After the defeat

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Re: narayan

Compliment appreciated :)

Narayan, concerning the mixture of facts and opinions, I am the first one to admit of that guilt, but I try to refrain from using personal intitution in my articles. I think you might be confusing me with Omar, because I do not remember ever using the examples of LCA or the Arjun as down playing Indians. My only oblique referance to the topic was the lack of an advanced trainer for the Indian Air Force as primarily being resposible for the high rate of IAF crashes and not necessarily the calibre of pilot, as a few people on Chowk have hinted.

Concerning the Arjun MBT, there was an interesting article on Arjun vis a vis the production of Pakistan`s Al Khalid MBT by an Indian analyst in an Indian newspaper. If you are interested, please send me your e-mail and I would be happy to forward it to you. The article, in dealing with MBTs, was highlighting the difficulties of Indian defense R&D to fulfill the country`s defense requirements.

I agree with your hope and maybe, the two nations can join their resources together, instead of against each, in a common space program. The greatest dismay to me about India and Pakistan is the potential lost in futile hate mongerings, which dominates our relations.

Yes, I am aware of the Indian chowkwallahs, but I can not please both the Indians and Pakistanis each time I write my articles. My articles are a reflection of how I ``see`` the situation based on the facts, past historic examples etc and what I infer from those factors. People can agree with or disagree with my articles if they want and there is nothing I can do, but defend my position/viewpoints as best as I can!

As for my age, I am 34 years old and well past the chest thumping stage! Ironically, I was coming to the same conclusion with you, based on your interacts, that all Indians are infalliable and are the eptiome of intelligence, while all Pakistanis are totally worthless. My friend, I have no problems on our mutual rights to disagree on a given set of facts, but I do have a problem when that disagreement is turned into a personal problem.

I imgine that you will be reacting with zest to my article about the Indian experince in Kashmir and why the present Indian policy is counter-productive to Indian interests in Kashmir. :)

Thanks for the technical info. I, too, have seen pictures of B-17s landing with huge pieces of the airframe missing, but can an aircraft still fly with damage to the avionics etc. Those WWII bombers were designed with multiple reduncies in them and to take any amount of abuse, which the Germans could dish out. I think that the ability of an aircraft to surivive a missile hit has to depend if it was designed to absorb the impact or not.

Narayan, as an aside, we can debate this issue till the cows home and leave again, but it will not settle the question of where that plane was when it was shoot until the Indians release their ground radar data showing the position of the MiGs at the time of the shooting and Pakistan releases the flight plan showing why the aircraft was so close to the Indian border.

But, we will never know that would we? In the mean time, we will continue to hate and mistrust each other. What a waste of all the young lives lost due to this incipent hatred which dominates our lives!

Re: Ferozk Reply #: 101

``...bovine scatahology`` !

I like that !

Ok. I apologize for the ``personal`` attack.

However, I was merely returning the compliment. Your replies and your Military articles at Chowk show along with genuine facts also your personal opinions and other fanciful artifacts of your imagination. When you belittle the LCA or the Arjun MBT, it is to me an equally ``personal`` attack.

The LCA is the only asian aircraft that is being designed from the ground up. And all that on a shoe-string budget. India has its severe limitations - but we`re doing well all the same.

Understandably, no pakistani ever talks about the Indian Space program. For here is success of Indian technology on a grand scale. A few months ago ISRO went commercial, launching sun-synchronous satellites for Korea and Germany. Hopefully we would be launching the GSLV within a year, InshaAllah !

And soon perhaps pakistan would ask us to launch their geostationary satellites - because we would have the cheapest launcher in the market !

Feroz, when you write your articles at chowk, you are off-course aware that a good number of Indians would be reading them. I suspect you have a strong streak of ``macho-giri`` (perhaps you are in your 20`s !) that leads you to finally prove that all things Indian are worthless while pakistan is a shining example of noble manhood. A little psychology would help improve your writing and readership. Good luck !

As a technical aside:

Yes, a plane CAN fly with a broken or missing wing. It depends. Basically a huge unbalanced rolling moment and somewhat lesser unbalanced yaw is produced here, which can be balanced with judicious application of the rudder and elevators - assuming that the rudder and elevators have enough surface area to produce the required moment. I have seen a WWII photograph of a British Lancaster Bomber flying sideways with half of its port wing blown off by german flak. The photo was taken from above, apparently by another Bomber in the formation. Also see the japanese war movie ``Zero``. It shows a fighter plane flying with a completely missing port wing !!!

And Yes, a twin-engined plane can fly with one engine out of action. In fact one of the certification tests for twin-engined planes is the ability to take-off using only one engine.

Re: anarayan

Hey, if you want to persit in thinking that the aircraft was gathering intelligence on Indian sites, please be my guest, because I am not going to try to convince you of something, which do not want to believe in!

If you disagree with my assesments, please say so without resorting and denigerating my comments by refering to them as bovine scatahology. In the past I have disagreed with some of your comments, but I never retorted to personally be-littling you as source of those comments, because my disagreements were with your comments and not you personally. In this case, you are turning this into some sort of a personal grudge match, which is highly unfortunate.

Anarayan, during college I had serious dicussions with a gentleman who had served as a lecturer at the US Army`s War College, who also happened to be my professor in a few classes I took on American strategic studies and I participated in host of seminars on national security issues. Hence, though I am not an expert, I am quite knowledgeable in military affairs and combat tactics.

Yes, the Atlantique is reconnaissance aircraft, but could you, as an expert on aerospace engineering, please educated me how it was supposed to glide after having an engine blown off and with possible structrual damage to the wing?

My reference to its glide capabilities was not meant to highlight its flight duration or how long it could stay in the air, but to suggest that with one engine destroyed, and structurally damaged, it could not fly too effectivily for a long period of time.

You are absolutely right as to its flight characteristics and its flying endurances, but sir, I ask you how could it glide after being shot at with a missile? If memory serves me right, even the U-2 piloted by Francis Gary Powers could not glide after it was shot at by a Soviet SAM and it too crashed and hence, the reason why Powers parachuted and was caught by the Soviets and was the sole reason why the Soviets backed away from the peace talks in Vienna that year!

Yes, I readily conced the point to you that gliding ability is related to the wingspan, but how is an aircraft going to glide on one wing only? For that matter, I do not think that even a glider could glide on one wing only or if it was structurally damaged!

Again, the max. time this aircraft can spend in the air (18hrs) is on both engines powering the aircraft and not one engine. Just ask yourself how long this aircraft can stay in the air without any engines operating it and still glide? Then ask yourself how long can it glide after being structurally damaged by a missile? It could probably do, but not with a wing damaged!

Anarayan, this aircraft could possibly glide in perfect conditions, but you have to admit that the flying conditions were not perfect after the Indian missile struck it`s port engine.

Since you have multiple degrees in Aerospace Engineering, could you please tell me how an aircraft is supposed to glide on one wing only for 18 hours at a time?

I would appreciate your comments on this question.

Re: Ferozk #: 94

Your confident BullS * * *ing is commendable !

``... but I am a serious student of military affairs history and over the course of many years, I have managed to gain an appreciation of military strategy and combat tactics. As to proof, let us start with the wreakage of the aircraft. The Atlantigue does not ``glide`` well and because of that fact...``

In your capacity as self-appointed expert on all matters military, you should perhaps know that reconnaissance aircraft are BUILT TO GLIDE - to hover around for as long as possible. The most famous of these was the U-2, which had an enormous wingspan. Seeing the Atlantique, I was struck by the size of its wingspan. If you knew any aerodynamics you would know that gliding ability is directly related to aspect ratio which is directly related to wingspan. I did some research and found that the Atlantique`s wingspan is about 40 meters as compared to its overall length of 31 meters. THIS AIRCRAFT WAS BUILT TO GLIDE.

If you are still not convinced look at the maximum time this aircraft can spend in the air - 18 hours !!!

If you are thinking up your usual half-baked, technical repartee to this mail, I should let you know that I have more than 1 degree in Aerospace Engg.

Re: Goyal # 98

Agreed! This whole faux pas was a blessing in disguise of the hard liners in both countries and the issue of ``betrayal`` is a very emotional topic on both side of the border and could get out of hand if not nipped in the bud.

Goyal, this is nothing more than the latest in the series of South Asian waltzes, which has been going on for the last 52 years: one step forward, half a step to the side, two steps back and turn and repeat.....

The key is, in order to salvage and restore the peace process, for the moderates to discredit the hard liners in both nations via the example of Kargil and not to lose hope. You are right, the hard liners will come to power and stay there if the moderates do not voice their opposition to them. To quote Ras, the ball is in the moderates quote and if they drop it, there will be no reprive or another chance to amend this situation.

Goyal, take hope yaar! Nothing is lost unless we give up the fight!! So, I say to all moderates, and please pass the word: Stand up, stand up and play the game!!!!

Feroz #97,

Perhaps you already know much about Indian political scene. For 50 years, we were able to thwart all sorts of religious fanatics. Success of Kargil episode would have given another shot in the arms of moderates.

I was in India ( and in Doda district) when this war was happening. War was a disappointment to people. Though cease fire is being trumpted as a victory for Indian position, people are disappointed at government taking to action for loss of so many lives and resources for what they see as treachery.

This will only bring hardliners to power. With Pakistan already in grip of muslim hardliners, it is now going to be a no-win situation for everyone.

Re: Goyal

You are absolutely right to say that there is no trust between Indians and Pakistanis. There is no jingoism in the line, which you quoted, but a simple declaration of facts. I said those words, because after this incident the 1991 treaty, preventing near border flights, which was a confidence building treaty has been destroyed beyond repair.

If memory serves me, I remember cautioning people, here at Chowk and else where, that Lahore should not be construed to mean anything beneficial or as a positive indicator of peace in the region. I am sorry that there was a general sense of dismay and dis-believe after Lahore in guise of Kargil, but people should not have had such high expectations from the Lahore summit.

Who stirred the hornets nest first? Goyal, we can sit here and discuss who is to blame and in the process we can beat each other over historical distinctions and seek to place the blame, but it will not solve the problem. Instead of disagreeing where the border or LoC is, let us agree that people are dead, because of it and seek to prevent such an occurance from happening again.

It is high time that both sides stopped playing this blame game and admitted to their own sins in this matter and only when this happens, will there be a realistic chance to solve the animity beteen our two nations.

Ferozk #94,

First tune to Pakistan Independence day awards where two army men are awarded medal for shooting down an Indian helicopter using a shoulder launched missile. That shooting in the very beginning of Kargil conflict happened atleast 4 miles inside Indian area.

Now refer to your statement #82

``All the Indians have done is merely stir the hornets nest, so please do not be suprised when your aircraft are targeted and shot at by Pakistan.``

Is it not your zingoism that is coming out of this line? Who stirred the hornets nest first? When everyone was feeling pally-pally after lahore, Pakistan shoots an aircraft inside Indian territory. Should not you have written this line at that time?

Trust was broken. What is happening now is result of that act!

Regards

Re: goyal:

No, I am not an authority per se on miltary strategy, but I am a serious student of military affairs history and over the course of many years, I have managed to gain an appreciation of military strategy and combat tactics.

As to proof, let us start with the wreakage of the aircraft. The Atlantigue does not ``glide`` well and because of that fact, it is safe to conclude that it was destroyed inside Pakistan. Also, one only has to find out just what type of missile the IAF MiGs fired at it and what was the max. range of those weapons? That should narrow the point of intercept considerably. Secondly, if the debris did fall inside India, why has India not taken a group of miltary attaches or UN personnel to the site and via the use of GPS claimed that it was inside India?

The best way and the most prefered way to settle this issue is by having Pakistanis releasing the speed, direction and last known location or radar fix of the aircraft before it was destroyed and for the Indians to release the flight info stored in the fire radar computers of the MiGs and the actual gun camera footage of the aircraft being destroyed. Since, that will never happen, there is no definate way to determine just where and how the aircraft was destroyed.

Yes, Kargil was a war zone despite what Pakistan was claiming. I do not give a fig in hell what Pakistan was denying or claiming, because Kargil was a limited war between Indian and Pakistani military forces and any one with any understanding of logistics would tell you that the ``freedom fighters`` do not have the capability to sustain offensive actions in such an inhospitable terrain against a professional military force!

I have never justified war in the past, but the misunderstanding arises from my facination with its conduct and its implements of purpose. Goyal, just because I hate war does not mean that I fail to understand its ``myriad faces``. This is an ironic contradiction of my character, because I love to study the very thing I hate!

For the record, I condemn Kargil, because it only added to the hate and misery in India and Pakistan without settling anything! Goyal, why condemn Kargil? Why not condemn the whole bloody insitution of war itself? Wars are nothing more than a mass murder writ large and nothing ever justifies, or can justify, the un-necessary loss of a singal human life.

My friend, please read my article ``Remembering Private Ryan`` on Chowk and you will have a better understanding of how I feel towards the topic of war!!

Re: Jay # 91

Yes, it is normal for a training flight to take place near the Indian border, but what was not normal was the Indian reaction to it. Contary to what UR might think, I think there was failure in the IAF`s line of communications and some one did lose his nerve. What ever the reasons may have been, this incident raises serious questions about the IAF`s command and control over its fighter bases.

IAF has been heavily influenced by Soviet air doctrines and by its rigid rules of controlling the flow of the battle from the ground through pre-determined maneuvers. In the last few years IAF has been de-centralizing its fighter groups and allowing more individual freedom to its pilots and forward air controllers to seek and react to more realistic combat scenrios. In this case, I think a FAC, using his own judgement, over reacted to the presence of the PN aircraft.

The aircraft was without an escort, because it was on routine training mission. Yes, you could drop troops from the Atlantique, but why would you? If that was the intention, it would have been better to opt for a C-130 and go for a HALO jump. The presense of sailors does not imply anything and unlike the Indian forces, Pakistan armed forces place more responsibilities on its NCOs and this could be nothing more than to familarize them with the systems on the aircraft.

The type of the training could depend on a host of factors and could be anything related to the performance of the aircraft and its on-board systems.

Hope this helps!

Re: anarayan # 90

Chill bro! Read what I am saying calmly before you get your panties in a bunch and get all twisted and spazed out!!:)

Atlantique is an ASW (anti submarine warfare) aircraft. It is designed with that in mind and not to operate as a ``ferret`` over IAF bases. PAF has better methods of ``fingerprinting`` Indian radar signitures than send a PN ASW aircraft. The only caveat to this might be that the aircraft was tracking Indian naval electronic emissions out of Mumbai and other Indian naval bases, because the Indian navy`s radar systems work on a different pulse modualar frequencies than IAF radar systems.

The PN aircraft might be using the Indian radar to calibrate its own radar systems and might be training its personnels in modes of tracking and localizing Indian electonic emissions and identifying their sources.

This still does not give the Indians the de jure right to ingress into Pakistani airspace and shoot the aircraft down, because what ever its mission might be, it was operating within the territorial limits of Pakistan. If the aircraft was gathering ELINT, on the Indians, from within India than the incident could be justified, but it was not! If Pakistani military aircraft want to gather ELINT on the Indians from within Pakistan and then it is their right to so and it does not give the Indians an excuse to violate Pakistani airspace to prevent such a flight mission.

Anarayen, regardless of the Atlantique`s mission, IAF does not have the right to shoot it down within Pakistan if the aircraft never intruded into India! In this case, post-accident evidence seems to suggest that the Indians simply screwed the pooch in this matter!

In the case of your MiGs on the LoC, it was a different situation, because they entered Pakistani airspace on our side of the LoC. In this case, the Atlantique did not enter Indian airspace. Also, Kargil was a war zone and the intentions of IAF aircraft, when they transgressed, were hostile. In this case, the PN Atlantique`s intentions would never be known, because it was inside Pakistan when it was destroyed.

Again, you need to chill and do a little research before you make silly statements like ISI fighting a proxy war by willing to risk and lose an ASW aircraft!

UR #85

``This was nothing but a cowardly act, that goes against all traditions of military aviation chivalry.``

``Shooting down an unarmed airplane (even in owns own territory) is shameful, and cowardly.``

Kindly stop giving a lesson in chivalry and bravery. I do agree that this act is wrong. But equally wrong were the act where Pakistani soldiers sneaked into Indian territory and directed fire on a town. Chivalry would have been to wage a direct war. Not a proxy one.

Chivalry would also mean to not disown the dead soldiers like Pakistan did.

Ferozk #92,

I assume that you are some sort of authority in military strategy.

India collected part of debris from its side of border. What proof do you have when you say that Indians ingressed in Pakistani space?

You also say that Kargil was a war zone. Did pakistan declare that it was a war zone. They were all along denying their involvement. India didn`t droped a bomb inside Pakistan. How will you justify the killing of Indian pilots and torture and murder of army men.

Please don`t justify any kind of war. If you want to condemn the Indian act, kindly add Kargil episode to it. I will join you in condemning them both.

Regards

Ferzok,

A person with some detailed info about military planning, I would appreciate your comments.

1. If Atlatique was on a training flight, is it normal for training to take palace near the indian border.

2. Under the present circumstances, why was the plane sent without an escort.

3. Could the plane be on a mission to drop intruders.

4. How do you expolain the unusual number of :sailors`.

5. What is the type of training one can give so close to an enemy border.

Re: Ferozk #: 82

``The Indian charges that the PN Atlantique was on an intelligence gathering mission is a non sequiter, because the aircraft is not the best platform for an ELINT mission. Granted it has the capability to track Indian radar signitures and IAF operational routine...``

Are you ignorant, or just stupid ?

Maybe tracking Indian radar signature does not fall under `Intelligence Gathering` in your lexicon. Also, the Indian authorities have mentioned some other things that the plane was upto.

``...the next time an IAF aircraft transgresses into Pakistani airspace, it will be shot down without any warnings...``

Again, are you ignorant, or just stupid ?

What the *@#%&! did you do to our MiGs in Kargil ?

``All the Indians have done is merely stir the hornets nest...``

The ISI has stepped up its proxy war. What ELSE can you do ?

If I were in a boxing ring I might wish the opponent punched with

right only in response to the right blow,but can he be bound.

I remember a joke when a Nawab invited his Sikh friend on lunch.

After the meals he said ``We should have fresh ``Gulab Jamans`` for dessert.

The guest was only pleased. Nawab ordered his servant to fetch the dessert

from sweetshop and when the servant went away he started a running commentry.

``He has got out of the house now, now he has crsossed the main road now the

cycle shop and now he has turned into the sweetmeat shop lane and now he has

asked for Gulab Jaman and now he is coming back lo he is here. Are you

there with the dessert``? The servant answers in affirmative and serves

the dessert. The Sikh guest was very impressed and resolved that he would

also train his servant in this manner. It took him some time to drill the

servant. when satisfied with his training he invited the nawab over to lunch

and deliberately omitted yogurt from the menu.During the lunch he says

``Nawab we are missing yogurt and called his servant and ordered him to fetch

it, and as the servant went away the host started giving the running

commentry.`` Karatara has taken the bike, he is out on the road, now he has

crossed over to the milkmans side he has reached there, now he has purchased

the yogurt and coming back lo he is here.``Are you back, Karatara``?

The servant replied,``Sardarji hale jootti lub reyan!(I haven`t found my

shoes yet!).



No religion professes barbarism or terrorism of any kind, it is the

bad followers who, to put it very very mildly misinterpret and justify

wanton violence.tariqlodi

Re: ALL

Just saw this somewhere thought you all may be interested...



India hit plane in Pak territory?

WASHINGTON: America`s most secretive National Security Agency (NSA) satellite data have confirmed that Indian fighter planes shot down a Pakistani unarmed aircraft Tuesday within Pakistani territory resulting in the death of 16 people. A secret National Security Agency spy satellite transcript leaked to selected American and Canadian journalists confirmed earlier reports that Indian control tower ordered its fighters to shoot down the Pakistan plane and return to base quickly.

Transcript recorded from the scene also indicates that Indian fighters also violated Pakistani airspace during their operation. Sources in Washington said that NSA officials have in their possession pictures as well as tapes of conversation between Indian MIG 21 pilots and ground control station officials. Observers believe that if the US officials agree to release the transcript and satellite images, a lot of trouble could be created for the Indians. However US State Department officials appear reluctant to do so officially for obvious reasons.

Narain is correct, whatever hope we had for building a constructive relationship with Pakistan has gone up in smoke after the Kargil war. What shocked me and millions of other Indians were the mangled, tortured bodies of Lt. Saurabh Kalia and his men. Tortured for 22 days, death must have only been a relief for them. Revenge is everyone`s mind at the moment. I dont endorse what the IAF did to the Atlantique, but in the light of the incidents of the previous months, it doesnt seem really out of place. The IAF only gave the PAF a taste of it`s own medicine. Frankly, it serves them just right.

Re: Narain.

I agree, pakistan was defenitely involved in something in that sector. but that does not warrant firing upon an unarmed aircraft. not without a warning shot. the aircraft can be force landed in indian territory. the entire warning , and other verbal communications between the two aircrafts could have been recorded and released to the media if things had been done properly. but it was a case of panic over reaction . (but after the mig affairs, the over reaction is to an extent understandable - but it was obviously panic nevertheless). i can believe that the pak navy was so stupid to send reconnaisance missions so close to the border and the indian air force was so much on a live wire. imagine a nuclear episode based on a similar reaction ?

rishi

Re: Ferozk

Feroz, sorry i dont share your optimism as far as the sub continent is concerned. As a set of people we are the most racist, steeped in prejudices and living neck to neck. Adding to this the ever shrinking economic pie, social unrest, failure of law and order only makes the going as much tougher. The paramount effect is again caused by our respective religions. Hinduism which treats sections of its own members as dirt and Islam which treats its women and all other religions as even worse. These two religions in their present (and past) forms are the most perverse and no one in their right minds would kill to defend these religions. india`s bullying attitude, and pakistan`s fascist religious nature (of calling allah for goddamn everything) will only complicate things further. the truth is we are a nation of sinners.

the only reason i would remain a hindu is because atleast i can say this about my religion and walk alive.

for once we should listen to the wise chinese. ``all outstanding issues between the two nations should be put into a backburner for a generation wiser than ours to decide upon. `` -- but then will we do that ?

- Rishi

RE: Ferozk

I am not trying to justify the indian action at all. i do not have the facts to do that. All that i am trying to do is explain why India could have done what it did. Post Kargil all feelings of reconciliation towards pakistan (which incidentally were running pretty strong at one point) have dried out, and patience with it is running very low. The pakistanis shot down one of our planes when it only slightly (if at all) transgressed their airspace in Kargil, and I think this was an admittedly petty, but effective way of getting back at them from an Indian perspective. And, of course, after having grossly violated all norms in Kargil, Indians feel that Pakistan should not cry too much if it gets a taste of its own medicine.

What is happening is very sad. At the beginning of this year I had felt that peace was round the corner, that it was inevitable. Unfortunately, kargil has set it back by atleast a decade. Worse still, from india`s point of view, we offered peace, and were given Kargil in return. Now if pakistan wants peace, they will have to come to us, and sue for peace on our terms. Given the power structure that exists in your country, this is very unlikely. So where do we go from here?

The most unfortunate part is that we all realize what we lost because of Kargil, yet can anybody explain what anyone gained from it?

-narain

India hit plane in Pakistani territory, confirms NSA Satellite

PPA Exclusive

WASHINGTON (PPA) - America`s most secretive National Security Agency (NSA) satellite data have confirmed that Indian fighter planes shot down a Pakistani unarmed aircraft on Tuesday within Pakistani territory resulting in the death of 16 people. A secret National Security Agency spy satellite transcript leaked to selected American and Canadian journalists confirmed earlier reports that Indian control tower ordered its fighters to shoot down the Pakistan plane and return to base quickly. *________________________________________________ *

This was nothing but a cowardly act, that goes against all traditions of military aviation chivalry.

The Navy aircraft was an unarmed airplane with no escorts. Shooting it down was about as difficult as shooting down an airliner. It was within Pakistani airspace.

Pakistani and Indian radars can see into each others border areas, as it is. Why would Pakistan need to fly a Navy plane to do that? If the plane was doing reconnaisance, it would not be flying at 7000 ft., and most of all there would be Pakistani escort planes ready to protect it. The Indian migs that took off were visible to the Pakistani ground radar. This happens regularly. Pakistanis fighters taking off near the border are monitored by the Indian radar, and vice versa. The fact that the Pakistan did not launch any escorts when they detected the Indian migs taking off indicates that the Navy plane was on a routine mission.

As far as the Mig pilot acting in haste. I do not agree. Mig 21s only have aiming radars. They do not have targeting radars. That means the ground controller gets them into position, to fire a missile. The Mig pilot on his own could not have made the decision to shot down the airplane, so close to the border. The ground controller must have receive approval from higher ups.

Shooting down a fighter in another country`s territory is a crime. Shooting down an unarmed airplane (even in owns own territory) is shameful, and cowardly.

Re: narain # 81

It will be some time before we know just what happened. On the other hand, we may never know what happened given the state of an undeclared war, which exists between the two neighbors.

The Indian charges that the PN Atlantique was on an intelligence gathering mission is a non sequiter, because the aircraft is not the best platform for an ELINT mission. Granted it has the capability to track Indian radar signitures and IAF operational routine, but it can do that from a safe distence without flying to within 10kms of the border. As to prior notification, remember both air forces are operating out of their forward bases and have been doing so for the last few months. Hence, the IAF already was aware of the operational routine of PAF CAPs, because it had been keeping tabs on PAF or PN aircraft, which were flying close to the border.

Yes, you are correct to say that given your intelligence failures in Kargil to detect Pakistani intentions, India was being wary of Pakistani intentions and rightly so. The question I would like answered is why an IAF MiG would fire at an unarmed PN aircraft without any prior warnings and that it would fire, after ingressing into Pakistani airspace?

Concerning Indian claims of prior violations, the question is why did the IAF engage and destroy this particular aircraft and not any other PAF fighters, which might have come closer than 10kms to the border? Are the Indians suggesting that this PN aircraft was responsible for all prior violations of Indian airspace? Could it be that this aircraft made a better and a safer target for IAF MiGs than risk ``dancing`` with a PAF fighter CAP?

Yes, the Indians did send a message to Pakistan and it was that in such cases, the engaging aircraft would have an authority for ``weapons free``. Narain, the next time an IAF aircraft transgresses into Pakistani airspace, it will be shot down without any warnings and incidently, the Indians actions in this matter have done more to violate the intent of 1991 agreement than any air violation could ever hope to!

All the Indians have done is merely stir the hornets nest, so please do not be suprised when your aircraft are targeted and shot at by Pakistan.

RE: Ferozk

I am not so sure that the downing of the plane was accidental. There is more to this then meets the eye. First of all, what was the plane doing so close to the border? There is a 1991 agreement between our two nations not to let fixed wing planes get closer than 10 km from the border without prior information to the other party about its intentions. There is no doubt that this agreement was violated. Given the nature of the aircraft, it is clear too that it was spying. India has claimed prior violations of its airspace. This was done even before this particular craft was brought down. Therefore, I tend to believe that these alleged cases were not premeditated lies, concocted for the purpose of justifying the shooting. All this leads me to believe that the pakistani`s are involved in something in that sector: what, I don`t know, but something for sure. Given our kargil experience, we cannot afford to be caught with our pants down, nor can we allow the pakistan army to continue with whatever activity it is planning. The downing was, I believe, a signal to the pakistanis not to try whatever they have been up to, since india is wise to it.

It is of course sad that 16 people had to lose their lives in this sorry incident. But my sorrow is greatly diminished when i think of the hundreds that had to lose their lives in Kargil. Or how pakistani newspapers gloat when reporting on Indian army fatalities. Unfortunately in this case, it is the pakistani war pigeons which are coming home to roost.

-narain

Re: goyal

I totally agree with your suggestion!

Re: Rishi

I think you are right about the IAF pilot having a panic attack, because this is the only explanation which makes sense. It is really unfortunate that the cover up has already began and like you mentioned, this act of stupidity will be repeated again in the future and no one will ever know the truth of what really happened.

What really discourages me about this episode is the ``payback`` syndrome and the loss of further lives, which will only end up perpetuating the cycle of hate between the two nations. Rishi, enough is enough and this madness has to stop and the common people of India and Pakistan have to re-learn how to live in peace with each other. It is not impossible to do so, because my dad used to tell me that his neighbors in Agra were Hindus and the friends of his childhood were Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs and Christians! It can be done. All it requires is a will to make it into a reality.

Re: Najib # 79

Najib, congratulations, from your post it seems that you have much in common with OMAR1974, because you also do not know when to keep your mouth shut! The kind of sentiments, which you were expressing is the very reason why this circle of hatred continues, because it is words like yours, which end up pouring gasoline over the fire. Najib, before you gleefully stroke up the fires of nationalism and revanche, just remember that road, which you are advocating and undertaking will one day end in the complete incineration of over a billion people.

Najib, I would listen to what Rishi is suggesting, because if the IAF pilot was a seasoned professional, he would have closely followed the Rules of Engagement (RoE) and each PAF and IAF pilot is duty bound to follow those RoEs, because they know just what will happen if they go around shooting opposing planes out of the sky!

There are three steps, which must be followed before ``splashing`` an intruding aircraft on both sides of the border. First, the intruding aircraft must be asked to leave and escorted to the border. Second; failing that order, PAF or IAF fighter fires a couple of cannon shells across the path of the intruding aircraft. Third, when that fails, the intruder is locked on with a missile so that his threat detection systems imply hostile intentions and lastly, when all the warnings have gone unheeded, the aircraft is fired upon, but ONLY after all possible warnings have been ignored.

It would seem that in this case, the IAF pilot was a rookie and he simply over reacted. As to your contentions of kicking butt, the next time an IAF aircraft intrudes into Pakistani air space, it will fired on without any warnings. Najib, if I were you,I would tamper my sense of national pride, because all the Indians have done is merely raise the stakes in the next potential crisis. With both sides having itchy fingers on the triggers, the chances of accidental war happening have just gone up significantly.

Najib, what we need on the sub-continent is cool heads and sane logic prevailing over emotionally charged rhetoric and calling each other names, no matter how emotionally satisfying, will not avert the specter of nuclear annihilation facing both India and Pakistan!

Yeah, we have kicked butt again! A Paki plane, flying in Indian airspace and acting hostile, was shot down!

It appears that an angered India wants to make sure that the Pakis pay for their incredibly silly misadventure in Kargil. Most Pakistanis often like to compare Pakistan with India, forgetting that India is the world`s second-largest nation, a country with immense resources. Promoting terrorism was foolhardy enough, but by instigating the Kargil attack, the Pakis woke up a sleeping giant.

And the Giant is very angry. Well, Pakis, brace yourselves for more action! India is huge. And now, it`s also angry!! We will kick butt!!!

Our current and future maneouvers will keep the Paki military establishment engaged and will force Pakistan to CONTINUE spending 85% of its resources on defense. This will push Pakistan further into jahannum!

An advice to Pakistanis: Let go of all malice. Let`s try and live in peace. But that can happen only if you, the Pakis, cease to extend moral or immoral support to Islamic terrorists in Afghanistan or elsewhere.

Feroz,

w.r.t to your news clipping on Sir creek/Kori creek dispute --

Generals and politicians from both counteries should be brought together in a neutral playground and allowed to kick each other to their satisfaction. That will allow common people to live their life with burden of a war.

Prepare for fire works on Independence Day!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

India Shoots Down Pakistani Surveillance Aircraft; 16 People Killed

From the New York Times

August 10, 1999

KARACHI, Pakistan -- Indian fighter planes shot down a Pakistani surveillance aircraft on Tuesday. Foreign Minister Sartaj Aziz said 16 servicemen were killed.

Both of the nuclear-armed neighbors claimed the plane was shot down in their territory.

The French-built Atlantic-I aircraft was on a training mission when it was shot down near a small coastal town, Aziz said. ``Pakistan reserves the right to make an appropriate response in self-defense,`` he said.

Aziz said wreckage of the aircraft was found a mile inside Pakistani territory.

India, however, said the aircraft was shot down after intruding into Indian airspace and failing to respond to warnings.

The crash came a few weeks after India and Pakistan came to the brink of another war over disputed Kashmir. They have fought three previous wars since gaining independence from Britain in 1947, two over Kashmir.

Aziz described the attack as a violation of Pakistani airspace, calling it a ``blatant and unprovoked act of military aggression against an unarmed aircraft.`.

Yet an Indian air force statement said its planes scrambled to intercept the plane after it was detected by radar on the ground. Air force officials said on condition of anonymity that the Pakistani plane was in Indian airspace for 15 minutes.

The jet fighters signaled that the plane should land at an Indian air base, but the Pakistani pilot ``acted in a hostile manner`` by turning his aircraft toward the Indian jet, the statement said.

The MiG-21 opened fire, hitting the Pakistani plane in the right engine, the statement said. Indian helicopters found the wreckage a mile south of the Pakistani border, near Kori Creek in the Rann of Kutch, a desert in Gujarat state. India had no immediate information on casualties.

Also on Tuesday, Pakistan ordered the expulsion of Indian diplomat Madan Mohan Jetly because he allegedly carried out activities incompatible with his official status. No other details were given, but Foreign Ministry officials said his expulsion was not related to the plane crash.

The Atlantic I is a twin-engine, propeller-driven plane used by naval forces in Europe and Pakistan for aerial reconnaissance, anti-submarine operations and to intercept radio signals. The 100-foot-long plane is similar in appearance to a cargo plane, but with a long, tapering tail section that holds special antennas and looks similar to the U.S. Navy`s P-3 Orion. Its standard crew is 12.

India said Pakistan routinely violates Indian airspace in that area, and claimed eight intrusions from May to July.

This year, India fought an 11-week undeclared war with what it described as Pakistani army troops in Indian-held territory.

Pakistan denied its soldiers were involved and said all the fighters were Kashmiri militants.

Re: UR & Feroz

wasn`t there such a simulation or an exercise where IAF, Isareli Air executed to plan like that somewhere in the septemeber of mid eighties...or was that just a rumor...?

but Feroze, I gotta go with UR`s strategy. Get a a bunch of eagles, put em up in India. Come for a quick strike over the lab, while creating some ground and/or some air distraction, and get out quick, that should be too hard...?

so flying the commercial corridors, jamming UAE, getting turkey in, would be too many variables...

met a coursemate yesterday, he is on deputation in Dubai...:) had a funny thing to tell me, said, something like, You have to get Intelligence Clearance to get a freak`n email account...:)

Re: UR #70

UR writes: ``...It is not a coincidence that the Pakistan military has been able to hold its own against an Indian army with resources ten times those of Pakistan..``

What nonsense! Considering all those past defeats (and the recent one in Kargil), nothing could be farther from the truth. And if the Pakistani military has been able to increase its effectiveness (from crappy to so-so) over the past several years, it is only because Pakistan spends 85% of its budget on military and foreign-debt servicing. That leaves nothing for `supporting institutions and infrastructure` that decide the outcome of a war.

UR also added: ``...India has not been able to do the same against China...``

Again, a very ill-informed assumption. India has complete military parity with China. The only difference is that the Chinese are more aggressive. Indeed, after realizing that India is no longer ruled by `doves` like Nehru (who dreamed of a non-violent panchsheel abiding world), and accepting that the world`s second-largest country is now on a military parity, the Chinese are taking care not to antagonize India. Look at how they recently took care not to anger the Indians during the Kargil conflict.

Feroze:

Its good to see that someone shares my interests. Perhaps you should write an article, with your initial plan of attack. Let the readers critique it. Then based on the critiques, rewrite a final plan. That way you will get input from other people, besides myself.

You might want to keep a few things in mind. What you are trying to plan has been discussed down to the minutest details by Pakistan`s military planners, starting from the cadet at the academy to the generals in the high command, for over fifteen years. It has been the topic of many a thesis in the varioius Pakistani defence colleges. PAF`s military excercises are built around this. Pilots have spent their careers flying CAP missions around Kahuta. I know many of them. They probably have the bends in the valleys, and the names of the smallest streets leading to Kahuta memorized. There are stories in the military (probably false) of the army air defence major getting sacked, who refused to fire on a PIA fokker, which flew too low over Kahuta. So you need to keep all these things in mind when planning your attack. Did you see how quickly the Indian Mig was shot down when it entered into Pakistan airspace? That wasn`t a lucky shot.

In brief, this is all that the Pakistan military does during peace time. So the information I am giving you is based on discussing and reading this vast reservoir of knowledge, with different people in the PAF, and army. Having spent time in the PAF, I know they are not very good at management and administration; however they are extremely good at handling what you are trying to plan.

Good luck. You`ll need it :) I think you need input and ideas from other people besides myself. So how about writing out the initial plan.

Re: UR

Points well taken and I think that an article would be a good idea on the topic. UR, this is becoming an additiction, because I would really like to see if this is workable and if nothing else, this excerise is forcing me to develop a better understanding of Pakistan`s air defense network, which has been quite illuminating!

I think, at the present, I am becoming so focused on this that I seem to be missing the graphic for the pixel ! I am going to take some time away from this and re-think my options.

Feroze:

We seem to be attracting a crowd. How about creating a separate thread for this discussion? Perhaps you could write a brief article on your plan, and we could discuss it over there.

Feroke:

I must sympathesize with you, becuase you are attempting the near impossible :). But all the same, here are some more points.

First of all, everytime the US has actively participated with another country in combat, the justification given has been the self-defence of that country, i.e. VietNam. The only surgical operations the US has carried out have been by its own defence forces, e.g. against Qaddafi, Osama bin Laden etc. The US does not actively assist other countries in surgical strikes.

You seem to be underestimating the Pakistan military. It is still a very professional organization, with very professional people in its leadership. They may not be the best civilian administrators in the world, but when it comes to strategic and tactical military affairs, they are quite good. It is not a coincidence that the Pakistan military has been able to hold its own against an Indian army with resources ten times those of Pakistan. India has not been able to do the same against China. The only time the Pakistan has failed is because of poor political decision making. The ISPR has nothing to do with the decision making of the military.

I have met a lot of American officers, from the lowest to the highest rank, and they all hold the Pakistan military`s war-fighting capabilities in high regard. So I doubt the Pakistan military`s high command is going to let Pakistan get militarily isolated to an extent where anyone can just come in and attack Kahuta. It is almost comical to read people`s comments about Pakistani military leadership making decisions on whims.

A good strike plan does not allow for any assumptions. You should base your plan on not what could happen, but what is happening. A strategic alliance of all these countries, with such different ideologies, may (a very very big may) happen, but has not happened yet. So you cannot assume it will happen. Thus you cannot base you strike plan on it. Otherwise, why not just have the US sell the Israelis a couple of ships, and have them fire Tomahawks from the Arabian seas, at Kahuta, with US and Israeli air cover. No Pakistani aircraft can break through a US air defence system. Isn`t that what the US did against Osama Bin Laden.

Also, why are you so interested in the pilots carrying out such a long flight. That can be extremely exhausting. Why not just have Israeli pilots land in one of the countries, have a change of crew, and fly off from for the attack.

Again, too many assumptions, that have not occured yet. Base you attack on the facts, as of right now.

Re: temporal # 68

Okay........

Lets discount the American angle for awhile.
What by-standers and minor headches did you have in mind?

An Israeli solo effort will be difficult without Uncle Sam helping out little David logistically.

The prefered route of attack would be through the Red Sea, with the planes departing from Tel Aviv, Israel and using an international air corridor and call signs of a major airliner, but without refueling, it will only get them as far as the Horn of Africa.

There is always a possibility for Israeli C-141 Starlifter cargo planes to fly ahead of them and use some remote landing area in either Somalia or nearby to re-fuel the aircraft, but even still that would only bring them as far as Pakistan and the aircraft would have to re-fuel prior to attacking their targets.

Like I said before, KC-10s will be required for this mission. I wonder..... I wonder if the Indians have any planes for mid-air re-fueling and those aircraft can meet the Israelis and refuel them prior to entering Pakistani airspace?

Let me think about this.

Feroz:

The present state of Russia is a bottomless pit. No amount can be put in that can revive it. Have you seen an old farce ``Weekend at Bernie`s``? Boris is Bernie. He is clinically dead, believe me. All those photo ops are an illusion. It is not possible to count them in.

Now, let us continue this at the risk of becoming an ``academic`` exercise.

Two players and some minor bystanders. Be creative.

regards

Re: temporal # 65

I am not assuming that Pakistani military is a club of idiots!!! About the politicans, on the other hand, I am not so sure. The critical problem is that without the American logistical aid, this op is nothing more than an academic discussion. Temporal, the sine qua non is that I need those KC-10s, because of the distences involved and that means American help. Or, the Israelis can take a few KC-10s on loan from the USAF and it would work also! Hence, it is crucial to enlist their aid while giving them all the plausible denability they may want. The Indian option is debatable and may not be so attractive after all.

The use of old Russian airfields in Afghanistan is a good option and makes for less headaches, but the problem is transiting their airspace and whether they will ``green light`` American presense given the nationalistic nature of their domestic politics. On the other hand, massive American loans to bale out the Russian economy and an unlimited supply of vodka for Boris Yeltsin might just work!!! There is another card, which the Israelis might play.....

The Israelis taking over a Pakistani base, via a seaborne attack, and using it as a base of ops for attack is a logical plan, but the problem would be sustaining and resisting Pakistani counter-attacks.

A Pakistani military personel selling out for money is an exteremely realistic option and interestingly, people who do ``turn`` to the other side do, because of their own sense of patriotism! In such a case, if it happens, the money will not be an issue as much as the person`s reasons for betrayal and invariably, they would be one, which the person thinks are in the best interest of Pakistan itself! For example, a pro-western Pakistani individual concerned about a possible tilt towards Hezbulallah, as you mentioned, might do it to in order to protect Pakistani interests and ties with the west!!!

Temporal, the pysche of espionage and the people who turn against their nations is facinating. I think, this could be parleyed, but the problematic question is whether MOSSAD or the CIA have any HUINT (Human Intelligence) operatives in Pakistan, because of ISI`s paranoia. Such a person can be easily cultivated, but it is a long term prospect and then the question is, how much time are you willing to invest and can you wait for a final pay off?

An excerpt from an Indian writer,

``One day, a police party from Calcutta landed up in

Bombay and raided Dilip Kumar`s house. He was a Pakistani spy, the

police said, and they were about to arrest him. Dilip Kumar a spy? How

could that make sense? And, anyway, what secret information was he in

a position to communicate to the Pakistanis? The vital statistics of

Vyjayantimala?

It turned out that the Calcutta police had arrested

a suspected Pakistani spy. In his diary, they had

found the names of many well-known people. In

the finest traditions of the Indian police, they

promptly concluded that all the Hindus listed in

the diary were contacts while the Muslims were

enemy agents. One such Muslim was Dilip

Kumar.

It is a measure of how deep prejudice runs in our society that India`s top

star -- a friend of Nehru who was then still prime minister -- was

accused of espionage on the basis of such flimsy evidence only

because he was a Muslim. If Dev Anand`s name had been in the diary, it

is extremely unlikely that anyone would have bothered to raid him.

After several traumatic months, the police gave up for lack of evidence.

But rumours swept the city. Dilip Kumar had confessed. The police had

recovered a radio transmitter under his floorboards. He was a leader of

a gang of Muslim spies within the film industry. And so on.

It is to Dilip Kumar`s credit that he bore no bitterness or ill-will despite

such appalling mistreatment. Instead he was there, as always, ready to

support our troops in the war against Pakistan in 1965.

I mention all this lest you think -- as many people with short memories

or of a certain age do -- that Dilip Kumar is being absurdly sensitive

about Bal Thackeray`s campaign against him. To understand why Dilip

Kumar has reacted with such passion and force, you need to

understand that he feels that no matter what he does to prove his

patriotism, there will always be those who believe that it is not enough.

The problem with Thackeray has a historical origin. In 1967 when Dilip

Kumar was campaigning for V K Krishna Menon in North Bombay,

Thackeray was busy founding the Shiv Sena in its first avatar as a gang

of Congress stooges who beat up Malayalis who dared vote for Menon.

Later, Thackeray revealed himself to be India`s filmi groupie number

one. Movie stars flocked to the Senapati`s residence and told him he

was their Fan-apati while the old boy stared goggle-eyed. Only Dilip

Kumar had the dignity to remain aloof.

Thackeray never forgave him and by the time he had

launched the Shiv Sena`s Muslim-hating avatar, he

seized on Dilip Kumar as a representative of all that he

loathed -- a successful secular Muslim who saw no

reason to pay court to fascism, even when it was

dressed up as groupiedom.

This explains why the Shiv Sena picks on Dilip Kumar

again and again. During the Bombay riots, it criticised

him for daring to help resettle some of those it had

made homeless. When he said that he did not find the movie Fire

obscene, it sent a contingent of thugs who stripped down to their

underwear outside his house. A Shiv Sena MP even said in Parliament

that he thought Dilip Kumar was a traitor. And now, Thackeray wants him

to return the Nishan-e-Imtiaz, the highest civilian honour in Pakistan. ``

HELLO, DR. STRANGELOVE

Feroz:

Interesting thinking aloud about various possibilities in what you call ``mind games``. Some thoughts on the subject.

Pakistan has to be seen supplying bombs and technology to the Hezbullahis ------ that will perhaps be the only excuse for ANY direct or indirect USintervention in taking out Kahuta. Pakistanis in military and politics may be corrupt and mad BUT they are no fools! Therefore, in this `war game` I would keep the Excited States out till after the deed is done.

I would keep India out of it, too. They would suffer the consequences whether they are part of it or not. By being out of it they would hope to minimise the fall out, sorry for the pun.

So now let us start with our brothers in Israel and brother Pakistanis and perhaps one or two minor sheikhs. Between you and UR you have already discussed some scenarios.
Here are some other possibilities. (----give me a moment to don my Israeli cap).

REMOTELY PROBABLE: Using some abandoned airfield the Russians built in northern Afghanistan, have a go at Kahuta. Neat, surgical in and out. Remotely probable, because of the logistics involved in getting the equipment dellivery and retrieval. Wonder where Dostam is? Wasn`t AbdulRashid Dostam a Maj Gen in Air Force, a communist to boot?

MILDLY PROBABLE: Israelis monitor carefully a PAF base at or near the sea, possibly in southern Baluchistan. They sail out of Aqaba with commandos, pilots and ground crew. Take over the base, silently, ruthlessly, quickly. Adapt the planes available for a surgical strike on Kahuta. (Heck, now there is a script for a Hollywood blockbuster. All the elements are there except sex. Well, they can invent some). And sail back to Sharm el Sheikh.

EXTREMELY PROBABLE: Get some Pakistani military type to do it for them. ( Yeah, yeah. yeah I know. They are loyal, patriotic, efficient, truthful, organised you know-- all the attributes that angels have plus some! But, ignoring these angles, there must be some ``Pakistanis`` in the military forces too. I mean them Pakistanis that are branded as the most corrupt or second most corrupt in the entire world?)

Safe conduct, immigration and passports, for themselves and their third cousins, and 300-500 millions dollars in the bank can do wonders for their ``eemaan``.

FALLOUT: No matter what scenario is adopted in these exercises, it is impossible to destroy ALL the bombs Pakistan has on the ground. A knee jerk reaction is bound to envelope Indian cities: one, at the least, or several, at the worst. And then...............


MORE FALLOUT: You`d certainly make it to the ECL.

Apologise for this rather longish response. Will now sit back and look forward to your really long analysis.

regards

Re: UR # 63

Sorry for this being a long post......

The United States did provide intelligence and battlefield logistical help to sustain the French garrision of Dein Bein Phu in 1954, before it fell to General Giap`s North Vietnamese forces. American air force pilots were flying actual combat missions during the siege of Dein Bein Phu and ten years later, American Army`s I Corps was activily engaged in combat operations, in support of the Army of the Republic of Vietnam, in the Ia Drang Valley to push North Vietnamese forces north. This was an offensive action to cut the Ho Chi Minh trail, and create a security buffer around it, at the point it entered South Vietnam. They failed, because a part of the trial was in Laos and in 1972, the United States, on behalf of South Vietnam, would invade Laos to finally cut off the trial.

The United States was waging the Vietnam War, an offensive military action, on the behalf of South Vietnam in order to aid Saigon to resist communism.

The United States pilots did not engage in combat ops during the 1973 war, because the Soviet Union had send a demarché to Washington suggesting that it would not tolerate American intervention. Why do you think the Israeli armor halted its drive outside of Cario after destroying the Egyptian Third Army and Sadat was crying and begging for Moscow`s help? The Soviets had dispatched an airborne regiment to fight, if necessary, with the advancing Israeli forces and we all know that that would have meant!

Pakistan is, sotto voce, considered as a rouge state by the United States intelligence community, because of its ties and the support it gives to terrorist movements, i.e. the right to use Paksitani territory as sanctury from reprisals and risk of it proliferating its nuclear technology and the danger of that technology falling into the hands of an Islamic militant movement. The recent Pakistani gambit in Kargil has strongly suggested, to the American intelligence analysts, that Pakistani possesion of nuclear weapons has a de-stablizing influence in the region, because it has a perchant for advocating policies of adventurism and risk.

Why do you think that the international opinion was so strongly in favor of India and even Pakistan`s traditional allies, Saudi Arabia and China, refrained from openly associating with the Pakistani action and in private were cautioning Islamabad to re-think the consequences of its actions.

You are right in saying that Kahuta is a R&D facility and that Pakistan already has nuclear weapons, but Pakistan lacks a delivery platform for those weapons. It may have the means to deliver a nuclear warhead in the next few years, but at the present time it does not and it has to soley rely on its aircraft, modified for the purpose, to deliver them. Pakistani nuclear weapons delivery system, even including Shaheen IIs, do not have range or the sophistication of warhead design, which would lessen the warhead weight to increase fuel capacity for attaining altitude neccesary to effectivly target United States.

The only country, which they could target would be Israel and Israel has a defence treaty with the United States that mates Israeli security concerns with American security interests in the region. Any threat to the national security of Irael would be seen as a direct threat to the interests of the United States and hence, creating a clear and present danger to the security of the United States itself.

Therefore, the United States has a very narrow window of opportunity to tacitily and overtly seek the destruction of Pakistani R&D facilities, which enable Islamabad to target American shoreline with nuclear weapons. Pakistan can not retailiate, because it is depends on American waivers to get monetary assistence from IMF, the Paris Club et al. It can always make up the difference by proliferating its nuclear technology by becoming a rouge state, but that would only invite a massive military strike by the United States and a ``presidential authorization`` to contract MOSSAD to assasinate Pakistani nuclear scientists.

The United States has only to agree to provide Israel with the logistical support and it does not need to get involved. It just has to ``green light`` the Israeli plan and facilitate its success by ``encouraging`` other nations to allow the transit of Israeli aircraft through their airspace. Once the right to transit is allowed, there is no need to fly 200 AGL the entire route to the target and there will no concern of avoiding SAMs till the actual ingress into Pakistan.

UR, this is where the United States diplomacy would use the ``carrot`` approach to intice these nations and co-opt their sub-rasa (below the table) approval to allow the strike aircraft to proceed. What could America offer these nations in return for their ``understanding`` ? A better question is, what do these nations want? America could make them a offer they could not refuse!

UR, all the United States has to do is promise India a seat on the United Nations` Security Council and a new bi-lateral relationship and access for Indian nuclear scientists to work in its top secret labs and increased American investment in joint defence ties in India to off-set the Chinese dimension. In return all India has to do is feint an attack in Kargil or elsewhere to draw the Pakistani attentions and keep them occupied while the Israelis try to attack them.

You do not think that the Indians would jump at the possibility? If you do not believe me, ask the Indian Chowkwallahs on this site!

As to China, do you really think that China wants to give its chances for a seat on the World Trade Organiztion and American tilt in its affairs with Taiwan for Pakistan`s benefit?

In case of Turkey, it would do well to remember that the Turkish military, unlike its Pakistani counter-part, is non-religious and it wants to keep the Turkish political scene free from religious influences and it shares and has more in common with the American and pro-western ideals than it does with the regressive Islamic politics of Pakistan and its military.

What does Turkey want in exchange for allowing its airspace to used against Pakistan?

For starters, the United States could ``pledge`` its support behind Turkey`s bid to accquire memebership in the European Union, which it has been trying for the last 15 years. The American can increase their levels of commitment to Turkish Army in its struggles against the Kurdish Liberation Army and openly call it a terrorist organization and refuse to aid the Kurds in their demands for a seperate homeland. It could tell Turkey that it understands and supports Turkish concerns over the issue of Cyprus and will ask the Greeks to moderate their anti-Turk stand on the issue.

Do you really think that the Turks will forsake all of these inticements for Pakistan`s sake? Turkish self-interests, in these issues, would suggest that Ankara would have more to lose by not helping the Americans and Israelis than it could gain by standing next to Pakistan.

As to Saudi Arabia, do you really think that Pakistan is so important to the Saudis that they would be willing to ruin their ``strategic`` friendship with Washington? Remember, all the Americans have to tell the Saudis is they are not the only ones with oil and that the Americans can get oil from Mexico, Venezula, from the North Sea oil fields and from oil deposits in the Gulf of Mexico and Texas and Oklahoma to make up its enegry needs. Do you really believe that the Saudi princess will want to risk their easy life styles and all their wealth for Pakistani nuclear facilities?

UR, the same ``self interest`` approach can be applied to Oman and any other nation to enable their ``agreement`` to allow the use of their air space. Nations act on the principle of self interest and self-preservation and they will forget about Pakistan. Pakistan has no friendly nations for support; it has only donar nations, who dicate its national and foreign policies from offices in Paris, London, and Washington. Pakistan as a sovereign nation is a facade and it exists under such an illushion, because those who ``own`` it merely allow it to day-dream that it is one!

So, you see, my friend, just how easy this whole thing could be in reality!!! Like the old saying, ``truth is stranger than fiction``, this is the reality in which Pakistan finds itself today, because of its own policies and its own bad choices. As an ex-Pakistani military officer, you need to quit believing the press releases from ISPR and take a hard look at the security environment, which surrounds Pakistan.

Feroze:

You have asked for some comments, so here they are:

Directly aiding one country to attack another is a very big issue. Can you name one incidence where the US has directly aided another country in an attack (not self-defence, but in attack)? They only do that through an alliance, like NATO, or through the UN.

The only help the US may provide is intelligence. They will never directly aid Israel with refuelers. If my recollection is correct, even when Egypt was about to run over Israel, in 1973, the US pilots did not get involved directly. They only flew cargo missions to ferry supplies to Israel. What makes you think they will help in attacking Pakistan? This is a very incorrect assumption you are making. Please keep in mind, that Pakistan already has nuclear weapons, so Kahuta in now a R&D facility. The last thing the US wants to do is to piss off a country with nuclear weapons, by attacking it for no reason.

Saudia Arabia, Oman and Turkey will never help Israel in attacking Pakistan. They have nothing to gain, and everything to lose. Their help would cause Pakistan to ally with Iran and Iraq against them. Also, the Islamic parties/groups/organizations in SA, Oman and Turkey, would really put their govts to the test. What could America offer to these countries that would be worth taking on such a headache? Please let me know.

Also, flying over so many countries, at low level to avoid radar detection is not easy (in fact impossible, if you ask me). Do you realize how difficult it is to fly over even a small island without being detected, much less the whole Middle East.

Try flying at 200 feet AGL for even an hour in a fighter. It is like running a marathon. I do not know anyone who has done it for 9 hours. If you know someone who has done that, please let me know their name. I would like to meet them. And even with LANTRNs, the aircraft will have to climb to get refueled. Some country will detect these aircraft.

Even if all the countries that the aircraft have to fly through co-operate, and assuming the US is in on it (both these things are impossible, as far as I am concerned), and the aircraft make it to the Pakistan border, what happens then. You are assuming that Kahuta`s main line of defence is the PAF. It is actually the radars, and SAMs ( a whole bunch of them). Will four (extremely tired) F-4E pilots be enough to handle the Pakistan air defence system (which is pretty good, by the way).

Any plan that involves coordination of more than one country, has too many variables. The only time more than one country can work together successfully is if they have trained together in an alliance, like NATO. Even then they have political and military problems.

A good plan of attack is one that has a very high chance of success. Not one that might succeed if so many things can be worked out.

Your plan sounds good for a fictional book, but has too many assumptions for a realistic chance of success.

Again, I could be wrong, and you could be right. So let me know what you think........

Re: UR # 61

UR, the point you make is a good one, but not when no one wants to detect those aircraft!!!!!

There are two elements to my plan: logistical and political. If you know what the Russian word ``maskirova`` means, you will have an idea of what I intend to do with the political aspects.

Oman, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia may be pro-Pakistani nuclear programmes, but they all share something with the Americans and the key is to exploit this ``common understanding`` and forge a consensus, which would enable the transit of the aircraft. The PAF personnell deputed to airforces of Saudi Arabia, Oman and Tukey will not be a problem, because they do not need to know what is going on and they can easily kept outside the information loop!!!!

USAF will lend its aircraft if the right arguments are made for faciliting the mission and if a critical link can be established between its national security interests and the mission intent. All that needs to be done is to establish the fact that Pakistani nuclear research complex, targetted, presents ``a clear and present danger`` to the security of the United States itself.

There is already a strong argument for establishing this fact for the issuance of a ``presidential finding``, which could tacitily authorize American support for such a mission.

As to the Wild Weasels being effective over such an extended mission, there is some serious concern on this issue. However, I am not anticpating any hostile reactions till prior to an ingress into Pakistan.

Remember, this is supposed to take place during the night and PAF has a limited inventory of FLIR HUDs or LANTRIN pods to mount CAPS at night and that limits the number of PAF fighters up at night and even if they are, they will be near the Indian border, which leaves the back door open!!!!

The ingress from the Indian side is too predictable and given the location of the target near the Agfhan border, it makes for a ``balls to the wall`` approach and then there is the question of the egress. By the time the strike aircraft turn around, PAF will ready for them and it would eat them for lunch on their way back to the Indian airspace!!!!

Appreciate your thoughts......keep sending them.....keeps me on my toes!!!!!

Feroze:

Are you sure you know how Wild Weasels work... You seem to be over estimating their capabilities. You might want to look into it again.

I think it is impossible for aircraft to fly for such a long time over foreign lands, and not get detected. There is only so much Wild Weasels can do.

US tankers taking off from Saudia Arabia, Oman, and Turkey to help Israeli aircraft in their attack on a Pakistani nuclear site. That will never happen. The people in these countries are very pro-Pakistan nuclear program. Also, I believe Saudia Arabia, and Oman still have a significant presence of PAF officers in their Air Forces. Also, USA will never lend its aircraft for an attack on another country. They may not stop Israel, but they will never directly help.

The planes will be detected well before they enter Pakistani airspace.

You need to enter from the Indian border.

Just some thoughts........

re: UR

So far, I have decided on a strike force comprising of ten aircraft: 4 F-16Ds, 4 Kfir C-7s and two F-4Es. The -16s will be the lead aircraft and will be armed with a single GBU Paveway Laser Guided Weapon, four Sparrows and two external drop fuel tanks. The Kfirs will provide top cover to the -16s and will be designated as the lasing pod, directing the laser beam upon whose glide path the -16s will release their weapons on and they will armed with AIM-9O missiles and two drop tanks. The -4Es will act as Wild Weasel anti-radar aircraft and will fly ahead of the -16s to clear a ``path`` and will be armed with Shrike and HARM anti-radar missiles.

The operational designation for the mission is Gideon`s Hammer and the point of departure is Ramat David Air Base in Israel. From there the package will fly to Turkey; via Iraq into the Persian Gulf past the Straits of Hormuz and will ingress Iranian territory, some 200kms from east of Bandar Abbas and enter Afghanistan. The attack on Katuha will be from the west, from inside Afghanistan, because it offers the shortest distence to the target and fewest risk for an easy egress. The total mission time will be around 9.1 hours (one way)and will cover about 6,000 kms (one way). There will four mid air refuelings: one near Mosul in northern Iraq, one 300kms south of Kuwait City, one 150kms north of Oman and a final one, inside Afghanistan. The refueling will be done by KC-10 tankers of USAF; flying out of from Incirlik, Turkey; Saudi Arabia, and from Oman.

I will post a more detailed breakdown, by the hour, upon final completion of the plan and a description of the assets and how they wll correlate with each other. This is just a rough draft and there are more details to be sorted out. I have agonized over the locales of Pakistan SAMs and radars and the flying path of PAF CAPs, but due to a lack of hard evidence, there is nothing I can do about that invariable and have to just chance it!!!! There will be an element of deception to allow the UASF KC-10s to ingress into Aghanistan via Iran.

Would appreciate if you would hold your questions till the finalization of the plan and then we can discuss the operational parameters of the idea! Will post new developments as they are rationalized!!

Re: UR # 57

Sounds good to me.....I would love to have someone who is familiar with the operational routine of the PAF! I just picked Kahuta as the primary target and presently, I getting intel on Pakistan air defences and PAF and army SAM sites. So far, it seems like it is going to be like trying to thread a needle wearing blind folds!!!!!

Anyway, I am looking at this idea as a brain teaser and a mental challenge to be solved!

My e-mail is ferozrk@hotmail.com

Re: Sri # 55

Your impression was correct. A E-3 does transmit emissions, but commands are send on encryptic channels and on modulating pulse frequencies. That is not its greatest Achilles Heel, but the radardome, which puts out enough enegry to microwave a small bird in flight and is really hard to mask it! Once, you have identified that, tracking an E-3 is not hard. E-3 does not have any defensive measures, but it does have fighters guarding it. So even though it is easy to track, it is hard to kill.

Okay....in your scenrio, I am assuming that PAF and IAF both have AWACS.

In that case, an IAF AWACS can track and identify PAF planes in the air by their speed, altitude and heading and it can steer the Indian MiGs clear of any PAF planes. It can use its suite of ECM (Electronic Counter Measures) to blind PAF radars and it can do the same for the Indian Navy. I would assume that you meant Indian Navy`s Sea Harriers for attacking Karachi, because Indian ships can not come any closer than 200 miles to Pakistani coast since that would put them under Pakistani missiles like Exocet AM-39s and under threat from PAF`s Mirage V naval strike aircraft, based in bases from Karachi to Pasni.

It can tell the Indian ships, where Pakistani missile boats are; their distence, range and course headings, so the Indians can take preventive measures against them and are fully aware of their threat environment.

On the other side of the street, a PAF AWACS can act as ``trip wire`` and warn about the in-coming Indian raid. A PAF E-3 can use its radar to track the Indian MiGs as soon as they take off from their bases and judging from their flight profile (attacking aircraft have a very specific formation, called the Alpha formation. The best way to explain this would be to think of your hand with fingers evenly spaced out and your thumb and little index fingers at 45 degrees from the base of your palm), it could vector any PAF CAP to intercept and interdict their flight path, thus saving both time and fuel and increasing the time factor by which the Indians could be detected and engaged.

In the case of the naval scenrio, it could track the flight of the Indian Sea Harriers and pin point the location of the Indian carrier. This info then would be tranmitted to PAF Mirages, who feed the data into their computers and head towards the Indian carrier on the vector provided by the E-3. Even if PAF does not have an E-3, it does have Orion P-3C maritime surveillance aircraft, which can do pretty much the same thing.

The only difference would be that they would have to ``guess`` the Indian carrier`s location, whereas an AWACS could ``see`` it on its radar. A carrier during combat flight ops also transmits large amonts radar emissions, which can be triangualated!!!

Also, in case the PAF does not have an E-3, the success of Indian raid over Lahore would increase, because the PAF CAPS would have to directed to the MiGs by PAF Forward Air Controllers or radar sites and only after the Indian aircraft have been airborne and that limits the reaction time of PAF to intercept the Indian raid. Hence, the suprise element would be with the IAF, but for a limited time.

Another thing to consider is that during a full scale Indo-Pakistan Stupidity (war) #4, Indian AWACS would be the prime target of PAF, because since PAF wants to achieve air superiority, it can can not afford to ignore the threat of
an AWACS. The IAF can protect them by flying behind the FEBA (Forward Edge of the Battlefield Area), but that would limit their tactical utility.

An AWACS does not confer a huge advantage; it merely increases the tactical options available to a commander by providing him with an accurate ``map`` of the battlefield. An E-3 is more of a force multiplier than an actual weapon. Also, it costs around 300 million dollars, that puts it within the buying power of both India and Pakistan, if they really, really want to buy it. The real problem is the issue of technology transfer and the Americans are paranoid about sharing the technical specifications of AWACS with any other nation and hence, for political reasons their deployment with either PAF or IAF is highly unlikely.

The only other air force, other than the United States Air Force, which uses the E-3 is the Royal Saudi Air Force. How did the Saudis get it? Money.....lots of it and effective lobbying, which mooted the concerns of pro-Israeli lobby in Washington, but that is another story.....

Hope this info helps!!!

Omar,

Most pakistanis will be happy that you exist, who can see the victory in kargill while the entire pak nation believes that something terrible has happened. See the pak news papers, the perception of loss is pervasive, from mujahideen to elite diplomats.

There was a great break through, Lahore process. Now after kargill pakistan is requesting for talks and india is putting forth conditions. That is some success.

Most of these details about costs are just numbers without much significance. If the aircraft are not lost in war, they are lost in flight accidents or are scrapped. The same with ammunition. All the costs of procurement and maintenance are losses to begin with, money could have been better spent on infrastructure and education. From an economic point of view, one has to look at the marginal cost of kargill operation. Other than the cost of moving the troops all other expenses are already committed. Specifically, instead of flying and drpping a few bombs in the deserts of Rajestan as part of training, the bombs have been dropped on pak troops. So what, where is the additional cost.

Any how please do take time to articulate your success story, a lot of pakistanis are eager to hear from you.

Re: UR #53

I am sorry, but had I seen your comments, I would have posted a reply to you with Sri`s post.

The mission of the Israeli Air Force is similar to Pakistani Air Force and that is to gain air superiority over the battlefield and to assit the ground elements in resisting an attack. Both Israel and Pakistan lack what can be termed as ``a critical depth`` and consequently, the concept of a tactical retreat does not exist, in either airforces` way of thinking, in face of a determined attack. Israel and Pakistan do not have land that can be traded for time and like the PAF, Israeli Air Forces` main operating bases are within 400-500 kms of their adversaries. Therefore, both air forces are dedicated to winning air superiority, because if they lose that edge, the enemy can effectivily neutralize their bases by over running them with his ground troops.

Both Pakistan and Israeli pilots are highly trained to fight against huge odds and both understand fully well that they are the first and last line of defense for their respective nations. This sense is further reinforced by a warrior corps d` espirit in their own training, aggressiveness and combat skills that neither pilot, Pakistani or Israeli, thinks that he will lose in an air engagement. Coupled with this, both airforces place stringent emphasis on Dissimilar Air Combat Tactics (DACT) and they learn to fight like their adversary might by having aggressor squadrons, which mimic their adversaries war doctrine and air combat tactics based on the flight characterists of enemy fighter aircraft.

This is just the obvivious similarities.....

As to the scenrio of an Israeli air attack on Pakistan, that was just an example. Your points are valid and I would have to look at them in detail. I think Omar has hooked me on to this idea, because I am seriously thinking about formulating a plan of attack on Pakistani nuclear facilities. Right now I am in the recon state and I am gathering ``intelligence``. After that, I will chose the ``attack package`` and a time frame. Right now, I am opting for F-16D and the Kfirs, because of their similar radar characterists with PAF`s F-16s and Mirage fighters. This is just a pre-lim determination, but attack will likely occur at around 0400hrs, Pakistani Standard Time, and hopefully on a moonless night.

You are right! I still have to work out the logistical wrinkles of the plan; route, flight time, fuel consumption, weapons payload, pilot fatique, PAF airbases within intended flight path, PAF and PAK army radar sites and their max range of coverage, PAF CAPs and BARCAPs over target, time on target and the egress routes out the ``kill box``

Just give me some time.......!!!!!!!!

Feroze:

This is getting interesting. I am looking forward to your scenario, for an Israeli attack on Kahuta. I have a scenario of my own. I am familiar, in detail, with how the PAF works. I have also been a student of military history, and military studies, for quite sometime. We should exchange notes.

Personally, I t