Indian Mirage 2000 hits targets in Pakistan

[disconnectedradical]

Only thing we know now is MiG-21 shot down, AIM-120 wreckage found which means F-16 was probably used by Pakistan. Everything else is speculation.

[knuckles]

He's alive. Currently at Maxwell AFB, was seen at a dinner party about 3 days ago.

So, half the PAF is in the USA, celebrating parties all the way...?

I believe this post is more politically affiliated.

Free along von Clausewitz's 'War is continuation of politics by other means': sure it is 'politically affiliated' - because what militaries usually do has 'something to do politics', you know.

That is out of my area of interest...

Well, perhaps it's about the time for the Pakistanis like you to conclude it might be of their interest to find out what is their government doing? It might help you be less surprised next time the Indians bomb something 80km+ inside Pakistan.

Overall, sorry: not impressed.

Well, looking at the some Indian narrative, it can be summarised as follows:

(a) The Indians flattened every single building they bombed (the buildings may have been wooden with long stems and green roofs).

Nobody said 'flattened', and it's well-known that buildings in question are based on massive concrete pillars (thanks to older GE photos).

The most authoritative photo that meanwhile emerged it showing buildings still standing where they are: one can see traces of fire around windows, though.

(b) The IAF bombed because they had info that every monkey terrorists that even intended to target India was in those buildings. It is possible they even bombed the surrounding trees just in case the monkeys climbed them.

The CIA, USAF, USN etc. are UAV-ing groups of 1-4 terrorists all over the world since 20 years. Shall I post you a few links about all the 'successes' from places like Waziristan (Pakistan), Yemen etc.? In north-western Idlib, in Syria, two years ago, a CIA-operated UCAV blasted a mosque stuffed full of 200+ sleeping civilians. I'll not even go into what was the US air power doing around north-eastern Syria - see Raqqa and similar places - the last two years; it's so despicable even French military officers began complaining. But, you're complaining that few of Indian bombs - apparently - missed and hit trees?

(c) The IAF fought the entire Pakisani air force comprising F-16s, Mirages and more F-16 (JF017s)s thereafter
(d) The IAF fought with just one mig-21. The Sukhois were too far away and not required.
(e) They managed to shoot down half the PAF, noting several pilot names, parachutes and even sight the pilot's fathers.

When did official Delhi said anything of that?

Ah, you're another troll. OK, no problem.

Not celebrating parties Cooper. It was a dinner for all air force officers of visiting nations. I don't know if you were trying to joke around or insult. But rest assured, half of them are not there as per your assumption. You are a writer....behave like one. I enjoyed your work on the Iranian Tomcat units.

Cheers !!!

[mixelflick]

I really enjoyed Tom's Iranian Tomcat Units In Action too.. until someone told me here most of it had been discounted!

So hard to get to the truth in war. I think it's pretty clear though Iranian F-14's performed well, in some cases brilliantly. They were a lot more successful with it than the US Navy, albeit circumstances were different too. Still strikes me as odd this big carrier based fighter did so well in the sands of the Middle East.

I often wondered how a land based F-14 would have looked like/performed without all that extra carrier weight. Conservatively speaking, I think she would have weighed at least 5,000lbs lighter, with a corresponding improvement in thrust to weight ratio. I do think it was the right plane at the right time for Iran. F-15's could have probably done the job but didn't carry as much gas, nor the Phoenix which for its day was a fantastic weapon.

But even with all that, Iran lost a few to Mirage F1's I think, and maybe a Mig-21. Just goes to show no aircraft is invincible, so reports of an F-16 or SU-30MKI downed are at least plausible. Without any wreckage/footage though, we'll probably never know..

[tomcooper]

As far as I read it, that whole post of weasel1962 was pure sarcasm due to all the trolling in this thread.

Well, I like sacrasm, and it simply didn't came over that way.

I don't know if you were trying to joke around or insult. But rest assured, half of them are not there as per your assumption.

'Per what assumption' - of mine?

Where did I say anything like 'this pilot was there' or 'the other one was'?

Are we now going to discuss your fantasies?

You are a writer...

You're a 'writer'.

I'm a researcher. That's two different things.

I really enjoyed Tom's Iranian Tomcat Units In Action too.. until someone told me here most of it had been discounted!

What has been discounted?

But even with all that, Iran lost a few to Mirage F1's I think...

Do you 'think' - or are you sure? If you're not sure, i.e. think, then how do you want to know?

By more of guessing...?

[mixelflick]

Well, when I posted here how much I enjoyed reading about Iranian Tomcat/Phoenix kills, someone chimed in and said most of it had been proven false? For the record, I thought you did a fantastic job documenting things, at least as best you could.

I'll have to go back and look for it. It may have been my mention of Foxbat kills by the Phoenix. Personally, I believe most of what the Iranians had to say. Regardless of some air to air outcomes, I found it a fascinating look/lesson in history. How often has a US Navy fighter (state of the art for the time) been exported to ANY country, fought in a 10 year war (against no small amount of Russian/French fighters) and put up such a good showing?

One thing I can't figure out is their opinion of the TF-30's, and why they haven't tried replacing them with something more powerful. On the one hand, I want to say they got the "improved" TF-30 and problems were in a word, manageable. On the other hand, any TF-30 is going to result in it being under-powered. I understand it may be lack of knowledge (or money), but for my $ priority #1 on those birds would be finding GE-F-110's. They apparently were successful in sourcing spare parts to keep them flying, and there's no shortage of F-110's and F-100's around the world. Greasing the palm of someone in Pakistan to get a hold of 1 or 2 F-100's that power their vipers wouldn't seem impossible. Maybe not, I dunno.

They also seem to have developed a Phoenix analogue, or at least I've seen them flying with one. Who knows. Maybe it's all smoke and mirrors. It's clear though they can't buy Flankers or any other high performance fighters due to sanctions, so prioritizing F-14 upgrades would seem important. 30 years after they were delivered, they're still a force to be reckoned with. Perhaps not by the USN or USAF, but neighboring countries for sure. Israel would eventually prevail, but to dismiss the F-14 out of hand would be a mistake IMO.

It's just such a capable and iconic aircraft, even all these years later ...

[botsing]

Well, when I posted here how much I enjoyed reading about Iranian Tomcat/Phoenix kills, someone chimed in and said most of it had been proven false? For the record, I thought you did a fantastic job documenting things, at least as best you could.

So let me get this straight:

Just because some dude on the internet told you, you simply and directly stopped taking in carefully collected information and then started basing your opinion on that same dude from the internet?

[tomcooper]

Well, when I posted here how much I enjoyed reading about Iranian Tomcat/Phoenix kills, someone chimed in and said most of it had been proven false? For the record, I thought you did a fantastic job documenting things, at least as best you could.

This is a link to the Study titled Trends in Air-to-Air Combat (PDF), prepared by John Stillion from the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, in the US.

Check the page 14, to inform yourself about the methodology of the people involved. It starts as follows:

CSBA compiled a database of all confirmed aerial victories from 1965 through 2013. The primary source for the database is regional and national databases maintained by the Air Combat Information Group (ACIG). Where possible, the ACIG air combat victories were crosschecked with official sources such as Project Red Baron accounts of U.S. victories and losses in Vietnam. The database contains information on 1,467 confirmed victories over fixed-wing combat aircraft. In addition to the date and nationality of the victor, all database entries include information on the type of aircraft claimed shot down and the type of weapon used (e.g., AIM-9, AA-2 Atoll, gun). In many cases the name of the victorious pilot and his unit are available. In some cases, ACIG has been able to cross-reference claims with officially admitted losses and provide the victim aircraft pilot’s name and/or aircraft tail number. The database contains victory claims for pilots from the United States, Vietnam, India, Pakistan, Israel, Egypt, Jordon, Syria, Iraq, Iran, the United Kingdom, Argentina, Venezuela, and Ecuador in achieving confirmed air-to-air victories.

...which, eventually, is the bare essence of the reason why am I researching aerial warfare since 1945 at all.

(For those who might now know it: I used to run the ACIG.org website from 1999 until 2017; I'm still running the ACIG.info forum, yes, also since 1999. And, no: I was not involved in preparing that study. The CSBA-people simply used what used to be posted on the ACIG.org website.)

Here's a video of the presentation of that study at the US Air Force Association's Mitchel Institute for Aerospace Studies. Please, listen carefully at around minute 21:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmGRn7GirS0

In acknowledgment of my research on the operational history of Iranian F-14s, the USN invited me to the Tomcat Sunset ceremony (official withdrawal from service ceremony for the F-14 Tomcat), and the following symposium with same title (where I was the only foreigner around), held at NAS Oceana, back in September 2006.

By side my books and articles about most diverse wars fought around the globe, but I think I can be proud of being contracted by nobody less than the Austrian MOD to provide continuous coverage of the war in Syria, for much of the last two years, too.

Now, please tell me - mixelflick or any other of you here, but especially those having any kind of traces of doubts about my credibility, thinking I'm biased towards one or the other party, or anything else of that kind: what can you offer in support of your own ability to express any kind of doubts about my work? ....or for even having doubts about my credibility?

Anonymous sources from the internet?

...or hear-say from your neighbor's best friend's brother's aunt of the father-in-law....?

[knuckles]

As far as I read it, that whole post of weasel1962 was pure sarcasm due to all the trolling in this thread.

Well, I like sacrasm, and it simply didn't came over that way.

I don't know if you were trying to joke around or insult. But rest assured, half of them are not there as per your assumption.

'Per what assumption' - of mine?

Where did I say anything like 'this pilot was there' or 'the other one was'?

Are we now going to discuss your fantasies?

You are a writer...

You're a 'writer'.

I'm a researcher. That's two different things.

I really enjoyed Tom's Iranian Tomcat Units In Action too.. until someone told me here most of it had been discounted!

What has been discounted?

But even with all that, Iran lost a few to Mirage F1's I think...

Do you 'think' - or are you sure? If you're not sure, i.e. think, then how do you want to know?

By more of guessing...?

Behave. We are not going to discuss my fantasies. The pilot I told you is alive and well.

Regards

[knuckles]

Behave.

Ah, behave yourself - especially at all the gala dinners the PAF is celebrating around the USA, while protecting jihadists at home.

...the next on the igno list...

PM me if you want more info. There is no protecting of jihadists there. The gala dinner were hosted by USAF.

[madrat]

Tom gets confidential information and goes on his gut instincts. He doesn't either believe you over his source or doesn't particularly care for multiple reasons. He's a researcher and not a reporter. He has to run with bias or he is cut off of information. And sometimes he just doesn't like people. Either way, I don't think he will return to this thread.

[mixelflick]

Well, when I posted here how much I enjoyed reading about Iranian Tomcat/Phoenix kills, someone chimed in and said most of it had been proven false? For the record, I thought you did a fantastic job documenting things, at least as best you could.

So let me get this straight:

Just because some dude on the internet told you, you simply and directly stopped taking in carefully collected information and then started basing your opinion on that same dude from the internet?

No, but it did give me pause to consider the other side of the issue.

[mixelflick]

Well, when I posted here how much I enjoyed reading about Iranian Tomcat/Phoenix kills, someone chimed in and said most of it had been proven false? For the record, I thought you did a fantastic job documenting things, at least as best you could.

This is a link to the Study titled Trends in Air-to-Air Combat (PDF), prepared by John Stillion from the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, in the US.

Check the page 14, to inform yourself about the methodology of the people involved. It starts as follows:

CSBA compiled a database of all confirmed aerial victories from 1965 through 2013. The primary source for the database is regional and national databases maintained by the Air Combat Information Group (ACIG). Where possible, the ACIG air combat victories were crosschecked with official sources such as Project Red Baron accounts of U.S. victories and losses in Vietnam. The database contains information on 1,467 confirmed victories over fixed-wing combat aircraft. In addition to the date and nationality of the victor, all database entries include information on the type of aircraft claimed shot down and the type of weapon used (e.g., AIM-9, AA-2 Atoll, gun). In many cases the name of the victorious pilot and his unit are available. In some cases, ACIG has been able to cross-reference claims with officially admitted losses and provide the victim aircraft pilot’s name and/or aircraft tail number. The database contains victory claims for pilots from the United States, Vietnam, India, Pakistan, Israel, Egypt, Jordon, Syria, Iraq, Iran, the United Kingdom, Argentina, Venezuela, and Ecuador in achieving confirmed air-to-air victories.

...which, eventually, is the bare essence of the reason why am I researching aerial warfare since 1945 at all.

(For those who might now know it: I used to run the ACIG.org website from 1999 until 2017; I'm still running the ACIG.info forum, yes, also since 1999. And, no: I was not involved in preparing that study. The CSBA-people simply used what used to be posted on the ACIG.org website.)

Here's a video of the presentation of that study at the US Air Force Association's Mitchel Institute for Aerospace Studies. Please, listen carefully at around minute 21:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmGRn7GirS0

In acknowledgment of my research on the operational history of Iranian F-14s, the USN invited me to the Tomcat Sunset ceremony (official withdrawal from service ceremony for the F-14 Tomcat), and the following symposium with same title (where I was the only foreigner around), held at NAS Oceana, back in September 2006.

By side my books and articles about most diverse wars fought around the globe, but I think I can be proud of being contracted by nobody less than the Austrian MOD to provide continuous coverage of the war in Syria, for much of the last two years, too.

Now, please tell me - mixelflick or any other of you here, but especially those having any kind of traces of doubts about my credibility, thinking I'm biased towards one or the other party, or anything else of that kind: what can you offer in support of your own ability to express any kind of doubts about my work? ....or for even having doubts about my credibility?

Anonymous sources from the internet?

...or hear-say from your neighbor's best friend's brother's aunt of the father-in-law....?

Relax Tom. I didn't question your credibility, nothing of the sort.

In fact, I stated I believe your claims and noted that you did a good job documenting such to the best extent possible, did I not? People here love to extrapolate and assume what others are thinking. These people need to chill out. Nobody here is a mind reader..

Many thanks for the links. I found them most informative..

[marsavian]

India, Pakistan threatened to unleash missiles at each other: sources

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-indi ... SKCN1QY03T

The sparring between India and Pakistan last month threatened to spiral out of control and only interventions by U.S. officials, including National Security Advisor John Bolton, headed off a bigger conflict, five sources familiar with the events said.

At one stage, India threatened to fire at least six missiles at Pakistan, and Islamabad said it would respond with its own missile strikes “three times over”, according to Western diplomats and government sources in New Delhi, Islamabad and Washington.

The way in which tensions suddenly worsened and threatened to trigger a war between the nuclear-armed nations shows how the Kashmir region, which both claim and is at the core of their enmity, remains one of the world’s most dangerous flashpoints.

The exchanges did not get beyond threats, and there was no suggestion that the missiles involved were anything more than conventional weapons, but they created consternation in official circles in Washington, Beijing and London ....

[mixelflick]

Are PAK or Indian missiles of this sort road mobile?

I'm not aware that either country has F-15E like strike aircraft designed to hunt these types of missiles. Just basic air to ground strike fighters. Hopefully, India's Rafale's will have some capability in this regard. Not sure if PAK has anything in the hopper like it.

Would get ugly fast. Glad it didn't happen..

[basher54321]

Social Media has been getting in a twiz over this recent photo supposedly from the crashed MiG-21Bison showing R-73 and R-77 variants - not easy to confirm the source though unfortunately.