What's new

CIA declassified documents Air War 1971 - PAF v IAF

PradoTLC

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Mar 17, 2007
Messages
8,888
Reaction score
-3
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Arab Emirates
Not sure if this was ever covered.. but here is what the CIA thinks the airwar balance of losses


PAF always seems to get the better of IAF

1965 on top
1971 - seems mixed but given odds very good
2019 - total ownage





Snip20200504_3.png



https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP85T00875R001100030003-0.pdf
 
Last edited:
https://www.aaj.tv/english/national...-which-changed-the-course-of-1971-war-at-sea/

The Story of Pakistan Navy Submarine Hangor which changed the course of 1971 War


Web Desk | December 9, 2019
Hangor.jpg




On 9 December 1971 Pakistan Navy submarine Hangor while patrolling in its allocated area off the Indian Khatiawar coast under the command of Commander Ahmed Tasnim (later Vice Admiral) located, tracked and fired a homing torpedo at the Indian anti-submarine frigate Khukri. The torpedo hit the frigate on its magazine which exploded and the ship sank in two minutes along with its crew of 18 officers and 176 sailors.

In order to understand the significance of this operation it will be necessary to review briefly the situation in which the action took place. Until the sinking of Khukri on 9 December the war at sea was not going well for the Pakistan Navy. On the outbreak of hostilities Indian Navy carried out two attacks by OSA missile boats on 4 and 6 December 1971. In the first attack PNS Khaiber and PNS Muhafiz received missile hits and sank. In the second attack PNS Dacca, the replenishment tanker of Pakistan Navy, which happened to be at Manora anchorage, received a missile hit but miraculously survived by the courage and vigilance of its commanding officer and the crew.

Two neutral merchant ships Harmattan and Gulf Star at Manora anchorage also received a missile hit each. The former sank but the latter survived. Incidentally, sinking of merchant ships in this manner without first placing the crew at a safe place was in grave violation of Geneva Conventions.

The loss of these two ships caused some unrest in a section of naval personnel. It is important to understand the cause of this unrest for it is largely responsible for the creation of the myth that Pakistan Navy was ‘mauled’ in the 1971 war. It was not the loss of these ships per se as the manner in which they were lost that caused unrest i.e. the ships had no means to defend against a missile attack or retaliate in any manner whatsoever.

It should be noted that officers and sailors were trained for and expected a classical gun battle to take place with the Indian fleet in which maneuver and accuracy of gunfire would determine the outcome. Instead all that transpired was appearance of a light followed by a hit and an explosion with no enemy in sight anywhere.

Although naval planners were aware of the possibility of use of missile boats, which were basically defensive vessels, in the offensive role (by extending their range through fueling at sea), this factor did not receive due weightage. Consequently the deployment of the fleet did not fully take into account the severe handicap imposed by the guns of our ships being outranged by a wide margin by the enemy missiles.

It would be recalled that in the 1965 war Indian Navy had been totally neutralized by Pakistan Navy which acquired complete control over the North Arabian sea when the Indian Navy failed to show up despite a provocative bombardment of Dwarka port. It remained bottled up throughout the war in Mumbai harbor because of the threat posed by a single submarine that we then possessed.

In the period between the two wars the Indian Navy underwent significant expansion and modernization of its fleet. Important additions in this period were four submarines and six OSA class guided missile boats from the Soviet Union. In the same period Pakistan surface fleet consisting of World War II vintage ships was allowed to languish into obsolescence. The only redeeming feature was the acquisition of 3 Daphne class submarines from France.

Despite all the advantages in shape and size the Indian Navy succeeded in sinking just one destroyer and one minesweeper in the two missile attacks. The Indian carrier group operating in the Bay of Bengal destroyed only one patrol craft out of a total of four stationed in East Pakistan, even though there was virtually no opposition at sea from the PAF. The total losses of Pakistan Navy in the War were one destroyer, one minesweeper and a patrol craft.

After the sinking of Khukri by Hangor losses in terms of major warships evened out. If the Indian Navy with all the advantages in quality and quantity was able to destroy in addition a patrol craft and a minesweeper it was no great achievement in terms of the result of tactical operations at sea. Moreover, the evening out of the score was not the only feature of the success of the submarine attack.

After an attack on a warship and particularly so an anti-submarine frigate, the submarine is extremely vulnerable, having lost the advantage of stealth because its position becomes known to the enemy and forms the datum on which the anti-submarine search is based. Instead its many limitations makes the task of evading its pursuers extremely complicated.

A submarine’s motive power when submerged is supplied by its batteries. These batteries have to be frequently charged for which it must surface or snorkel and thus becomes vulnerable to detection by enemy aircraft and ships. A submarine’s submerged speed in comparison to surface ship is much slower. It is further restricted because the higher it’s submerged speed the faster its batteries are discharged and sooner it is required to surface or snorkel. In short these and many other contending requirements generated by submarine’s limitations need to be reconciled in an environment pregnant with intense enemy activity.

After the loss of Khukri the entire antisubmarine assets of the Western Indian Fleet were thrown into a massive hunt for the submarine for the next four days day. More than 150 underwater projectiles were fired in this period and there were some close calls. The submarine however, was able to evade its pursuers and returned back to Karachi unharmed on 18 December.

Both the attack on an anti-submarine frigate in shallow waters and its subsequent escape unharmed speaks volumes for the professional skill, courage and patience of the crew of the submarine. This was a turning point in the war at sea because after the attack “Operation Triumph” the third missile attack which was to be launched on 10 December was cancelled and thereafter no further missile or other attacks could be carried out by the Indian Navy on Pakistan Navy ships and Karachi harbor.

The performance of the Pakistan Navy in the 1971 War was creditable under the under prevailing situation with Hongor making the most significant contribution towards that end.
PM inaugurates first Science & Technology Park »
 
In the period between the two wars the Indian Navy underwent significant expansion and modernization of its fleet. Important additions in this period were four submarines and six OSA class guided missile boats from the Soviet Union. In the same period Pakistan surface fleet consisting of World War II vintage ships was allowed to languish into obsolescence. The only redeeming feature was the acquisition of 3 Daphne class submarines from France.
Indians have massively build up their Navy now

After the loss of Khukri the entire antisubmarine assets of the Western Indian Fleet were thrown into a massive hunt for the submarine for the next four days day. More than 150 underwater projectiles were fired in this period and there were some close calls. The submarine however, was able to evade its pursuers and returned back to Karachi unharmed on 18 December.
:pakistan:
 
Not sure if this was ever covered.. but here is what the CIA thinks the airwar balance of losses


PAF always seems to get the better of IAF

1965 on top
1971 - seems mixed but given odds very good
2019 - total ownage





View attachment 629527


https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP85T00875R001100030003-0.pdf






So the above independent and credible source proves that Pakistan won the air war by a huge margin in 1971, even though we lost the political war.
 
Last edited:
So the above independent and credible source proves that Pakistan won the air war by a huge margin in 1971, albeit we eventually lost the political war.


"winning" is a matter military objectives.. if PAF's mission was to shoot down more IAF planes then yes it was a victory..

however any air mission is to support military objectives set out by political masters. 27 feb was an example of harmony of political and military objextives which results in a victory

over all it can be seen from what we already know.. PAF is a first class outfit that performs well even in the most difficult of situations.
 
Casualties are est. for Pakistan because we gave no figures. However, 85 officers died from March to 3 December in rebellion and crossborder skirmishes in East Pakistan. Another 120 died from 3 December till Simla Agreement in '72. In comparison, 174 IA officers died from 3 Dec onwards till ceasefire. Including Bangladeshi officers would further inflate this figure. Do the maths.
 
Problem was in 71 we were a divided nation. Two traitors caused a loss of a nation. Bhutto and mujeeb. Both died at the hands of their own troops. Today we are nit a divided nation and things are very different. But even today Pakistans biggest enemy is not indian forces but politicians industrialists and molvis
 
indian could have blocked Karachi port... and Pakistan's position would have been even weaker than normal.

Karachi port was blocked.

https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP85T00875R001700020087-3.pdf

"The problem is that Karachi is the only major port, and it is under attack by Indian air and naval forces. Neither foreign ships nor Pakistan's own merchant vessels have tried to run the Indian naval blockade of Karachi, and even if they did get into the port, they might have difficulty unloading because of damage to cargo-handling and storage facilities. In addition, the single rail route and two good roads leading out of Karachi are vulnerable to interdiction."
 
Karachi port was blocked.

https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP85T00875R001700020087-3.pdf

"The problem is that Karachi is the only major port, and it is under attack by Indian air and naval forces. Neither foreign ships nor Pakistan's own merchant vessels have tried to run the Indian naval blockade of Karachi, and even if they did get into the port, they might have difficulty unloading because of damage to cargo-handling and storage facilities. In addition, the single rail route and two good roads leading out of Karachi are vulnerable to interdiction."
sir have you ever seen a map of Pakistani and Indian coastline.......
it would be hard for even US navy to block a coastline as vast as Indian.....
furthermore, while Karachi was relatively undefended and virtually only major port........ its complete neutralization not only should have been number 1 priority but given vastness of Indian Navy..... it should have been leveled..... yet it was (not outstandingly but given the total strength of Pak navy) adequately defended.
 
sir have you ever seen a map of Pakistani and Indian coastline.......
it would be hard for even US navy to block a coastline as vast as Indian.....
furthermore, while Karachi was relatively undefended and virtually only major port........ its complete neutralization not only should have been number 1 priority but given vastness of Indian Navy..... it should have been leveled..... yet it was (not outstandingly but given the total strength of Pak navy) adequately defended.

I have enclosed the CIA report. You don't completely level something if you can make it inoperable. According to the link I gave, Karachi port was completely neutralized. Completely leveling it would have required more time to be spent in extremely hostile enemy environment and would have meant taking losses.

If you read it, one of the sentence is "Several tankers standing off Karachi have been prevented from entering by the India blockade."

The US has a navy big enough to blockade a coastline as long as that of India's. When you blockade a country, you just blockade the major ports. Not the whole coastline.
 
Not sure if this was ever covered.. but here is what the CIA thinks the airwar balance of losses


PAF always seems to get the better of IAF

1965 on top
1971 - seems mixed but given odds very good
2019 - total ownage





View attachment 629527


https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP85T00875R001100030003-0.pdf


Only 3 F.6 aircraft were lost.
One shot down by AAA which Flt.Lt Shahid KIA.
Another shot down by Su.7 Fitter in a pot shot,the pilot a Flt.LT ejected over home base.
Last one was a fratricide in which Wing Commander Saad Hatmi accidentally shot down his wingman in poor light using a sidewinder,he was KIA.

This info can be cross checked with A/C Kaiser Tufail's book on 1971 air war.
Also 11 sabres of 14 squadron were left behind in Dhaka after damaging their circuits and all.

https://www.aaj.tv/english/national...-which-changed-the-course-of-1971-war-at-sea/

The Story of Pakistan Navy Submarine Hangor which changed the course of 1971 War


Web Desk | December 9, 2019
Hangor.jpg




On 9 December 1971 Pakistan Navy submarine Hangor while patrolling in its allocated area off the Indian Khatiawar coast under the command of Commander Ahmed Tasnim (later Vice Admiral) located, tracked and fired a homing torpedo at the Indian anti-submarine frigate Khukri. The torpedo hit the frigate on its magazine which exploded and the ship sank in two minutes along with its crew of 18 officers and 176 sailors.

In order to understand the significance of this operation it will be necessary to review briefly the situation in which the action took place. Until the sinking of Khukri on 9 December the war at sea was not going well for the Pakistan Navy. On the outbreak of hostilities Indian Navy carried out two attacks by OSA missile boats on 4 and 6 December 1971. In the first attack PNS Khaiber and PNS Muhafiz received missile hits and sank. In the second attack PNS Dacca, the replenishment tanker of Pakistan Navy, which happened to be at Manora anchorage, received a missile hit but miraculously survived by the courage and vigilance of its commanding officer and the crew.

Two neutral merchant ships Harmattan and Gulf Star at Manora anchorage also received a missile hit each. The former sank but the latter survived. Incidentally, sinking of merchant ships in this manner without first placing the crew at a safe place was in grave violation of Geneva Conventions.

The loss of these two ships caused some unrest in a section of naval personnel. It is important to understand the cause of this unrest for it is largely responsible for the creation of the myth that Pakistan Navy was ‘mauled’ in the 1971 war. It was not the loss of these ships per se as the manner in which they were lost that caused unrest i.e. the ships had no means to defend against a missile attack or retaliate in any manner whatsoever.

It should be noted that officers and sailors were trained for and expected a classical gun battle to take place with the Indian fleet in which maneuver and accuracy of gunfire would determine the outcome. Instead all that transpired was appearance of a light followed by a hit and an explosion with no enemy in sight anywhere.

Although naval planners were aware of the possibility of use of missile boats, which were basically defensive vessels, in the offensive role (by extending their range through fueling at sea), this factor did not receive due weightage. Consequently the deployment of the fleet did not fully take into account the severe handicap imposed by the guns of our ships being outranged by a wide margin by the enemy missiles.

It would be recalled that in the 1965 war Indian Navy had been totally neutralized by Pakistan Navy which acquired complete control over the North Arabian sea when the Indian Navy failed to show up despite a provocative bombardment of Dwarka port. It remained bottled up throughout the war in Mumbai harbor because of the threat posed by a single submarine that we then possessed.

In the period between the two wars the Indian Navy underwent significant expansion and modernization of its fleet. Important additions in this period were four submarines and six OSA class guided missile boats from the Soviet Union. In the same period Pakistan surface fleet consisting of World War II vintage ships was allowed to languish into obsolescence. The only redeeming feature was the acquisition of 3 Daphne class submarines from France.

Despite all the advantages in shape and size the Indian Navy succeeded in sinking just one destroyer and one minesweeper in the two missile attacks. The Indian carrier group operating in the Bay of Bengal destroyed only one patrol craft out of a total of four stationed in East Pakistan, even though there was virtually no opposition at sea from the PAF. The total losses of Pakistan Navy in the War were one destroyer, one minesweeper and a patrol craft.

After the sinking of Khukri by Hangor losses in terms of major warships evened out. If the Indian Navy with all the advantages in quality and quantity was able to destroy in addition a patrol craft and a minesweeper it was no great achievement in terms of the result of tactical operations at sea. Moreover, the evening out of the score was not the only feature of the success of the submarine attack.

After an attack on a warship and particularly so an anti-submarine frigate, the submarine is extremely vulnerable, having lost the advantage of stealth because its position becomes known to the enemy and forms the datum on which the anti-submarine search is based. Instead its many limitations makes the task of evading its pursuers extremely complicated.

A submarine’s motive power when submerged is supplied by its batteries. These batteries have to be frequently charged for which it must surface or snorkel and thus becomes vulnerable to detection by enemy aircraft and ships. A submarine’s submerged speed in comparison to surface ship is much slower. It is further restricted because the higher it’s submerged speed the faster its batteries are discharged and sooner it is required to surface or snorkel. In short these and many other contending requirements generated by submarine’s limitations need to be reconciled in an environment pregnant with intense enemy activity.

After the loss of Khukri the entire antisubmarine assets of the Western Indian Fleet were thrown into a massive hunt for the submarine for the next four days day. More than 150 underwater projectiles were fired in this period and there were some close calls. The submarine however, was able to evade its pursuers and returned back to Karachi unharmed on 18 December.

Both the attack on an anti-submarine frigate in shallow waters and its subsequent escape unharmed speaks volumes for the professional skill, courage and patience of the crew of the submarine. This was a turning point in the war at sea because after the attack “Operation Triumph” the third missile attack which was to be launched on 10 December was cancelled and thereafter no further missile or other attacks could be carried out by the Indian Navy on Pakistan Navy ships and Karachi harbor.

The performance of the Pakistan Navy in the 1971 War was creditable under the under prevailing situation with Hongor making the most significant contribution towards that end.
PM inaugurates first Science & Technology Park »


Don't think it did much in changing the course of war,atleast from the naval perspective. Rather the Indian Osa gunboats changed the course of war.
 
1971 was lost not due to military but due to lack of political interest.
The only thing Bhutto was interested in was becoming the ruler of whatever is left of Pakistan.
He was the bigger traitor as he also arrested and jailed Mujeeb who was in favour of autonomy but not total separation.
 

Back
Top Bottom