’t think this is their intention

The enemy can always call your bluff, and then you're left with a choice between accepting defeat or commit to mutual destruction. Considering how delusional Indians sometimes are, do you really want to bet everything on their rationality?

No, I don't think Pakistan can ignore India's further investment in long range strike. Pakistan's AD is already showing deficiency in this conflict due to insufficient number of HQ-9 and HQ-16 cover. Imo, simply increasing GBAD procurement is a losing proposition considering how expensive it is, and enemy can always tries to saturate it with more munitions.

There needs to be measures to ensure PAF survivability assuming enemy munitions will get through. Maybe hardened hanger or even underground hanger dug into the mountains like Sweden air force.
 

doggydogdo

Junior Member
Registered Member
Can China's reserve of older J-7, J-6 compare against 3000 F-15/F-16 coming back from retirement or supplied by its vassals? US has much bigger pool of retired fighter jet pilots than China. So, they can rapidly expand their air force with retired pilots.
Whats the point of using old F-15 and F-16s if they can't ever get a shot off? Iraq had a shit ton of tanks too still got destroyed since they can't even see more technologically advanced Americans. If F-15 and F-16 are sent to fight China they would just be cannon fodder
 

Gloire_bb

Major
Registered Member
Whats the point of using old F-15 and F-16s if they can't ever get a shot off? Iraq had a shit ton of tanks too still got destroyed since they can't even see more technologically advanced Americans. If F-15 and F-16 are sent to fight China they would just be cannon fodder
Americans have networking to make good use of them. Just not for a stand-in in high threat areas. Def-ca, stand off munitions in more permissive areas, drone intercept.

Will take sweeping reserve fleet upgrades(vanilla planes aren't effective), but in desperate situation it's doable.
 

4Runner

Senior Member
Registered Member
Hello Hello Good Evening or Good Morning or Good Between,

After forced to spend lots of time on this subject over all sorts of media, I feel I am one of the better arm-chair generals in modern warfare in the context of this recent Bharat Pak conflict.

In this 3rd decade of the 21st century, air combat between two military peers is essentially video games of real-time long-distance loosely-coupled seamlessly-integrated kill-chains, which are comprised of all sorts of sensors and relays and actuators.

For those who have hands-on experience in complex industrial system integration, which have similar aspects of system engineering, it is rather simple and straightforward in replay and postmortem of this air war.

The real-time aspect includes but is not limited to sensors and communications that enable situation awareness. Pak has demonstrated one kill-chain of HQ-9 radar detection => ZDK-03 AWACS => J-10C => PL-15E that can be guided by its jet or AWACS. Maybe throw in some electronics warfare. Everything works the way as advertised, no more no less. If Bharat had similar kill-chain, then we should have seen at least some results from the Bharat side. The fact that it was 5:0 or 6:0 or whatever indicates that the Bharat air battle system is inferior. That is it, simple and easy. It really doesn't matter what Rafale should be or might be. Or it doest not even matter much which pilots are better trained. Rather it is sensor detection, data ingestion, real-time analysis and communication and decision, pilot pushing some button(s), missile guided by the system fly toward target in range. Game over.

The whole battle was a very simple replay of the system integration capabilities. The real complex knowledge or innovation resides in each component or link or station that are seamlessly integrated for shooting the target.

I can simplistically conclude that, after this air battle example, any isolated piece of weapons is probably only good for photos or videos or shows or propagandas, for which why we are here. It really does not matter much if a system is comprised of Country-A weapons or Country-B weapons, as long as weapons can be seamlessly integrated as a capable kill-chain.

The real question who (countries or institutions) produces and delivers such air combat systems in this world right here right now. In this case study, it was one-sited slaughter simple because A used such kill-chains agaisnt B who didn't have.
 
Americans have networking to make good use of them. Just not for a stand-in in high threat areas. Def-ca, stand off munitions in more permissive areas, drone intercept.

Will take sweeping reserve fleet upgrades(vanilla planes aren't effective), but in desperate situation it's doable.
Numbers of airframes simply wont matter very much, the results will be determined solely by which side can dominate the EM environment. The side that can maintain situational awareness and communications/networking capabilities will prevail. Losses will be very lopsided for the side that gives up EM dominance. Furthermore, in an extended air war, missile (BVRAAM) production becomes much more important than airframe production (and China has an insurmountable advantage in missile production).
 
Last edited:

crazyinsane105

Junior Member
VIP Professional
The enemy can always call your bluff, and then you're left with a choice between accepting defeat or commit to mutual destruction. Considering how delusional Indians sometimes are, do you really want to bet everything on their rationality?

No, I don't think Pakistan can ignore India's further investment in long range strike. Pakistan's AD is already showing deficiency in this conflict due to insufficient number of HQ-9 and HQ-16 cover. Imo, simply increasing GBAD procurement is a losing proposition considering how expensive it is, and enemy can always tries to saturate it with more munitions.

There needs to be measures to ensure PAF survivability assuming enemy munitions will get through. Maybe hardened hanger or even underground hanger dug into the mountains like Sweden air force.
PAF is trained to be able to land on civilian roads as well. Not to mention that out of all the strikes, India destroyed a single C-130 and hit a hangar and a few buildings. I’m quite sure they were trying to take out a decent number of aircraft yet they did fail at it.
Even in Desert Storm, US cruise missile strikes weren’t nearly as effective in taking out the Iraqi Air Force. Russia is unable to destroy very many Ukrainian aircraft as well via missiles. The evidence points to the contrary, that cruise missiles aren’t the most effective platforms to significantly degrade enemy air forces. I doubt India will have better luck than either the US or Russia
 
Top