PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 31 Aug 2019, 01:28
by kingtiger88
https://medium.com/@sameerjoshi73/a-sha ... 30e7412f65

Cutting beyond the rhetoric of both sides, New Evidence on the PAF F-16 vs IAF MiG-21 on 27 Feb 2019 suggests the following -
1. A man-made object on fire, fell over the skies between Kotli and Charhoi on 27 February 2019.
2. There are very clearly two distinct and different crashes noticed in the various videos shot by the residents in the PoK on 27 February 2019.
3. IAF lost ONE MiG-21 over PoK on 27 February 2019. So, who lost the other aircraft?

Please see EVIDENCE No 6 and beyond.

The author argues -
"Yes, there is no image of the debris on ground (neither will there be anything meaningful)— but since time immortal, kills have been granted basis gun camera footage — in absence of which, the crashing image of the ‘Tadpole’ is a very serious piece of evidence — debunking consistent lies of the PAF and ISPR on the subject."

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 NEW EVIDENCE

Unread postPosted: 31 Aug 2019, 14:10
by basher54321
Kills (Claims really) have been based on many things historically – gun cam film being one of the better means – but even then 50 years later the war records get matched up and the aircraft actually flew home damaged for example.

Gun cam footage is better than any pilot account that’s for certain – or any still images of radar plots for that matter. In fact if the IAF had anything half as good as Gun Cam footage to show us perhaps Twitter wouldn’t be clogged up with Indias and Pakistanis throwing mud at each other.


The amateur blogger also writes:
“The first casualty of War is always the Truth! “


Unfortunately for him there are also “Two sides to every story” – but in this blog we only see the Indian side (as to be expected) but it does put any credibility of the blog down the toilet. He cant just write off everything the other side states with the poor evidence presented or because he thinks all Pakistanis are liars. :doh:

If I hadn’t scrolled to the bottom and seen it was the same blogger who posted something very similar months back (was also posted here) this would have been ignored.

He goes into a lot of effort clearly and desperately wants there to be something somewhere – but no matter how much he writes at the end of the day what is presented is mostly pie in the sky and straw clutching – regardless of how many times he says it is proof or a fact.

There is a lot to be concerned about. Look at this quote:

It also gives us a clue that in all probability, the PAF aircraft which crashed was a single seater, unless for some reason in a twin seater — the other pilot was not able to eject out.


Unless this person retired years back why would he conclude that a twin seater F-16 always has two pilots? The majority of the worlds F-16s are trainers so someone in the back is dead weight in combat – the first AMRAAM shot in combat was from a twin seat US F-16D with one pilot only!!

Anyway the truth may out in many years time and some of this guys conjecture might be close or it might not be.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 NEW EVIDENCE

Unread postPosted: 02 Sep 2019, 10:04
by boilermaker
The Indians got their a$$ kicked because their comms were in the clear and the ISi had the beads on them.

It has been proven in part by the fact that the IAF has quietly scrambled to get Israeli freq encryption ,hoping and jamproofing from Israel.


There is no way in such situation of information superiority that the pakistanies were in a position of taking risks and vulnerability. And indeed, the IAF rely on eyewitness accounts and conjectures instead of actual solid information of what happened. This report only reinforces the confusion and wonderment of the IAF regarding what happened, much like a civilian bystander instead of someone who has a real picture of the event.

They were too arrogant and proud and the mission was a complete fiasco, sadly. We shall note that one thing that grates me about Chuck Yeager was his naive endearment for Pakistani thugs, but he did say something interesting about them vs the Israeli pilots. In his view the Israei were too proud and too arrogant and he liked the Pakistani pilot humility and dedication , knowing they were underdogs and had to perform very carefully and on a budget. And frankly, I believe it. That he liked of course being considered as a god by them vs Israelies who were pompous is understandable, but this is how the pakies were able to extract all the juices of airman ship and management from him effectively.

Do not underestimate them

Case closed.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 NEW EVIDENCE

Unread postPosted: 03 Sep 2019, 13:16
by hythelday
Wow, the mental gymnastics that guy performed is truly astounding.

Great to hear that an F-16 can burn to crisp leaving no wreckage behind within a couple of seconds it takes it to crash. Keep the good content coming, @kingtiger88!

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 NEW EVIDENCE

Unread postPosted: 03 Sep 2019, 16:37
by vm
boilermaker wrote:The Indians got their a$$ kicked because their comms were in the clear and the ISi had the beads on them.

It has been proven in part by the fact that the IAF has quietly scrambled to get Israeli freq encryption ,hoping and jamproofing from Israel.


There is no way in such situation of information superiority that the pakistanies were in a position of taking risks and vulnerability. And indeed, the IAF rely on eyewitness accounts and conjectures instead of actual solid information of what happened. This report only reinforces the confusion and wonderment of the IAF regarding what happened, much like a civilian bystander instead of someone who has a real picture of the event.

They were too arrogant and proud and the mission was a complete fiasco, sadly. We shall note that one thing that grates me about Chuck Yeager was his naive endearment for Pakistani thugs, but he did say something interesting about them vs the Israeli pilots. In his view the Israei were too proud and too arrogant and he liked the Pakistani pilot humility and dedication , knowing they were underdogs and had to perform very carefully and on a budget. And frankly, I believe it. That he liked of course being considered as a god by them vs Israelies who were pompous is understandable, but this is how the pakies were able to extract all the juices of airman ship and management from him effectively.

Do not underestimate them

Case closed.

I guess since you have closed the case, we all will have to go with you.
You have tried to portray a distance from the Pakistanis, I guess to appear as a neutral party , but it seems sort of obvious where your royalties lie. Fooled nobody but good attempt nevertheless.
The reference to chuck Yeager and his deep love for the wonderful airmanship of Pakistanis gave you away.
With reference to the article, the Pakistanis kept deaths of 450 to 4000 army soldiers in kargil hidden for more than a decade, what is a solitary plane ?
The truth will take another decade to emerge.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 NEW EVIDENCE

Unread postPosted: 04 Sep 2019, 01:57
by hythelday
Alright then, I didn't bother with this crap when the event happened, but now since some still try to concoct some sort of "evidence", let's examine some real evidence, shall we?


This is dedicated to everyone believing in "SECOND PARACHUTE" story irreversibly proving a second aircraft was downed:


Soviet planes had several iterations of ejection seats, including but not limited to K-22, KS, KM-1, KT-1, K-36 etc.

Here's how a K-22, a seat used in MiG-19 worked:

Image

One couldn't help but noticing that a separate stabilizing/main chute deployment parachute exists.

The venerable MiG-21 used several different seats, with early models having KS, which in the later models, including MiG-21bis, were upgraded to KM-1 ejection seat. And it's my pleasure to inform the entire congregation of "Second Chute Church" that after the ejection the seat also deploys it's own parachute and lands in the immediate vicinity of the pilot. "Why would they do that?", one may wonder? Well you see, the seat carried the survival kit for the pilot (НАЗ-7), so it had to land near the pilot for him to be able to use that, as neatly illustrated by this caricature from the polish magazine. Whoever doubts me may type all that text manually into translator. I didn't do that, because I believe it will be pretty identical to the russian sources I found online.

Image

They say that the picture is worth that a thousand words, so let me post some for your entertainment:

Exhibit 1: LNA Fishbed shot down in Libya this summer, pilot ejected, survived, captured. Run a reverse image search to read the details. Please note the holy second chute:

Image

Exhibit 2: Libyan Air Force Flogger (MiG-23 also used KM-1) shot down over Benghazi in spring 2011, pilot ejected, survived. Run a reverse image search to read the details. Please note the holy second chute:

Image

Now to the videos, I found one quite interesting and informative. It's mainly about Soviet K-36 (an impressive specimen to say the least!), but I believe there's footage of Fishbed also (maybe KM-1, maybe modified to accept K-36) at 0:55 mark:

Exhibit 3a: @00:55-01:03 a single person ejects from a plane that looks a lot like Fishbed then transforms into two separate chutes, because the seat has it's own
Exhibit 3b: @01:47-01:54 we see footage of Fullback ejection. It apparently uses older generation of K-36 seat, because two ejected dummies are separatee from their seats... which soon after deploy their own chutes, doubling the number of chutes. Note that the seat chutes are slightly different from persons' chutes. I hope none of you are going to claim a four-seater Fullback exists.
Exhibit 3c: @01:55-02:00 we are treated to a footage of ejection from the tail of a "flying lab". I believe this is also an early gen K-36. As one can notice (watch at 0,25 speed) the seat deploys it's own chute and can be seen dangling near by the pilot in the upper right corner after disappearing from the frame for a second.



"Well why don't you see seat having their own chutes in some well documented crashes at airshows?" Well, I got two versions for that. Either it's disabled/removed because the pilots don't need survival kit at the airshow, OR they were equipped with later gen K-36 (called K-36M, K-36D and K-36D-3,5) which got rid of the seat chute in lieu of strapping survival kit (upgraded to НАЗ-8) directly to the pilot:

Image

Actually, one can see footage @01:16-01:19 of ejected pilot with a raft dangling beneath him after two Fulcrums collided at 1993 RIAT. Or one can look up footage of Fencer shot down by Turks. It also features two pilots parachuting down with rafts dangling beneath them. Su-24 was the first aircraft to feature K-36 seat and thus is eligible to be upgraded to newer K-36 models.

So there you have it: the second chute apparently seen by the locals (but so far absent from any footage) is not a conclusive proof of the second downed aircraft, since MiG-21 would have produced two chutes by itself.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 NEW EVIDENCE

Unread postPosted: 04 Sep 2019, 02:13
by weasel1962
which would also explain why the Pakistanis thought there were 2 pilots initially (and that they had downed 2 planes) when it was only one.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 NEW EVIDENCE

Unread postPosted: 04 Sep 2019, 06:51
by vm
weasel1962 wrote:which would also explain why the Pakistanis thought there were 2 pilots initially (and that they had downed 2 planes) when it was only one.

Nope.
The air conflict took place at 10 am local time.
The Pakistani army spokesperson tweeted and gave a live news conference at 12 pm, clearly saying that 2 pilots were in custody, one being in hospital.
PM Khan niazi( no relation to gen niazi who surrendered 90000 troops in 1971, to India), gave a speech at 5 pm in Parliament, stating that 2 pilots were in custody. So after 7 hours.
Either this was the heaviest fog of war ever seen in history or their were 2 pilots.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 NEW EVIDENCE

Unread postPosted: 04 Sep 2019, 06:59
by weasel1962
Clearly in India "nope" means yes. *shaking head here*

For x hours, the Pakistanis obviously thought they had 2 pilots when they only had 1.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 NEW EVIDENCE

Unread postPosted: 04 Sep 2019, 08:00
by Shimud
oh no...not again :doh:

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 09 Sep 2019, 01:48
by n3sk
https://www.indiatoday.in/amp/india/sto ... 2019-08-23

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.telegr ... id/1699879

https://youtu.be/QUKo_3KNwEY

There are reports the Indians did shoot down something else that day, their own helicopter. According to the article in India Times, this shoot down happened in the same area 10 minutes after the MiG was shot down.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 NEW EVIDENCE

Unread postPosted: 09 Sep 2019, 06:56
by jedit
hythelday wrote:So there you have it: the second chute apparently seen by the locals (but so far absent from any footage) is not a conclusive proof of the second downed aircraft, since MiG-21 would have produced two chutes by itself.


Very informative, however forget it because right now, even Russians (the designers) couldn't come and confirm this was clearly the second chute of the Mig21 per their assessment because India just will not accept it because that would mean accepting total failure. Indians regarding the 27th Feb skirmish can be summarized like this ... "We admitted we shot our own Mi17 chopper, Pakistanis are liars, people said 2 chutes, so it was the F16."
There are so many videos out there of them analyzing the smoke contrail using the word 'tadpole' that 'PAF F16 tadpole' is actually a Googleable thing now pointing to Indian nerd videos and posts.

vm wrote:I guess since you have closed the case, we all will have to go with you.
You have tried to portray a distance from the Pakistanis, I guess to appear as a neutral party , but it seems sort of obvious where your royalties lie. Fooled nobody but good attempt nevertheless.
The reference to chuck Yeager and his deep love for the wonderful airmanship of Pakistanis gave you away.
With reference to the article, the Pakistanis kept deaths of 450 to 4000 army soldiers in kargil hidden for more than a decade, what is a solitary plane ?
The truth will take another decade to emerge.

I guess you meant 'loyalties' and yes they didn't fool anyone, neither did you, nor will I.
vm wrote:Nope.
The air conflict took place at 10 am local time.
The Pakistani army spokesperson tweeted and gave a live news conference at 12 pm, clearly saying that 2 pilots were in custody, one being in hospital.
PM Khan niazi( no relation to gen niazi who surrendered 90000 troops in 1971, to India), gave a speech at 5 pm in Parliament, stating that 2 pilots were in custody. So after 7 hours.
Either this was the heaviest fog of war ever seen in history or their were 2 pilots.


Your bruised ego is evident in you mentioning Bangladesh's war of independence in 1971 from Pakistan instead of providing any irrefutable evidence in the form of wreckage etc.
For a second, assume Greece and Turkey had a conflict today and Greece shot a Turkish F16 (assumption to prove a point, no offense against Turkish forces), Turkey couldn't prove they won the battle in 2019 by reminding back people of Cyprus conflict between the two countries' Armies let alone Air Forces.
Good that you mentioned Kargil conflict where Pakistan Army supposedly didn't acknowledge casualties. You conveniently forgot to tell everyone PAF lost no plane in that conflict while IAF lost 3 there as well. One Mig 21, One Mig27, and one Mi17. I must however mention PAF likely shot none, at least 2 if not all 3 were downed by SAMs.

1999: IAF lost 2 jets and one Mi17
2019: IAF lost at least 1 jet (2 if you believe PAF theory similar to F16 theory), and 1 Mi17.

PAF has no proven loss in both conflicts so let's not go by history there, best keep discussion logical and try providing 'irrefutable' evidence. If it takes 10 years, take 10, come back to this forum in 10 or 20 or whenever when you've found the wreckage.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2019, 00:50
by kingtiger88
The issue is that none of you blokes, who have extensively detailed the Russian drogue shoot theory or dismissed the article outright, have unfortunately gone through the videos or the photos posted in the piece.

It may or may not be an F-16, but one thing is sure - TWO aircraft crashed in POK that day. And if you close your eyes to the investigation, declaring it BS even before reading the related content - then really not much to say here, is it?

Personally after going through this, beyond what the author pieces as evidence, not sure if it was a F-16. But if the amateur video is authentic, sure that a 'second' aircraft did crash. That's all. DO the math now, drogue chute or whatever !!

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2019, 03:05
by garrya
kingtiger88 wrote:The issue is that none of you blokes, who have extensively detailed the Russian drogue shoot theory or dismissed the article outright, have unfortunately gone through the videos or the photos posted in the piece.

It may or may not be an F-16, but one thing is sure - TWO aircraft crashed in POK that day. And if you close your eyes to the investigation, declaring it BS even before reading the related content - then really not much to say here, is it?

Personally after going through this, beyond what the author pieces as evidence, not sure if it was a F-16. But if the amateur video is authentic, sure that a 'second' aircraft did crash. That's all. DO the math now, drogue chute or whatever !!

TBH, I have read it and it is BS.
He basically tried his best to cherry pick information to convince himself and the audience that F-16 did crash, but it is not convincing at all. Unless you are Indian

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2019, 13:13
by basher54321
kingtiger88 wrote:The issue is that none of you blokes, who have extensively detailed the Russian drogue shoot theory or dismissed the article outright, have unfortunately gone through the videos or the photos posted in the piece.


Yes well most will dismiss that blog, as alluded in the post above and for the reasons stated - you can't really blame them.

Yes if this was X and that was Y we could spend a lot of time speculating but still being none the wiser.


Both sides have had public celebrations recently to some extent haven't they with awards for Minty Aggarwal (Yuddh Seva Medal) and Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman (Vir Chakra) - not clear if there will be an actual ceremony.

Pakistan seems to have had what looked like a music awards ceremony apart from the audience looks to be mostly military and both pilots with the MiG/Su claims are paraded on stage. They also showed new pictures of both R-73s they claim to have found with the Wing Commanders MiG - with English labels of course (they know their audience :wink: ) .

The truth is out there.......maybe

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 21 Sep 2019, 02:04
by jedit
basher54321 wrote:
kingtiger88 wrote:The issue is that none of you blokes, who have extensively detailed the Russian drogue shoot theory or dismissed the article outright, have unfortunately gone through the videos or the photos posted in the piece.


Yes well most will dismiss that blog, as alluded in the post above and for the reasons stated - you can't really blame them.

Yes if this was X and that was Y we could spend a lot of time speculating but still being none the wiser.


Both sides have had public celebrations recently to some extent haven't they with awards for Minty Aggarwal (Yuddh Seva Medal) and Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman (Vir Chakra) - not clear if there will be an actual ceremony.

Pakistan seems to have had what looked like a music awards ceremony apart from the audience looks to be mostly military and both pilots with the MiG/Su claims are paraded on stage. They also showed new pictures of both R-73s they claim to have found with the Wing Commanders MiG - with English labels of course (they know their audience :wink: ) .

The truth is out there.......maybe


It is definitely out there but even if the truth turns out to be in favor of PAF, you will not be able to convince the Indian side because F16 or the smoke contrails there of is all IAF has to show for 27th Feb. They for sure lost a Mig21 and admitted to shooting down their own Mi17. IAF based their case on radar tracks superimposed on publicly available topography map images shown to media which is only convincing if you want to be convinced that IAF is doing this to bring out the truth and not to save face. PAF from the get go claimed a second jet (Su30) that they claimed landed on the Indian side but they played smart by not even trying to provide similar radar tracks. That reminds me to point you towards the interesting part of that music award ceremony thing where PAF showed video feed from the actual PGM that they landed near the Indian military site.

https://youtu.be/RYLcCzE4WIM?t=588 - skip to 9:51 in case URL doesn't automatically forward you there.

PAF waited 7 months to release this footage while IAF was parading actual metal shards from the AMRAAMs in a live televised press conference the day after the skirmish!
Narrative of superiority of armed forces over Pakistan has been built on the Indian media so definitively over the past decade or so that it is just impossible to accept a numerical loss. It is neutral forums like these that bring a reality check as neutrals pose questions and call out silly claims (from both sides).

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 NEW EVIDENCE

Unread postPosted: 24 Sep 2019, 04:10
by vm
Its typical that instead of giving proof that the Pakistani army has given the casuality figures for the kargil conflict, you diverted the topic to planes crashed/shot down. Still awaiting the ispr or official figures of the army men Pakistan lost in kargil (4000 pak soldiers dead as per ex PM Nawaz Shariff).

I could similarly divert the topic to the Pakistani atlantique plane shot down by India, killing 16 personnel, including 5 officers, but I won't.

My post just exposed the historical lies inherent in the Pakistani army's statements, right from 1965 to kargil and now this incident. Understandable since pak army is a political organisation.

Also I alluded to video recorded official statements of the Pakistani army spokesperson, who continued contradicting himself for days after the incident.

Remember that your army head and president, gen Musharraf, is in record saying many times that bin laden was not in Pakistan. And now we know the Americans killed him right in the cantonment town of Pakistan, living in a palatial house with scores of his family members, undetected?? . Not very trustworthy the official statements of your army.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 NEW EVIDENCE

Unread postPosted: 24 Sep 2019, 05:28
by jedit
vm wrote:Its typical that instead of giving proof that the Pakistani army has given the casuality figures for the kargil conflict, you diverted the topic to planes crashed/shot down. Still awaiting the ispr or official figures of the army men Pakistan lost in kargil (4000 pak soldiers dead as per ex PM Nawaz Shariff).
I could similarly divert the topic to the Pakistani atlantique plane shot down by India, killing 16 personnel, including 5 officers, but I won't.
My post just exposed the historical lies inherent in the Pakistani army's statements, right from 1965 to kargil and now this incident. Understandable since pak army is a political organisation.
Also I alluded to video recorded official statements of the Pakistani army spokesperson, who continued contradicting himself for days after the incident.
Remember that your army head and president, gen Musharraf, is in record saying many times that bin laden was not in Pakistan. And now we know the Americans killed him right in the cantonment town of Pakistan, living in a palatial house with scores of his family members, undetected?? . Not very trustworthy the official statements of your army.



- Burden of proof lies with IAF not Pakistan. If IAF could spot 1 ft holes (that no one else but Indians could see) in tin roof of the Balakot compound they allegedly struck, it must be a cake walk to find an F16 shot down by their pilot, that their soldiers saw going down, and that likely gave a huge smoke trail possibly for hours. Let us see that, its been 7 months!
PAF planes are watched by aviation nerds like many present on this forum and tail numbers of virtually all jets are in public, IAF hasn't been able to categorically say, well viper tail number XYZ went down, flown by this pilot. (Indians allege Pakistanis lynched their own PAF pilot, as if there could be any more absurdity left to add.)

- IAF Chief in what is pretty much his farewell interview to media as Air Chief said that even though he believes a jet went down, he does not have any 'evidence' (irrefutable). Being in charge of this operation, his legacy will probably be based on this operation (way more on the line than a bruised ego of an average Indian aviation fan), yet he simply tones down the rhetoric to "unfortunately we do not have the evidence, we are 100% another air craft went down in that sector and our only Air Craft in the area was Abhinandan (mig21 shot down)". That should be enough to say he doesn't even want to be as categorical as saying it is an F16 because he being so experienced knows way better than to think PAF hid a shot down F16 in plain sight!

https://youtu.be/GAxoAYD-JQs?t=805

He couldn't tone down the rhetoric any bit more or it would simply mean retracting all earlier claims from Govt and IAF itself, can't imagine the shame it would bring. I guess you have more credible information than Air Chief of IAF on the day this happened, so I urge other members to show your claims due respect they have so far denied.

- You did cite Atlantique incident, brave of you. I will not waste more than a sentence to enlighten the unaware here that an IAF Mig 21 jet shot down a Pakistan 'Navy' maritime patrol twin prop aircraft Bréguet 1150 Atlantic in what many say was an unprovoked kill to boost morale of IAF that lost 2 jets and a Mi17 chopper in 1999 Kargil conflict a month earlier vs 0 for PAF. Let's not switch topics though.

- Pakistan 'Army' spokesman's statements do not prove an F16 went down. If a F16 went down, provide the irrefutable evidence, India lost that window, its been 7 months. Case closed, let's not spam forums trying to cite 'new' evidence when its all those videos from the same day showing smoke. I encourage Indians to not make absurd terms like 'tadpole smoke f16' googleable tags linking to Indian blog posts like the one you posted originally.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 26 Sep 2019, 03:03
by eloise
Indian saw the blip then it vanished but they can't provide physical evidence
0_P3wgpR_oehMAy4qz.png

I think the false track could be generated by this:
71947424_1121569974698402_9193381289544122368_n.png

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 26 Sep 2019, 06:57
by vm
eloise wrote:Indian saw the blip then it vanished but they can't provide physical evidence
0_P3wgpR_oehMAy4qz.png

I think the false track could be generated by this:
71947424_1121569974698402_9193381289544122368_n.png

I think aliens could have generated the signals.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 26 Sep 2019, 07:46
by eloise
vm wrote:I think aliens could have generated the signals.

Pakistani F-16s are equipped with ALQ-211
http://www.f-16.net/f-16-news-about-ALQ-211.html

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 26 Sep 2019, 08:58
by Corsair1963
The IAF and PAF account of the 2019 vary, what actually happened? What are popular misunderstandings of it?

We shot a MiG-21 on our side and a Su-30 on their side (which we didn’t claim initially because we already had the MiG-21 pilot in custody and that was enough of a message that we had the superiority). Plus we didn’t want to rub it in their face that we had shot two jets which in turn would escalate the problem. Needless to say, we have the wreckage of MiG-21 with all four missiles intact (hence no shooting of our jets took place) plus our electronic warfare (EW) platforms have all the radio transmissions of the IAF — and it’s a treat to listen to those confused and devastated calls of IAF pilots and controller which the shooting was taking place (IAF do not operate on secure radios so all their RT chatter is easily picked by EW platforms. Plus a MiG-21 in Block zero-one i.e below 20,000 with AA-12 Adder can only dream of getting a missile off rail against targets beyond 20NM (plus the Kopyo radar doesn’t support AA-12 launches beyond 20NM and that too on head-on aspects). Plus the evidence the Indians showed was a AMRAAM piece on their side claiming it was from a F-16 they shot. My simple question: if they found a piece of AMRAAM on their side but no jet attached to it then where did the wreckage go? Duhhh. And for a MiG to launch a missile against an F-16 and get it to A-pole and in the meantime get shot by another jet speaks poorly of the MiG-21’s pilot’s priorities as a fighter pilot. Nobody in their right frame of mind would enter the kill zone being spiked from all side and still continue hot without listening to any controller or formation member. In the intense comm jam environment with non secure radio the poor MiG-21 pilot didn’t receive any threat warnings given by his controller and I’m sure he didn’t have a moving map display telling him he had crossed the border and the comms were being jammed.

Source: https://hushkit.net/2019/07/19/flying-f ... ter-pilot/

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 26 Sep 2019, 09:49
by garrya
Corsair1963 wrote:Plus a MiG-21 in Block zero-one i.e below 20,000 with AA-12 Adder can only dream of getting a missile off rail against targets beyond 20NM (plus the Kopyo radar doesn’t support AA-12 launches beyond 20NM and that too on head-on aspects).
https://hushkit.net/2019/07/19/flying-f ... ter-pilot/

Good point.
Below 20k ft, AA-12 Adder is limited to 22 km from head on aspect and 5 km from tail on aspect.
RVV-AE@.jpeg

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 04 Oct 2019, 17:29
by notafanboy
eloise wrote:Indian saw the blip then it vanished but they can't provide physical evidence
0_P3wgpR_oehMAy4qz.png

I think the false track could be generated by this:
71947424_1121569974698402_9193381289544122368_n.png


Bravo and a R-73 will lock on to fake Radar Tx because it's ARH missile, not IR guided.

Few salient points regarding article that no one bothered to address

> Author (A Mirage 2000 vet, not just another journalist) proves both crashes happened 50 seconds apart.
> Both crash sites are 13-17 Km apart.
> Both events happened on Pakistan's side.

Here's another account of Brazilian writer questioning veracity of AAMs displayed by Pakistan

https://translate.google.com/translate? ... 2,15700265

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 05 Oct 2019, 18:45
by eloise
notafanboy wrote:Bravo and a R-73 will lock on to fake Radar Tx because it's ARH missile, not IR guided.

The screen is from AWACS. No R-73 was used

notafanboy wrote: Few salient points regarding article that no one bothered to address
> Author (A Mirage 2000 vet, not just another journalist) proves both crashes happened 50 seconds apart

Just because he is a pilot doesn't mean he isn't bias. Another Indian pilot said Mig-21 is more maneuver than F-16 and he was proven wrong: viewtopic.php?f=30&t=1872&start=90


notafanboy wrote:> Both crash sites are 13-17 Km apart.
> Both events happened on Pakistan's side.

R-73 can't fly that far

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 06 Oct 2019, 07:22
by garrya
notafanboy wrote:.
> Both crash sites are 13-17 Km apart.

That is further than R-73 tail chase range.
R-73 engagement envelope from manual:
Head on range on the left hand side, tail chase range on the right hand side.
424CB230-55A8-4441-AC12-04412B68FADA.png

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 06 Oct 2019, 11:10
by notafanboy
eloise wrote:The screen is from AWACS. No R-73 was used


IAF stated position is R-73 brought down F-16. PAF says Mig21 didn't fire any R-73 for which i gave the other link.

eloise wrote:Just because he is a pilot doesn't mean he isn't bias. Another Indian pilot said Mig-21 is more maneuver than F-16 and he was proven wrong: viewtopic.php?f=30&t=1872&start=90


Fair enough. Not uncommon for pilots to vouch for their fighters. It's favoritism.

notafanboy wrote:R-73 can't fly that far

garrya wrote:That is further than R-73 tail chase range.
R-73 engagement envelope from manual:
Head on range on the left hand side, tail chase range on the right hand side.
424CB230-55A8-4441-AC12-04412B68FADA.png


The answer to this is in article itself plus once R-73 hit F-16, Mig21 was gunning back towards border/LoC. He intruded in Pak's side because he locked on to F-16. Hence the distance and 50 sec delta t between events.

Image

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 07 Oct 2019, 15:54
by garrya
notafanboy wrote:The answer to this is in article itself plus once R-73 hit F-16, Mig21 was gunning back towards border/LoC. He intruded in Pak's side because he locked on to F-16. Hence the distance and 50 sec delta t between events.
Image

When I wrote tail chase range, I mean maximum engagement envelope from the tail aspect.
Moreover, the diagram I referred to isn't of a generic IR missile but it is the envelope of R-73 itself taken from manual
At altitude of 20k ft, from tail aspect, the maximum engage distance of R-73 is roughly 5 km
This is an enlarged version of that launch envelope.
R-73.jpg

I read the article but feels too forced like the author has the belief that an F-16 was shot down, he tends to test hypotheses in a one-sided way, by searching for evidence consistent with that belief instead of all relevant pieces of evidence. Sort of confirmatory bias if you will. TBH, some analysis is questionable, such as the tadpole analysis, he said the "Tadpole’ is mathematically calculated to be at a distance of between 37–40 km from, and 8,000 feet higher than the observer" and " height of the Tadpole is calculated as approx. 800–1000 feet" but it wasn't actually explained how they were calculated exactly for the reader to examine the accuracy. Furthermore, his conclusion that the "tadpole" is indeed burning fuel doesn't sound very convincing. For instance, why assume it to be fuel instead of afterburner or missiles launch or flare?.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 09 Oct 2019, 16:40
by notafanboy
garrya wrote:When I wrote tail chase range, I mean maximum engagement envelope from the tail aspect.
Moreover, the diagram I referred to isn't of a generic IR missile but it is the envelope of R-73 itself taken from manual
At altitude of 20k ft, from tail aspect, the maximum engage distance of R-73 is roughly 5 km
This is an enlarged version of that launch envelope.
The attachment R-73.jpg is no longer available

I read the article but feels too forced like the author has the belief that an F-16 was shot down, he tends to test hypotheses in a one-sided way, by searching for evidence consistent with that belief instead of all relevant pieces of evidence. Sort of confirmatory bias if you will. TBH, some analysis is questionable, such as the tadpole analysis, he said the "Tadpole’ is mathematically calculated to be at a distance of between 37–40 km from, and 8,000 feet higher than the observer" and " height of the Tadpole is calculated as approx. 800–1000 feet" but it wasn't actually explained how they were calculated exactly for the reader to examine the accuracy. Furthermore, his conclusion that the "tadpole" is indeed burning fuel doesn't sound very convincing. For instance, why assume it to be fuel instead of afterburner or missiles launch or flare?.


One basic look and rough calculation tells me that in proportional navigation we can assume jet taking periphery of circle while missile takes straight route between fire and explosion points i.e, for missile taking 2r distance, jet flies pi*r (half circumference of circle) distance. That in itself gives 1.5x range (not that its point of argument here)

Author hasn't pinpointed loss of F-16 just for the sake of it. What are the chances that RADAR track of F-16 vanishes at two distinct RADAR monitoring systems at same time when Mig 21 fires R73, two jets go down in Pak at distinct places and time, Pak acknowledging arrest of two pilots and then altogether denies using F-16 while India shows wreckage of AIM 120 C-5?

Crashed jet can be JF-17 etc for all author cares but he maintains two jets crashed in Pak and rest circumstantial evidence points to F-16.


P.S:

Here is Pakistani story broken few days back

https://twitter.com/RT_com/status/1181574970973003776

Image

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 09 Oct 2019, 22:27
by basher54321
notafanboy wrote:What are the chances that RADAR track of F-16 vanishes at two distinct RADAR monitoring systems


Where did the IAF state the exact composition of the radar track they presented? I have seen that they stated both AWACs and (unknown number of) ground radars involved but not what the track was actually made up of.

One thing bothering me since this began has been the presentation of technology as being infallible and not subject to issues including EW/SigInt.


The Brazilian may have a point regarding the serial no on the R-73 and generally makes a good attempt to match up the photos. I don't see him mention that the photos/videos do not necessarily show the entire MiG crash site.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 10 Oct 2019, 03:04
by garrya
notafanboy wrote:One basic look and rough calculation tells me that in proportional navigation we can assume jet taking periphery of circle while missile takes straight route between fire and explosion points i.e, for missile taking 2r distance, jet flies pi*r (half circumference of circle) distance. That in itself gives 1.5x range (not that its point of argument here)

To start with, proportional navigation doesn't mean the missle will fly a direct path to target,a BVR missile will fly ballistic arcs and still use lead navigation. To elaborate, proportional/lead navigation only means the missile will fly toward the future location of the aircraft instead of its current location.
lead.PNG

Furthermore, the radar will only tell you the direct distance between your aircraft and your enemy rather than the distance the enemy have flown. What I meant is that radar will let you know the current direct distance between the two aircraft, represented by the green line in the photo below, this is also what shown on his HUD, rather than the distance that enemy traveled represented by the red curve.
radar distance.jpg

Moreover, the engagement diagram is not supposed to show the maximum fly distance of R-73, it supposed to represent the maximum distance that the pilot can take a shot and that missile can reach the target. The pilot doesn't have to care what trajectory the missile will take, the manual only need to tell him at what range he can launch his missile and that missile can reach target before it falls down from the sky.
To sum up, the distance that the jets fly in your calculation was never a part of consideration.

notafanboy wrote:Here is Pakistani story broken few days back
https://twitter.com/RT_com/status/1181574970973003776

This is how we feel about the alleged F-16 shootdown

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 10 Oct 2019, 03:34
by garrya
notafanboy wrote:Author hasn't pinpointed loss of F-16 just for the sake of it. What are the chances that RADAR track of F-16 vanishes at two distinct RADAR monitoring systems at same time when Mig 21 fires R73, two jets go down in Pak at distinct places and time, Pak acknowledging arrest of two pilots and then altogether denies using F-16 while India shows wreckage of AIM 120 C-5?


This is the kind of reasoning I am talking about, because the belief is that 1 F-16 was shootdown, hence all evidence are only explained in the way to support that belief. For instance I don't think there was any information regarding what point in time the Mig-21 launch R-73 or what point in time the Phalcon illustrates the F-16 disappeared from his scope. But for the sake of argument, assuming they disappear at the same time, how can we be sure that isn't just the F-16 engage AIDEWS, chaff and flares then dive to low altitude as any pilot would?.The only possible evidence that 2 aircraft were shootdown is the tadpole. The tadpole supposed to implied F-16 were hit and exploded but at the same time, it can be the result of R-73 hitting flares or fuel tanks or even F-16 using afterburner, the possibilities are endless. The eye witness account is even more ambiguous given that they are only civilians, at the start of this shenanigan we have seen Indian claiming Mig-21 pieces belong to F-16 and they even went as far as pointing out some series number allegedly linked to Jordan F-16 transfer. Before that was debunked it spread everywhere on the internet with many supporters. My point is that eye witness are not a reliable source of information. Furthermore, Pakistan denied using F-16 has a lot to do with the restriction that US put on F-16 deal, they are only allowed to use them to attack terrorists.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 11 Oct 2019, 08:08
by jedit
notafanboy wrote:Author hasn't pinpointed loss of F-16 just for the sake of it. What are the chances that RADAR track of F-16 vanishes at two distinct RADAR monitoring systems at same time when Mig 21 fires R73, two jets go down in Pak at distinct places and time, Pak acknowledging arrest of two pilots and then altogether denies using F-16 while India shows wreckage of AIM 120 C-5?


We cannot blindly believe either side in such a skirmish so contradictions in either side's statements don't amount to irrefutable evidence. There are many facts and contradictions Indians are conveniently ignoring.

- IAF Chief in what is pretty much his farewell interview to media as Air Chief said that even though he believes a jet went down, he does not have any 'evidence' (implying irrefutable). His legacy probably hangs on how history books will narrate this story and yet he is not willing to fuel the F16 theory for there is always a risk of something ala 'Wikileaks' or declassifying of documents confirming Pakistani stance. Again, he says he believes plane went down, but he refuses to unequivocally declare it an F16 just to be safe. Smart of him!

https://youtu.be/GAxoAYD-JQs?t=805

If IAF chief (who definitely has more information than the keyboard warriors) won't say it with absolute certainty, would you believe these tadpole theories. If anyone was to perform scientific evidence based research to locate the alleged F16, absolutely nobody had more incentive or resources than IAF.

- IAF in its first and only formal official presser said PAF crossed into Indian air space and I quote:
"On 27th February at around 10:00 hours, IAF radars detected a large package of PAF aircrafts, heading towards the Indian territory, towards general area Jhangar. They breached Indian Air space west of Rajauri in the Sunderbani area."

However Air Chief B S Dhanoa in an interview said "They did not come into our air space.", "none of them (let me tell you) crossed into our territory". Look at the link below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEnITYOQ23Y - 0:14 and 0:55

Now that is IAF confirming PAF stance that they didn't cross. PAF also confirmed they did not shoot down the Mi17 helicopter and that it was possible fratricide, something IAF confirmed 7 months later. IAF also said PAF failed because our jets quote 'thwarted the plan' but then PAF showed video link till the bombs hit confirming they were in touch with the PGMs they landed. PAF officially never did a presser, only Pakistan Army (entirely different entity) released this news which explains why there were contradictions and retractions.

- Would you really believe radar traces provided by the AF whose radars couldn't identify their own chopper. IAF shot down their own Mi17 killing 7 on their side and then want their people to believe in victory on the day. Their An-32 transport air craft vanished a few weeks later and it took them a week to trace it. Those are all radar monitored events. You want the world to believe their radars are a 100% to be believed against an enemy known to have deployed jamming and ECW in a highly planned retaliatory strike.

garrya wrote:This is the kind of reasoning I am talking about, because the belief is that 1 F-16 was shootdown, hence all evidence are only explained in the way to support that belief. For instance I don't think there was any information regarding what point in time the Mig-21 launch R-73 or what point in time the Phalcon illustrates the F-16 disappeared from his scope. But for the sake of argument, assuming they disappear at the same time, how can we be sure that isn't just the F-16 engage AIDEWS, chaff and flares then dive to low altitude as any pilot would?.The only possible evidence that 2 aircraft were shootdown is the tadpole. The tadpole supposed to implied F-16 were hit and exploded but at the same time, it can be the result of R-73 hitting flares or fuel tanks or even F-16 using afterburner, the possibilities are endless. The eye witness account is even more ambiguous given that they are only civilians, at the start of this shenanigan we have seen Indian claiming Mig-21 pieces belong to F-16 and they even went as far as pointing out some series number allegedly linked to Jordan F-16 transfer. Before that was debunked it spread everywhere on the internet with many supporters. My point is that eye witness are not a reliable source of information. Furthermore, Pakistan denied using F-16 has a lot to do with the restriction that US put on F-16 deal, they are only allowed to use them to attack terrorists.


You have a point. When they said F16s weren't used, it may not have been clear whether F16 was used or not because that could be propaganda and lies and trying to vaguely abide by the terms of use of F16s, but it was fairly certain that an F16 did not go down. No military wants to be caught in a lie where it cannot back out. Mig21 wreckage leaked on Pakistani side of Kashmir and Mi17 (fratricide) wreckage leaked from Indian side of Kashmir. What stopped a single video of F16 from coming out. Curious only for those who aren't blindly following the Indian line. When the spokesman said F16 wasn't used, he would've been raked if an F16 wreckage came out.

basher54321 wrote:Where did the IAF state the exact composition of the radar track they presented? I have seen that they stated both AWACs and (unknown number of) ground radars involved but not what the track was actually made up of.


They did not. Their radar info isn't the most reliable to say the least. Their radar officer who was awarded for her 'heroics' on the day said "when i lost blip of Wing Commander Abhinandan, whether he could hear my comm, this i cannot surely say he had heard or not, i was continually monitoring air situation" - 13:40 on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfM2lmxZ6bE

She of course knows whether Abhinandan heard her or not. She's stuck.

i - If she confirms Mig21 pilot was in touch, then both were complicit in Mig21's crossing of LoC over to the enemy's side and getting shot.

ii - If she confirms he didn't hear her, this would confirm IAF's failure against PAF jamming.

iii - If she confirms he heard her but ignored orders (something PAF and OSINT sources from Pakistani side report), then awarding both is a contradiction in itself and explains IAF only awarded both to save face and not admit failure in chain of command.

These are the only three eventualities so I refuse to believe she didn't know. Pilot has been back for 7 months, she could've found out after he came back whether he heard her or not. Also, comm links have logs, protocols, checksums, its not hard to figure out whether someone was jammed or not.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 11 Oct 2019, 18:19
by basher54321
jedit wrote:You have a point. When they said F16s weren't used, it may not have been clear whether F16 was used or not because that could be propaganda and lies and trying to vaguely abide by the terms of use of F16s, ........................ When the spokesman said F16 wasn't used, he would've been raked if an F16 wreckage came out.


You could take a guess that it was intentional misinformation in a time of conflict but to me that doesn't totally wash because at some point he was going to be outed anyway, so my guess would be total incompetence because the guy is living in the dark ages if he somehow thought every piece of information could be controlled even at that point.

If you are going up in front of the cameras in front of the world during a major incident you better be good on the camera regardless if you are lying or not - showmanship is what it is about and in particular making yourself and the country look good to the world. When the AMRAAM was found that guy and Pakistan were looking very stupid. Cooler heads stating something along the lines of "We will let you know when we have ascertained facts" would have put both sides in better light.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 12 Oct 2019, 00:12
by jedit
basher54321 wrote:
jedit wrote:You have a point. When they said F16s weren't used, it may not have been clear whether F16 was used or not because that could be propaganda and lies and trying to vaguely abide by the terms of use of F16s, ........................ When the spokesman said F16 wasn't used, he would've been raked if an F16 wreckage came out.


You could take a guess that it was intentional misinformation in a time of conflict but to me that doesn't totally wash because at some point he was going to be outed anyway, so my guess would be total incompetence because the guy is living in the dark ages if he somehow thought every piece of information could be controlled even at that point.

If you are going up in front of the cameras in front of the world during a major incident you better be good on the camera regardless if you are lying or not - showmanship is what it is about and in particular making yourself and the country look good to the world. When the AMRAAM was found that guy and Pakistan were looking very stupid. Cooler heads stating something along the lines of "We will let you know when we have ascertained facts" would have put both sides in better light.


Fair point. Many said a spokesperson from Air Force should have been charged with informing everyone about the details rather than the Army spokesman. Then again, they Air Force does not have such an elaborate and dedicated propaganda wing as the Army does in Pakistan.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 12 Oct 2019, 07:25
by kingtiger88
Guys, I am amused that none of you are addressing the core issue that the author, though biased towards a F-16 shootdown (which I ain't sure basis the reconstruction theory he gives), outlines - I think what is bought out conclusively is that TWO jets crashed in Kashmir that day.

I am amused by the chute theorists and the vets supporting same, but conveniently not addressing that there are TWO distinct videos in the same and there is no question of a drogue in one of the same.

Please explain the below given image. Are these the SAME plane or are TWO different planes? Referring to same author's tweet - https://twitter.com/joe_sameer/status/1 ... 33216?s=20

Last but not the least, there is some talk also of a PAF Blue on Blue, may not have been a F-16, maybe a JF-17. A frat from a HQ-16/ SPADA or whatever.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 12 Oct 2019, 07:28
by kingtiger88
Ok. So the video link for the insinuated PAF shootdown at Khuiratta from the piece has been taken down.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 13 Oct 2019, 08:34
by notafanboy
garrya wrote:To start with, proportional navigation doesn't mean the missle will fly a direct path to target,a BVR missile will fly ballistic arcs and still use lead navigation. To elaborate, proportional/lead navigation only means the missile will fly toward the future location of the aircraft instead of its current location.
lead.PNG

Furthermore, the radar will only tell you the direct distance between your aircraft and your enemy rather than the distance the enemy have flown. What I meant is that radar will let you know the current direct distance between the two aircraft, represented by the green line in the photo below, this is also what shown on his HUD, rather than the distance that enemy traveled represented by the red curve.
radar distance.jpg


Again this explains my earlier crude assumption that proportional navigation increases effective range of missile by 1.5 by adjusting its trajectory. Taking R-73 numbers, above can be considered as right angled triangle with 4 and 3 kms as other two measurements of triangle with hypotenuse as 5 km. So its 7/5 = 1.4


garrya wrote:Moreover, the engagement diagram is not supposed to show the maximum fly distance of R-73, it supposed to represent the maximum distance that the pilot can take a shot and that missile can reach the target. The pilot doesn't have to care what trajectory the missile will take, the manual only need to tell him at what range he can launch his missile and that missile can reach target before it falls down from the sky.
To sum up, the distance that the jets fly in your calculation was never a part of consideration.


You are right if you think in that perspective but proportional navigation takes a short cut (if you will) towards a target thereby increasing the effective range. Yes, Trajectory does matter because missile is not chasing fighter jet per-se and AFAIK missile parameters are mentioned in tail chase context.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 13 Oct 2019, 08:48
by notafanboy
garrya wrote:
This is the kind of reasoning I am talking about, because the belief is that 1 F-16 was shootdown, hence all evidence are only explained in the way to support that belief. For instance I don't think there was any information regarding what point in time the Mig-21 launch R-73 or what point in time the Phalcon illustrates the F-16 disappeared from his scope. But for the sake of argument, assuming they disappear at the same time, how can we be sure that isn't just the F-16 engage AIDEWS, chaff and flares then dive to low altitude as any pilot would?.The only possible evidence that 2 aircraft were shootdown is the tadpole. The tadpole supposed to implied F-16 were hit and exploded but at the same time, it can be the result of R-73 hitting flares or fuel tanks or even F-16 using afterburner, the possibilities are endless. The eye witness account is even more ambiguous given that they are only civilians, at the start of this shenanigan we have seen Indian claiming Mig-21 pieces belong to F-16 and they even went as far as pointing out some series number allegedly linked to Jordan F-16 transfer. Before that was debunked it spread everywhere on the internet with many supporters. My point is that eye witness are not a reliable source of information. Furthermore, Pakistan denied using F-16 has a lot to do with the restriction that US put on F-16 deal, they are only allowed to use them to attack terrorists.


US giving Pakistan F-16 to fight terrorists was always a baloney. Why would Pakistan need 500 AIM120 c-5 AMRAAMs for terrorists ? Yes eyewitness accounts can't be relied upon when it comes to complex details but is it too much complex to distinguish 1 and 2 pilots ?

Fact is Pakistan F-16 never saw R-73 incoming since it wasn't equipped with MAWS. It wasn't even aware that one Mig21 beached BARCAP until an AEWACS told them so. For diving part, other RADAR that observed F16 going down was Thales GS 100 LLTR.

Yes Indian media too created confusion in this whole scenario with half baked theories. My next reply will prove there were 2 pilots.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 13 Oct 2019, 09:01
by notafanboy
jedit wrote:...


I didn't even bother to read your post since most of the stuff looks to be repetition of what was discussed earlier.

My only one question

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I2_C9x0VIUc&t=72s

This is video of you Army spokesperson DG ISPR on official ISPR channel.

Timestamp: 1:06

One pilot is dead and one pilot was released who was captured.

Captured pilot = IAF Mig 21 pilot.
Second dead pilot = ?????

This video is uploaded on March 6, full 1 week after 27 Feb.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 13 Oct 2019, 17:56
by garrya
notafanboy wrote:Again this explains my earlier crude assumption that proportional navigation increases effective range of missile by 1.5 by adjusting its trajectory. Taking R-73 numbers, above can be considered as right angled triangle with 4 and 3 kms as other two measurements of triangle with hypotenuse as 5 km. So its 7/5 = 1.4
You are right if you think in that perspective but proportional navigation takes a short cut (if you will) towards a target thereby increasing the effective range. Yes, Trajectory does matter because missile is not chasing fighter jet per-se and AFAIK missile parameters are mentioned in tail chase context.

You are really míunderstanding the proportional navigation and the purpose of missile envelope diagram.
To begin with, the direct path to target is not always the most efficient path to target. BVR missile for example, they will climb to higher altitude so that they can coast in low density air toward target yet they still use proportional navigation (lead pursuit). In other words, using lead pursuit doesn't necessary mean your missile fly a straight line to target and in many case, a curve part will actually increase lethal range of missile.
496CF587-C95A-4387-9DF2-C82E0551B818.png

What lead pursuit guided does is LEAD your target, in layman term, it basically guide your missile toward the future location of your target base on its current heading and velocity. This has 2 benefits the first one is so that missiles don't have to maneuver significantly matching target maneuver and losing valuable energy, the second is so that missiles don't have to fly the distance as far as the target itself. This part is especially vital in your misunderstanding, because you are thinking that missiles launch envelope diagram in manual supposed to show the missile maximum kinematic range. It isn't. Full stop. Missile launch envelope diagram is not supposed to give pilot a "guess when you can attack" game. A pilot in combat do not have excess time to waste on pointless practice like that. The missile envelope diagram only tell the pilot one thing, very specific thing: at X altitude, with specific heading, with certain missile then what range he can press the launch button and his missile can reach target. That it. He doesn't need to know what trajectory the missile will take or how far can the missile fly before it fall down. If you pay attention, you will notice that the head on aspect range is larger than tail on aspect range, that because when something fly toward you, it is easier to reach it even if your missile was launch from further out. By contrast, if they are flying away, then your missile is useless the moment it decelerate to lower velocity than what it is chasing. What does this all mean?. All the features of a misile that give it more efficient flight path is already considered In the missile launch envelope diagram. Because, that the whole point of the diagram.For the pilot to know if his missile will reach target when launched at a certain range. FYI, Tails chase here only mean launching from tail aspect rather than using pure pursuit navigation.
0B6F0223-43D3-4702-864E-5DFBA42BED3F.jpeg

To elaborate further, let examine your hypothesis of how proportional navigation increasing missile effective range in the photo below. The pure pursuit path is the same one as the flight path of target- the red curve. The short cut with proportional navigation is the green lines. Up to that point it is correct. Your wrong assumption is to assuming that the range shown on missile launch envelope diagram is the red curve. It isn't, because if it is , there would be no way for the pilot to know when he is in range to launch. Because his radar will only give him the value of the green lines.
306C1EF2-2DC7-40CB-B776-81633FDDB66C.png

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 13 Oct 2019, 18:38
by garrya
notafanboy wrote:US giving Pakistan F-16 to fight terrorists was always a baloney. Why would Pakistan need 500 AIM120 c-5 AMRAAMs for terrorists ?

I agree but that is in their agreement, so I guess we can only blame the policy maker
notafanboy wrote:Yes eyewitness accounts can't be relied upon when it comes to complex details but is it too much complex to distinguish 1 and 2 pilots ?

If they think the small chutes/drogue attached to the ejection seat is another pilot then that is very possible mistake to make

notafanboy wrote: Fact is Pakistan F-16 never saw R-73 incoming since it wasn't equipped with MAWS. It wasn't even aware that one Mig21 beached BARCAP until an AEWACS told them so. For diving part, other RADAR that observed F16 going down was Thales GS 100 LLTR.
Yes Indian media too created confusion in this whole scenario with half baked theories. My next reply will prove there were 2 pilots.

IMHO, their F-16 should know if Mig-21 breached BARCAP because there are 3 of them very close together. If Mig-21 can detect and lock one F-16 from tail aspect then others F-16 should be able to detect and lock that Mig-21 from head on aspect. That not only because APG-68v9 is a better radar set than Kopyo but also because a closing target stand out better from side lobes clutter than a retreating target. It is also important to note that while Pakistan F-16 are not equipped with MWS, they are equipped with RWR and Mig-21 doesn't have an IRST. Besides, according to the Indian Mig-21 pilot, he used radar to lock on to the F-16, thus in any case they should got a fair amount of alert.
7E0C10EF-91C8-467F-8D5C-03771306BBF7.jpeg

DC8372C8-9B84-47AD-82FE-CA4D1C21F97B.png

Thales GS100 is a ground radar, so TBH, it is the one most affected by radar horizon problem if the F-16 was diving

kingtiger88 wrote:Guys, I am amused that none of you are addressing the core issue that the author, though biased towards a F-16 shootdown (which I ain't sure basis the reconstruction theory he gives), outlines - I think what is bought out conclusively is that TWO jets crashed in Kashmir that day.
Please explain the below given image. Are these the SAME plane or are TWO different planes? Referring to same author's tweet - https://twitter.com/joe_sameer/status/1 ... 33216?s=20.

TBH, if you look at the whole thing from a neutral perspective, the only thing we can say he did brought out conclusively is that there are 2 smoky object on the sky, but there are too many possible causes for that smoke thingy varied from flares, missiles launch, afterburner use, explode EFTs ...etc. Thus, to conclude that the two smoke things mean two fighters were shot down is such an ambitious assumption that most third party (not related to Indian or Pakistan) would be hesitant to make

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 14 Oct 2019, 04:26
by garrya
Kopyo radar on Mig-21-93 can detect target with RCS of 5m2 from 57 km
The Kopyo radar has a 57km detection range against a 5m² (54ft²) radar cross section, or fighter-sized target. It can track eight targets and shoot at two simultaneously.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ile-56106/

Whereas even the first F-16 radar, APG-66v1 can track target such as T-38 from 27 nm - 50 km and it can engage 6 target simultaneously.
APG-66A.gif


The later APG-68v9 set on their Block 50/52 is significantly better than APG-66
apg-68v9.PNG

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 15 Oct 2019, 04:59
by weasel1962
So is it the R-77 or R-73?

If it was the R-73, what has the radar got to do with things?

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 15 Oct 2019, 07:59
by garrya
weasel1962 wrote:So is it the R-77 or R-73?

If it was the R-73, what has the radar got to do with things?

AFAIK, it the R-73
Radar is used to get distance, closure rate and heading of the target so pilot know where the target is and whether he is in range.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 16 Oct 2019, 01:08
by gc
https://theaviationgeekclub.com/the-myt ... less-junk/

One wonders if they have any improvement in reliability since then. Newer missile sbut same reliability makes no difference.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 16 Oct 2019, 01:09
by weasel1962
garrya wrote:
weasel1962 wrote:So is it the R-77 or R-73?

If it was the R-73, what has the radar got to do with things?

AFAIK, it the R-73
Radar is used to get distance, closure rate and heading of the target so pilot know where the target is and whether he is in range.


So what was the mig-21 shot down by? A sidewinder or Amraam>?

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 16 Oct 2019, 02:48
by airomerix
weasel1962 wrote:
garrya wrote:
weasel1962 wrote:So is it the R-77 or R-73?

If it was the R-73, what has the radar got to do with things?

AFAIK, it the R-73
Radar is used to get distance, closure rate and heading of the target so pilot know where the target is and whether he is in range.


So what was the mig-21 shot down by? A sidewinder or Amraam>?


An AMRAAM.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 16 Oct 2019, 02:58
by weasel1962
Great, so if the R-73 shoot down is validated, the Amraam engagement range would have to be that of the R-73. The alternative is that another F-16 (the one that was apparently shot down) was nearer to the Mig-21 than the other F-16 that shot it down in which case, the PAF is dumb enough to fly an F-16 in front of another when engaging an adversary.

Really makes me wonder why the Su-30mki couldn't do the same since the PAF F-16s were also firing Amraams at them.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 16 Oct 2019, 04:23
by garrya
weasel1962 wrote:Great, so if the R-73 shoot down is validated, the Amraam engagement range would have to be that of the R-73.

Actually worse, AMRAAM's head-on engagement range would have to be greater than R-77's head-on engagement range, but still shorter than the tail on engagement range of R-73.
weasel1962 wrote:Really makes me wonder why the Su-30mki couldn't do the same since the PAF F-16s were also firing Amraams at them.

Because even AIM-120A has significantly better range than R-77.
AIM-120AB.png

RVV-AE@.jpeg

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 16 Oct 2019, 04:25
by weasel1962
Doesn't the Su-30mki also carry the R-73?

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 16 Oct 2019, 04:30
by garrya
weasel1962 wrote:Doesn't the Su-30mki also carry the R-73?

It can, but R-73 has shorter range than R-77 hence the paradox.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 16 Oct 2019, 04:36
by weasel1962
So the PAF were firing Amraams at the Su-30mki outside their range of the Su-30mki's short ranged R-73 but within the short range of the R-73 of the Mig-21?

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 16 Oct 2019, 04:41
by garrya
weasel1962 wrote:So the PAF were firing Amraams at the Su-30mki outside their range of the Su-30mki's short ranged R-73 but within the short range of the R-73 of the Mig-21?

Actually worse when we realize that missile's head-on range is greater than their tail on range.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 16 Oct 2019, 05:37
by madrat
I really thought this thread had no chance for a second page. Boy was I wrong.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 16 Oct 2019, 06:51
by weasel1962
A few more posts and we can even get up to page 5. Not bad for a work of fiction.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 16 Oct 2019, 17:08
by notafanboy
garrya wrote:
notafanboy wrote:
0B6F0223-43D3-4702-864E-5DFBA42BED3F.jpeg

To elaborate further, let examine your hypothesis of how proportional navigation increasing missile effective range in the photo below. The pure pursuit path is the same one as the flight path of target- the red curve. The short cut with proportional navigation is the green lines. Up to that point it is correct. Your wrong assumption is to assuming that the range shown on missile launch envelope diagram is the red curve. It isn't, because if it is , there would be no way for the pilot to know when he is in range to launch. Because his radar will only give him the value of the green lines.
306C1EF2-2DC7-40CB-B776-81633FDDB66C.png


Effect of proportional navigation will be more profound in WVR or SRAAMs because that's where angle will vary the most. In BVR scenario, yes the missile will fly upwards but that's usually not the SOP that pilots are trained to do ideally. They would rather position their a/c much above the altitude of bogey so that they get max range and KE as additional bonus before lobbing BVRs.

I am assuming the Red curve is straight line in head-on and tail chase parameters of missile without proportional navigation because that will define true linear range. But it's an off-boresight launch using HMS so pilot does know range.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 16 Oct 2019, 17:25
by notafanboy
garrya wrote:If they think the small chutes/drogue attached to the ejection seat is another pilot then that is very possible mistake to make


I am not basing eyewitness accounts only on what they saw in sky but what they saw on ground and that is two pilots. Eyewitnesses even described second pilot as a Sikh which clearly mig 21 pilot was not. Sikh mean a guy with turban and beard.

garrya wrote:IMHO, their F-16 should know if Mig-21 breached BARCAP because there are 3 of them very close together. If Mig-21 can detect and lock one F-16 from tail aspect then others F-16 should be able to detect and lock that Mig-21 from head on aspect. That not only because APG-68v9 is a better radar set than Kopyo but also because a closing target stand out better from side lobes clutter than a retreating target. It is also important to note that while Pakistan F-16 are not equipped with MWS, they are equipped with RWR and Mig-21 doesn't have an IRST. Besides, according to the Indian Mig-21 pilot, he used radar to lock on to the F-16, thus in any case they should got a fair amount of alert.


Mig 21 Bison or Mig21 type 93 is equipped with IRST from Russia's URALs optical-mechanical plant. AFAIK, the standard practice in IAF using Mig21 for kills is to switch off radar, guided by data-link and switch on ELTA 8222 pod for getting near to bogey and getting kill using R-73. Kashmir valley is a bowl and Mig 21 suddenly emerged from behind the mountains at 15k feet and that's where F-16 failed to detect. Since Mig21 never used its RADAR, there is no question of RWR going off.

For more, read about cope India 2004 where USAF F-15s faced exact same tactic applied by IAF against them scoring multiple kills.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 16 Oct 2019, 19:15
by basher54321
notafanboy wrote:Mig 21 Bison or Mig21 type 93 is equipped with IRST from Russia's URALs optical-mechanical plant.



What are you basing that on? - an IRST sensor should be easy to see externally although would expect to see it pod mounted on a MiG-21.

Not aware anything has been identified as a Jamming pod from the wreckage thus far although there was a drop tank in the photos.

You would expect he has to ID before firing thus you could assume that an onboard data link would be the only way he could fire at the range shown in the IAF radar tracks. However he obviously didn't have the full picture because as it is presented he was way too close to the PAF fighters.

The blog that started off this thread makes out several times Varthaman was using radar as if for certain but yes it is not for certain currently - I don't know if Varthamen stated so himself or if that has just been more media fluff.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 17 Oct 2019, 01:37
by weasel1962
So now the story is that the mig-21 managed to emerge from the mountain undetected by the F-16 but get shot down by an Amraam fired from..... ?

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 17 Oct 2019, 03:32
by jedit
weasel1962 wrote:Great, so if the R-73 shoot down is validated, the Amraam engagement range would have to be that of the R-73. The alternative is that another F-16 (the one that was apparently shot down) was nearer to the Mig-21 than the other F-16 that shot it down in which case, the PAF is dumb enough to fly an F-16 in front of another when engaging an adversary.
Really makes me wonder why the Su-30mki couldn't do the same since the PAF F-16s were also firing Amraams at them.


If it hasn't been validated in close to 8 months, chances seem remote now. Even IAF officials have now virtually given up after realizing that its hard to prove they shot a jet. Retiring IAF chief confirmed he doesn't have (irrefutable) evidence.

weasel1962 wrote:So the PAF were firing Amraams at the Su-30mki outside their range of the Su-30mki's short ranged R-73 but within the short range of the R-73 of the Mig-21?


No confirmed reports on that. IAF showing AMRAAM shrapnel led to everyone associating AMRAAM with events of the day and it seems now everyone assumes only AMRAAM was used in the skirmish.

weasel1962 wrote:A few more posts and we can even get up to page 5. Not bad for a work of fiction.


Of course.

notafanboy wrote:In BVR scenario, yes the missile will fly upwards but that's usually not the SOP that pilots are trained to do ideally. They would rather position their a/c much above the altitude of bogey so that they get max range and KE as additional bonus before lobbing BVRs.

Kashmir valley is a bowl and Mig 21 suddenly emerged from behind the mountains at 15k feet and that's where F-16 failed to detect.



Talking of height advantage, SOP of pilots and (the theory IAF fans now present everywhere) regarding Mig 21 sneaking up from mountain cover at 15k feet, what would stop the F16 pilots (allegedly 8 from a total strike package of 24 PAF jets) from using that same SOP that day?
Let me rephrase it. What drug would influence F16 pilots to ditch this SOP suggested by you. Since PAF used the same mountains to sneak 24 jets right atop the Indian air space in the first place, they must have surely known the potential hazard presented by the mountains so height would have been their only deterrent.
All evidence or lack thereof suggests no F16 was shot. I fail to understand why IAF fans keep pushing the same circumstantial and fringe info, already shot down by experts as proof, in increasing number of posts.

Mig 21 Bison or Mig21 type 93 is equipped with IRST from Russia's URALs optical-mechanical plant. AFAIK, the standard practice in IAF using Mig21 for kills is to switch off radar, guided by data-link and switch on ELTA 8222 pod for getting near to bogey and getting kill using R-73.

Since Mig21 never used its RADAR, there is no question of RWR going off.


IAF had no jets near Abhinandan from all accounts, he was the lone warrior that ventured into Pakistani air space. So without any other jets or AWACS to piggy back radar info off of, he only had the Ground radar. Ground radar officer Minty Agarwal (since awarded national medal for her heroics that day) claimed she was managing the entire IAF defense that day and vectoring jets. She in the same interview claimed she didn't know whether Abhinandan heard her or not. How do you think that links with your assertion that Mig 21 had radar off and was using data link when his own radar officer doesn't know whether he could hear her or not.

For more, read about cope India 2004 where USAF F-15s faced exact same tactic applied by IAF against them scoring multiple kills.

Cope India in 2004 was an 'exercise' without BVR engagements held between USAF and IAF 15 years ago, 27th Feb skirmish between PAF and IAF where there were no such limitations and PAF of course used BVRs. This pushes me to link the video from 4 years after Cope India where a USAF officer suggests IAF had a lot of fratricide because they manually inquired about friendly or foe from AWACS.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DycGbEjcHTY

Remember IAF lost a Mi17 to fratricide on 27th Feb. Sigh.

notafanboy wrote:I am not basing eyewitness accounts only on what they saw in sky but what they saw on ground and that is two pilots. Eyewitnesses even described second pilot as a Sikh which clearly mig 21 pilot was not. Sikh mean a guy with turban and beard.


I cannot even fathom the heights of fantasy fiction that led to this theory. IAF couldn't provide shoot down video, pictures or video of wreckage, tail number, pilot name of a F16, and here conspiracy theorists are not just assuming an F16 was shot, but that the pilot had a beard and looked like a Sikh because some 80yo civilian was put on the spotlight by an eager camera crew. People have claimed seeing UFOs, Sea monsters and aliens when put in the spotlight like that. Some completely normal people swore that jet hitting WTC had no windows, others said jet liner had a huge bomb strapped under it. Some claimed they heard explosions before jets struck WTC on 9/11, while others said they heard explosions similar to demolition work after jets struck. Some said no jet ever hit Pentagon and they were all eye witnesses as well.
It is the height of desperation when you start entertaining accounts like that as there is no other credible evidence of a F16 going down.

garrya wrote:IMHO, their F-16 should know if Mig-21 breached BARCAP because there are 3 of them very close together. If Mig-21 can detect and lock one F-16 from tail aspect then others F-16 should be able to detect and lock that Mig-21 from head on aspect. That not only because APG-68v9 is a better radar set than Kopyo but also because a closing target stand out better from side lobes clutter than a retreating target. It is also important to note that while Pakistan F-16 are not equipped with MWS, they are equipped with RWR and Mig-21 doesn't have an IRST. Besides, according to the Indian Mig-21 pilot, he used radar to lock on to the F-16, thus in any case they should got a fair amount of alert.


Fairly logical, just that Indian pilot didn't claim anything officially. Allegedly there were 8 F16s and a total of 24 jets and India had the lone brave hero in a Mig 21. Of course Indians believe the single vintage Mig 21 was able to shoot down the F16, don't the odds clearly suggest this!

basher54321 wrote:You would expect he has to ID before firing thus you could assume that an onboard data link would be the only way he could fire at the range shown in the IAF radar tracks. However he obviously didn't have the full picture because as it is presented he was way too close to the PAF fighters.
The blog that started off this thread makes out several times Varthaman was using radar as if for certain but yes it is not for certain currently - I don't know if Varthamen stated so himself or if that has just been more media fluff.


He only said 'i was looking for targets when PAF shot me down' while being captured but there was no other detail. You can judge yourself where this information is coming from.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 17 Oct 2019, 03:37
by jedit
weasel1962 wrote:So now the story is that the mig-21 managed to emerge from the mountain undetected by the F-16 but get shot down by an Amraam fired from..... ?


IAF fans have a fantasy ending they all agree on, an F16 was downed by the Mig 21. Now to convince themselves, they keep piling up hypotheses to create a chain of events that appears theoretically possible, at least to them, even if it lacks evidence.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 17 Oct 2019, 05:19
by garrya
notafanboy wrote:Effect of proportional navigation will be more profound in WVR or SRAAMs because that's where angle will vary the most. In BVR scenario, yes the missile will fly upwards but that's usually not the SOP that pilots are trained to do ideally. They would rather position their a/c much above the altitude of bogey so that they get max range and KE as additional bonus before lobbing BVRs.

No, proportional navigation is far more important for BVR missiles because all of them except for Meteor will coast in the mid and terminal phase. They do not have excess energy to waste like SRAAM because their motor are no longer burning at terminal phase. Moreover, the engagement time for BVR shoot is longer than for WVR shoot (because missiles have to fly further). Thus, without lead intercept, your missiles will have to make very dramatic maneuvers.
Furthermore, regardless of how much higher your a/c compared to the bogey, the BVR missile will almost always climb up, sort of a semi ballistic arcs. The only situation where they don't is when the range is too short and a ballistic arcs is not necessary
1.PNG



notafanboy wrote:I am assuming the Red curve is straight line in head-on and tail chase parameters of missile without proportional navigation because that will define true linear range. But it's an off-boresight launch using HMS so pilot does know range.

and I am telling you the value shown on missile engagement envelope MANUAL is not the kinematic range of the missile but the value to let the pilot know whether his missile will reach the target if he press launch button. If it just the kinematic range then the kinematic range of missile in head-on and tail-on situation will be the same. Only when we consider whether the missile can reach target or not that these values become different.
The distance that will be given to the pilot by his radar is the green line, if the green line value is smaller than the value shown in the manual diagram then the missile has a chance to reach target. If the green line value is greater than value shown in the manual diagram then the missile will not be able to reach target. That, however, doesn't mean the trajectory of the missile will be the same as the green line. The actual flight path of the missile is the one in blue, but the manual doesn't show that because that not the kind of information the pilot will be interested in and he doesn't have time to extrapolate
167-Figure3.44-1.png



notafanboy wrote:I am not basing eyewitness accounts only on what they saw in sky but what they saw on ground and that is two pilots. Eyewitnesses even described second pilot as a Sikh which clearly mig 21 pilot was not. Sikh mean a guy with turban and beard.

I haven't seen any video of them capturing 2 pilots on the ground, besides, I don't think you are allowed to wear a turban or even having a thick beard if you are flying a fighter. Those things will certainly getting in the way of the helmet and the oxygen mask

notafanboy wrote:Mig 21 Bison or Mig21 type 93 is equipped with IRST from Russia's URALs optical-mechanical plant.

Mig-21 Bison isnot equipped with IRST, In fact, there isn't any Mig-21version equipped with IRST.
IRST system are really easy to identify, if any Mig-21 have one, we would have known by now.
Aggressors-highlight.jpg

Eurofighter Typhoon showing IRST.jpg


Compare that to Indian Mig-21
india-air-force-mig-21.jpg



notafanboy wrote:AFAIK, the standard practice in IAF using Mig21 for kills is to switch off radar, guided by data-link and switch on ELTA 8222 pod for getting near to bogey and getting kill using R-73. Kashmir valley is a bowl and Mig 21 suddenly emerged from behind the mountains at 15k feet and that's where F-16 failed to detect. Since Mig21 never used its RADAR, there is no question of RWR going off

If you operate your Jammer, your direction will be shown on enemy RWR, because jammer is also a transmitter like radar. It can deny targeting information but they don't make your fighter invisible. Furthermore, according to the blog post given by OP, Mig-21 pilot uses his radar to lock on F-16 before launching R-73

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 17 Oct 2019, 21:26
by airomerix
I dont think there is any point of dragging this topic.

The facts are simple. IAF:0 PAF-1

The 2nd kill: IF it has been achieved anyway then it definitely wasn't by the mig shot down. All 4 missiles were recovered with seekers. Two of them were burnt but that is beside the point.

Bruised ego's at play perhaps.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 18 Oct 2019, 00:56
by madrat
Yes, thread has ran its course and the topic haw been debated ad naseum in other threads.

If an R73 downed anyone that day it was only a MiG-21Bison hit. Otherwise, there is zero proof an R73 was even fired once.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 18 Oct 2019, 01:05
by weasel1962
I'm sure this thread can reach a lucky 6. We can do it. Just needs a bit more imagination.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 18 Oct 2019, 15:03
by notafanboy
weasel1962 wrote:I'm sure this thread can reach a lucky 6. We can do it. Just needs a bit more imagination.

airomerix wrote:I dont think there is any point of dragging this topic.

The facts are simple. IAF:0 PAF-1

The 2nd kill: IF it has been achieved anyway then it definitely wasn't by the mig shot down. All 4 missiles were recovered with seekers. Two of them were burnt but that is beside the point.

Bruised ego's at play perhaps.

madrat wrote:Yes, thread has ran its course and the topic haw been debated ad naseum in other threads.

If an R73 downed anyone that day it was only a MiG-21Bison hit. Otherwise, there is zero proof an R73 was even fired once.


:D Look at this doomy gloomy lot. I am not debating here for India or IAF. I refuse some sub standard PR campaign pull one over me specially looking back the credibility of Pakistan.

Super busy schedule. May reply by Sunday.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 19 Oct 2019, 03:46
by airomerix
notafanboy wrote:
weasel1962 wrote:I'm sure this thread can reach a lucky 6. We can do it. Just needs a bit more imagination.

airomerix wrote:I dont think there is any point of dragging this topic.

The facts are simple. IAF:0 PAF-1

The 2nd kill: IF it has been achieved anyway then it definitely wasn't by the mig shot down. All 4 missiles were recovered with seekers. Two of them were burnt but that is beside the point.

Bruised ego's at play perhaps.

madrat wrote:Yes, thread has ran its course and the topic haw been debated ad naseum in other threads.

If an R73 downed anyone that day it was only a MiG-21Bison hit. Otherwise, there is zero proof an R73 was even fired once.


:D Look at this doomy gloomy lot. I am not debating here for India or IAF. I refuse some sub standard PR campaign pull one over me specially looking back the credibility of Pakistan.

Super busy schedule. May reply by Sunday.


The way this forum works is based on facts and plausible speculations. Credibility is subjective and it has nothing to do with it. For many India is not credible. Perhaps for most it isnt after Feb 27 fiasco. So lets abide by the spirit of the debate and not make it sensational.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 19 Oct 2019, 17:39
by eloise
If Mig-21 downed F-16 or JF-17 downed Su-30 then where are crash sites on satellite image?

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 20 Oct 2019, 02:23
by weasel1962
eloise wrote:If Mig-21 downed F-16 or JF-17 downed Su-30 then where are crash sites on satellite image?


Why need photo, locations where there is maths? The mathematical "proof" is that in any war, the home side will always shoot down equal or more more than the other side. In fact this is supported by a simultaneous equation that when one side downs an aircraft, the other will simultaneously offset this with a counter claim. This is clear physics based on newton's third law which applies in South Asia where for every claim, there is an opposite claim. Who can argue with maths?

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 21 Oct 2019, 14:54
by botsing
weasel1962 wrote:This is clear physics based on newton's third law which applies in South Asia where for every claim, there is an opposite claim. Who can argue with maths?

Laws of propagandynamics:
  • The first law, also known as Law of Conservation of "truth", states that "truth" cannot be created or destroyed in an isolated system.
  • The second law of propagandynamics states that the "facts" of any isolated system always increases.
  • The third law of propagandynamics states that the "facts" of a system approaches a constant value as the "truth" approaches absolute zero.

:mrgreen:

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 13 Nov 2019, 02:28
by shoot_to_kill
I am not sure if a PAF F-16 was toast or not but there is plenty of disinformation on the claims here. Some clarifications:

- You maybe surprised but IAF actually did not claim a guaranteed F-16 hit. They claimed an F-16 hit was likely based on preponderance of evidence as they analyzed it. This includes sat images not available in public domains like those shot with SAR cameras. IAF has not recorded an F-16 hit anywhere.
- Pakistan Armed Forces meanwhile has claimed a guaranteed Su-30 MKI hit, which of course is laughable. They have also recorded a Su 30 hit.
- In South Asia, India is the engineering king. No other country can even remotely match India's industrial and engineering base including aeronautical engineering base (which is growing by orders of magnitude every year). Given this, I am pretty sure the IAF folks were completely aware of flight performance parameter envelopes and waves.
- India also has an advanced radar industry including encryption algorithms talent (Indians are good at math - several Indian mathematicians have won the Fields medal). So, it is always a surprise to me when someone says IAF used unencrypted transmissions when home grown expertise is fully available for effecting such techniques.
- Indians, as a society, are bad at communications for sure. This can be seen from their press conferences to how the controllers vectored IAF assets. There is a tendency to talk in obfuscating ways with inefficient jargon that more confuses than clarifies. IAF certainly has to improve its PR department by miles. But this does not mean India lacks aircraft engineering and design skills, and the ability to apply such skills to winning an air war against an adversary.
- People on this forum seem to think that PAF and IAF is on similar footing. That is an absurd assumption as IAF is backed by a huge industrial base with active collaboration with top defenses forces of the world - critical capabilities that PAF totally lacks. They also lack the ability to produce a homegrown plane like the HAL Tejas, demonstrating the technological leap India has over its adversaries in this part of the world.

Re: PAF F-16 vs MiG-21 - New Evidence

Unread postPosted: 13 Nov 2019, 05:55
by airomerix
shoot_to_kill wrote:I am not sure if a PAF F-16 was toast or not but there is plenty of disinformation on the claims here. Some clarifications:

- You maybe surprised but IAF actually did not claim a guaranteed F-16 hit. They claimed an F-16 hit was likely based on preponderance of evidence as they analyzed it. This includes sat images not available in public domains like those shot with SAR cameras. IAF has not recorded an F-16 hit anywhere.
- Pakistan Armed Forces meanwhile has claimed a guaranteed Su-30 MKI hit, which of course is laughable. They have also recorded a Su 30 hit.
- In South Asia, India is the engineering king. No other country can even remotely match India's industrial and engineering base including aeronautical engineering base (which is growing by orders of magnitude every year). Given this, I am pretty sure the IAF folks were completely aware of flight performance parameter envelopes and waves.
- India also has an advanced radar industry including encryption algorithms talent (Indians are good at math - several Indian mathematicians have won the Fields medal). So, it is always a surprise to me when someone says IAF used unencrypted transmissions when home grown expertise is fully available for effecting such techniques.
- Indians, as a society, are bad at communications for sure. This can be seen from their press conferences to how the controllers vectored IAF assets. There is a tendency to talk in obfuscating ways with inefficient jargon that more confuses than clarifies. IAF certainly has to improve its PR department by miles. But this does not mean India lacks aircraft engineering and design skills, and the ability to apply such skills to winning an air war against an adversary.
- People on this forum seem to think that PAF and IAF is on similar footing. That is an absurd assumption as IAF is backed by a huge industrial base with active collaboration with top defenses forces of the world - critical capabilities that PAF totally lacks. They also lack the ability to produce a homegrown plane like the HAL Tejas, demonstrating the technological leap India has over its adversaries in this part of the world.


What a load of irrelevant crap.