Team-BHP
(
https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foxbat
(Post 4612058)
Pakistan has about 71 F-16s of which about 20 are the two seater versions. The two seater versions are more expensive and valuable as they can be used for training as well as combat. There is would have been a good reason to risk one of these more valuable assets in the conflict (i.e. need for a second pilot to act as a leader/co-ordinator of the Combat Air Patrol (CAP). Therefore I'm pretty sure there were two pilots in the plane.
Also from the very beginning it was thought a two seater F-16 was shot down and Pakistan claimed having 3 pilots in custody or on the ground (Abhinandan + 2 more from a two seater aircraft), a statement which was later retracted. Many witnesses on the ground also mentioned two pilots ejecting from a single aircraft. All these cannot be coincidences, I strongly believe a two seater F-16 was shot down.
|
Had seen this video many months ago but couldn't find it when I posted above.
A video of an aircraft going down in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and the observers commenting "do pilot" at 0:51. You can see two parachutes coming down and the aircraft heading straight down.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=CAOdrITApv0
This cannot be the Mig-21 which was shot down as it has only one seat and also the wreckage of the Mig-21 shows the front portion relatively intact which is not possible if the plane impacted the ground at 90 degrees.
IAF to induct first 4 Apache AH-64E by 15th August https://www.news18.com/news/auto/wor...o-2248221.html
At long last a proper attack helicopter enters services after 3 long decades. The Mi-25 for various reasons, mainly poor hot and high performance, never sat well with the IAF. And a mix of funding constraints and available alternatives and maybe apathy towards AH type missions kept us from acquiring a real AH. We are only getting 22 by 2020. I would think 80 to 100 is a more realistic number given our border terrain and the versatility these choppers bring.
Quote:
Originally Posted by V.Narayan
(Post 4628238)
I would think 80 to 100 is a more realistic number given our border terrain and the versatility these choppers bring.
|
IAF + Indian Army has ordered 180 units of HAL Light Combat Helicopters though.
Meanwhile, I found this useful website for tracking combat aircraft related news
https://combataircraft.keypublishing.com/
Quote:
Originally Posted by V.Narayan
(Post 4628238)
IAF to induct first 4 Apache AH-64E by 15th August
At long last a proper attack helicopter enters services after 3 long decades.
|
Sir, Any view on these being allocated to IAF? Wouldnt it make more sense to allocate them to the Army to be part of the Independent Combat Brigades being developed?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maveryq
(Post 4628375)
Sir, Any view on these being allocated to IAF? Wouldnt it make more sense to allocate them to the Army to be part of the Independent Combat Brigades being developed?
|
Given what the AH-64 is ideally it should serve with both Air Arms. The Army certainly needs it for direct battlefield support, of that there can be no doubt. If budgets permit I would like to see the Army have five to six squadrons of its own. Budgets, alas! The IAF too needs it for difficult to access targets in the mountains and also just behind the front line of troops, and as Balakot demonstrated we will increasingly have these terrorist surgical strikes to execute for which the AH-64 is perfect in some situations. I believe some are coming for the Army but I am not so sure. I hope aircraft like the AH-64, which is the chopper version of the Su-30MKI as far as ground attack and sophistication of avionics goes, will change the narrow mindedness of the IAF of seeing themselves as primarily a fast combat jet force. It is a myopic thinking that afflicts several Air Force's the world over.
OT; but look at the globalization. An American Attack chopper, being delivered in a Ukranian aircraft for use by the Indian Airforce!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maveryq
(Post 4628375)
Sir, Any view on these being allocated to IAF? Wouldnt it make more sense to allocate them to the Army to be part of the Independent Combat Brigades being developed?
|
The Army Aviation Corps will be armed with the Rudra and LCH to start with. for now, the Apache will be exclusive to the IAF.
ISPR guy Asif Ghafool has made a fool of himself again
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...w/70418923.cms Quote:
Originally Posted by Maveryq
(Post 4628407)
Thanks Smartcat for pointing out that it is a AN124 and not a AN225 as mentioned on twitter. Edited for the same.
|
4 engines = AN124.
6 engines = AN225 :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmartCat
(Post 4628637)
|
Champoo bhai
Quote:
4 engines = AN124.
6 engines = AN225 :)
|
^^^
Toyz for Boyz
Quote:
Originally Posted by V.Narayan
(Post 4628686)
Toyz for Boyz
|
I just realized that the tail section is different too. An-225 seems to have 2 vertical stabilizers - like old WW2 aircraft.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmartCat
(Post 4628693)
I just realized that the tail section is different too. An-225 seems to have 2 vertical stabilizers - like old WW2 aircraft.
|
I watched a documentary on the AN225 and the reason that they gave for the split tail was that the 225 was originally designed to carry the Soviet space shuttle - Buran and having the Buran's tail along with the 225's tail caused issues in having a stable flight pattern. This meant that to ensure that when the Buran was being transported, it was better to have the split tail to ensure aerodynamic stability.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmartCat
(Post 4628693)
I just realized that the tail section is different too. An-225 seems to have 2 vertical stabilizers - like old WW2 aircraft.
|
Yes, the 2 vertical stabilizers is to allow enough rear space to carry the Soviet space shuttle 'Buran'
The Shuttle Carrier Aircraft of NASA used to have tail cones on the Space Shuttle to reduce turbulence and probably that is what helped it to have a single tail design. These aircraft on the other hand did have vertical stabiliers on their rear tail wings for stability.
Images: NASA and others
Pak DG ISPR peddles fake news, posts doctored video of retired IAF Air Marshal https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...w/70418923.cms
Ghafoor shared a video of retired IAF Air Marshal Keelor on his Twitter account, claiming that the war veteran was talking about the "Indian failure" during the dogfight between the Indian Air Force (IAF) and Pakistan Air Force (PAF) on February 27 this year.
Netizens were quick to point out that the video was recorded in 2015, approximately four years before the Balakot and its ensuing incidents occurred in 2019.lol:
This is the same Pakistani Armed Forces Spokesperson who claimed PAF shot down two Indian aircraft and have 2 pilots in custody. Later backtracked and said one died and then later claimed to only have captured only one.
I'm now 100% convinced the Pakistanis lost an aircraft on February 27 and claimed it was an Indian Aircraft.
Found this article on the Print.
F-16 never stood a chance to be in IAF fleet. Lockheed Martin messed it up so much
Would love to hear from knowledgeable people in the group.
Some excerpts from the article
Quote:
It is in fact a tribute to the F-16’s potency that the IAF wants to avoid engaging it in a dogfight and would prefer to take it out at longer ranges. In effect, it wasn’t the F-16 that irritated the IAF so much as it was the AMRAAM – after all, no matter how advanced an F-16 India was being offered, if the missiles were going to be the same as Pakistan’s (AMRAAM), the electronics differential of the launch platform wasn’t going to be much use to India.
|
Quote:
Sadly, given the hodgepodge of equipment the IAF operates, almost none of which talk to each other, the IAF simply doesn’t understand networked warfare, nor does it care. Stuck in the 1980s’ mindset, the IAF still believes in kinetics while the rest of the world has moved towards electronics. The simplest explanation for this is the scene from Indiana Jones and Raiders of the Lost Ark, where an Arab swordsman comes around flaunting his sword skills and Indy simply shoots him with a revolver. Here, the IAF is the Arab swordsman, who thinks a better sword could have won him the battle, instead of transitioning to a revolver; Lockheed Martin is the revolver salesman, who futilely tries arguing with the swordsman to give up his sword for the revolver.
|
Quote:
But Balakot was the last straw. The IAF is convinced that it shot down an F-16 using an obsolete MiG-21. The severe factual inaccuracies of the “IAF didn’t shoot an F-16” lobby, combined with an embarrassing set of tweets by the Pakistani DG-ISPR unable to explain two missing pilots, means the IAF is now convinced that its reliance on dogfights is valid (that is, the Arab swordsman can still win against Indian Jones’ revolver) and that the F-16 is a flawed product.
|
Personally I feel the Rafael was chosen due to familiarity with Dassault equipment and being a really good fighter vs unknown territory of US equipment and more involved infrastructure required to support US planes.
This article looks like the author doesn't know what he is talking about. First he says that the IAF wants to avoid a dogfight against the F-16 and then later says that IAF is convinced that dogfights are the way to go.
What do others feel about this?
| All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 06:17. | |
