T
So,does India confirm the Rafale and S-400 loss?
Pakistan-India Conflict (2025)
- Thread starter mTT
- Start date
- Messages
- 1,190
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Or maybe not...it seems the call from Pakistan's DGMO initiating ceasefire only came in the afternoon. But these strikes were probably done in the early hours of the day. US may have only played the role of a facilitator.
We'll see...there's already reports of fresh firing at Akhnoor sector in J&K. The ceasefire may have already been broken (would depend on what the terms were...cessation of only missile/air strikes would mean artillery/small arms exchange -- which is more or less normal at the LoC -- would continue).
- Messages
- 1,190
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Haven't heard anything yet, though I doubt some of those claims.
Destruction of an S400 battery/launcher, if true, cannot be hidden from satellite images. The system has a huge footprint.
If the Govt officially announces Op. Sindoor as over, then they might start announcing what the losses & damages were.
- Messages
- 932
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
- Messages
- 1,190
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Yep - Pakistan has launched fresh drone & artillery attacks all across the border.
The ceasefire didn't last 3 hours
- Messages
- 1,111
- Reactions
- Age
- 65
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Chinese-Made PL-15 Air-To-Air Missile Components Came Down Intact Inside India
The largely intact rear section and other parts of a Chinese-made PL-15E active-radar-guided air-to-air missile came down in India during a battle in the skies along the country’s border with Pakistan earlier this week. While many details about the aerial confrontation between the two countries remain murky, it marked the first known combat use of any version of the PL-15. Recovery of any parts of what is one of China’s most modern air-to-air missiles could be of great interest to authorities in India, as well as to its allies and partners.At a press conference today, Pakistani officials said that Chinese-made J-10 and JF-17 fighters, as well as U.S.-supplied F-16 Vipers, had taken part in the aerial fighting with Indian forces on the night of May 6-7. They also explicitly noted the employment of PL-15E missiles. Pakistani authorities claim 42 of their fighters tangled with 72 Indian jets, downing five of the opposing aircraft – three French-made Rafales, one Russian-made Su-30MKI Flanker, one Russian-made MiG-29 Fulcrum
Chinese-Made PL-15 Air-To-Air Missile Components Came Down Intact Inside India
Pakistani use of PL-15Es against Indian fighters opens up a new vector for intelligence exploitation on one of China's most threatening missiles.
www.twz.com
We already know that the French have admitted the downing of the Rafale. They believe that this is the first time a Rafale has been shot down in combat. They are probably very worried about this incident. After all, India was going to buy 36 more of this type of fighter from France.
The Russians are a different matter. Their reaction, as always, is special. Russian experts say that the downed MiG-29 was old, and as for the Su-30, the Russians blame the Indians themselves, saying that they modified them themselves, so the Russians have nothing to do with it.
In fact, you can understand the Russians: why should a person in wet clothes be afraid of rain?!
Last edited:
- Messages
- 932
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
I don’t think France is actually that much worried, it’s just a machine after all. Dassault will probably use that incident to obtain as much feedback as possible.
- Messages
- 11,083
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Objective maxar osint will come out, and claims vs reality will be cross checked on AFB damage etc. Members can just wait till its all distilled later.
One thing that likely comes out is S-400 (and rest of Indian IAD for its critical nodes) is superior to HQ-9 one.
Both sides have some deficiencies on C-UAS tiers around this IAD though...as to why there was sustained drone use to exhaust IAD etc.
It was interesting that both sides agree that Pakistan AFB's were targetted by IAF jets (missile wise):
India targets PAF bases in dead of night
KARACHI: India has targeted PAF bases in Rawalpindi, Chakwal and Shorkot, but all air force assets are safe, the DG...
www.dawn.com
"“Continuing its naked aggression, India... has fired air-to-surface missiles with its jets,” Lt-Gen Chaudhry said."
(This was what the Indian press briefing said too).
- Messages
- 11,083
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Objective maxar osint will come out, and claims vs reality will be cross checked on AFB damage etc. Members can just wait till its all distilled later.
One thing that likely comes out is S-400 (and rest of Indian IAD for its critical nodes) is superior to HQ-9 one.
Both sides have some deficiencies on C-UAS tiers around this IAD though...as to why there was sustained drone use to exhaust IAD etc.
It was interesting that both sides agree that Pakistan AFB's were targetted by IAF jets (missile wise):
India targets PAF bases in dead of night
KARACHI: India has targeted PAF bases in Rawalpindi, Chakwal and Shorkot, but all air force assets are safe, the DG...www.dawn.com
"“Continuing its naked aggression, India... has fired air-to-surface missiles with its jets,” Lt-Gen Chaudhry said."
(This was what the Indian press briefing said too).
At to why India went to pak military infra as well, it was addressed here:
Pakistan-India Conflict (2025)
Will again have to wait and let some time play out to get idea of whats going on right now
defencehub.live
Damien Symon is good OSINT page to follow btw.
- Messages
- 5,139
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Bro, I am honestly curious how did you come to that conclusion? Did you gathered sufficient evidence from past few days events? i haven't specifically looked into the performance of both countries ADs and had my focus on Air battles. But in general afaik, PAF HQ9 BE uses new GaN based AESA MFR/FCR compared to gravestone's old passive ESA tech. Also it is no secret that Chinese has left the Russians behind in electronics and sensor tech. Add to that S400's performance in Ukraine. Not nearly as good as advertised. It quite consistently failed against and got elemented by not so sophisticated stuff. (HIMARS/ATACMS)
Rajendra Chola
Well-known member
- Messages
- 328
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
India was content with initial missile strikes on terror compounds and the second night was spent mostly on defending against drones.
The immediate escalation point was the usage of Fateh or similar BM which was intercepted in a trajectory on way to Delhi.
It was after this incident, India decided to escalate and attack major air bases on PAF with token attacks implying, we are violating your air defences and can attack anytime.
As far as fighters are concerned, I believe from OSINTs, India have lost 2 fighters & one large drone. But India will officially update the losses after Operation Sindoor ends.
- Messages
- 11,083
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
I said "likely", its not a conclusion by any stretch yet.
For that we will have to wait for the OSINT to get lot clearer (from maxar et al.) for both sides AFB.
Remember AFB's ought to be the most protected infra, and A2G missiles really shouldn't be landing doing major damage at this conflict level to begin with:
Any force can write down/assert things in technical specs (whatever they actually are on the system is another matter in the end, no one is going to have neutral verifying types sniffing around there)....the proof is in the pudding.
Along with the IAD layered around the top guy.
Indian MIC leverages a lot here....from its missile/space ecosystem.
It is not one that has a BM stockpile for decades unable to produce even one SLV, when "even NK and Iran have".
Rajendra Chola
Well-known member
- Messages
- 328
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
S400 are not used in isolation in India. It’s part of varied & complex AD system comprising of QRSAM, MRSAM (Indo Israeli Barak 8), Akash SRSAM, BMD(Ballistic Missile Defences), S125, L70s upgraded with anti drone capabilities, non kinetic anti drone capabilities (military didn’t explain what system) and finally S400. In addition in some areas, we even converted old supplies of R73 into SAM systems. My understanding is some suicide drones did get through our defences but none of their missiles made through our AD. L70s, Akash and Barak 8 had a very major role to play in the defence. S400 is said to have engaged PAF fighter at a long range & bought it down.
In Ukraine, S400s are against US EW warfare systems. In Syria, S400 was mostly standalone & facing US Israeli Turkey & other NATO system.
- Messages
- 11,083
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Past the AFB "totally destroyed" claims by Pakistan (w.r.t sat intel to come shortly)....there is also an objective list of other claims to cross-verify with OSINT that comes out:
- "6 BM's" launched from armitsar, landing on amritsar itself
- Brahmos storage facility at Beas destroyed (the cam footage being spread was debunked already as 7 hours old iirc prior to the strike claims)
- S-400 "destroyed" that Gessler already posted about.
Simply objective evidence will come out as to cross reference with each side's list of claims and who's then clearly fibbed a lot more.
Some OSINT guys already have a good hunch just from video footage at time of impact on ground....as to what was being reported on twitter etc by civvies etc.
But its good to give a bunch of days/weeks.
Its not going to be many days and weeks looking at one shack in balakot as to if there's 3 holes in the roof or not.
There is plenty for maxar to do, past the initial targets from the SCALP and HAMMER payloads.
- Messages
- 5,139
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
fair enough.
But do you apply this level of scrutiny to Western Or Indian systems? Did India really develop AESA tech? Sure DRDO published some photos and showcased some stuff in Defense fairs that look like AESA components. But we will actually never know until whatever platform it is integrated into excels in real combat? Or perhaps French were scamming us all alone. Given their much hyped Rafale got smoked while supposedly having high performance AESA and top notch EW suite. The proof is in the pudding. I would find this way of thinking irritating. Given we don’t actually have access to any classified technical specs of these systems, something has to be taken at face value to begin with or we will never know anything for sure Or make any meaningful value judgement.
PAF simply has 1x HQ-9BE battery. Instead of deploying it defensively protecting any one of 9 air bases attacked, it could be deployed to offensively in attempt to get IAF jets. Or even if it is deployed defensively it won’t be protecting more than a single AFB. We have to get into a lot more specifics (how and where it was deployed and then how much of Indian strike package got through there) to judge HQ9BE's performance.
Last edited:
Rajendra Chola
Well-known member
- Messages
- 328
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Actually the first attack on 9 targets, none of them were neutralized inspite of high elevation of attacks. Either HQ9 were really bad or our missiles used tree hugging capability that neutralized the threat. More info will come as days go on.
- Messages
- 1,111
- Reactions
- Age
- 65
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
“Shares in China’s Chengdu Aircraft Company have soared. Nearly three decades after its maiden flight, its first J-10 “Powerful Dragon” fighter jet has finally passed a test fire and emerged unscathed.
By 4 a.m. on May 7, Chinese diplomats in Islamabad, the capital of Pakistan, were at the Foreign Ministry studying the results of the first encounter between advanced Chinese fighter jets armed with untested missiles and radars and the advanced Western technology deployed by India, the Financial Times reported.
As evidence emerged, albeit inconclusive, that a Pakistani pilot flying the latest model of the J-10 could have shot down a French Rafale, Chengdu shares have soared more than 40% in just two days.
“There’s no better advertising than a real combat situation. “It was a pleasant surprise for China … the result is quite impressive,” said Yun Sun, an expert on Chinese military affairs at the Stimson Center in Washington.
While India and Pakistan may be engaged in their most serious clashes in decades, the conflict is also serving as a testing ground for equipment important to another rivalry — that between China and the US-led Western alliance.
Pakistan is “becoming a showcase for some of China’s new capabilities.”
...this is the first time Chinese military hardware has been tested against top-notch Western equipment...” — Azerbaijani publication Haqqin.az.
- Messages
- 11,083
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Again things are static or they are dynamic assets (adding another vector).
99.9% folks have done zero study as to why say USN lost a full third of top of the line skyhawks in rolling thunder to begin with (ignoring USAF thunderchiefs faring even worse)...which had top of the line specs for the time vs Soviet IAD and soviet CAP around Hanoi-Haiphong.....as a lot of other things come into play regd how they were deployed (and those were many sequences of one-offs...i.e sustained sorties requiring timing between USN and USAF along with significant capacities held back due to conflict mitigation LBJ et al imposed).
Without studying the largest most relevant air campaigns of the largest force structures in 20th-21st century first (and the attrition they took on top assets), you dont really get the issue of dynamics (and ROE and constraint + timid tiers picked w.r.t assets at hand) vs just static assets....in more bite sized "tactical one-off" portions compared to sustained + strategic.
Various important variables like little SEAD and DEAD today cascading to compacted maneuvering zones after say holding/timing patterns in staging areas (that tip off the opponent the bigger you arrange them and get higher CAP alert and more scramble availability).... due to dodging both A2A and IAD rather than just one, and what are the timings of face-offs within this to be deduced in more measured fashion over time... given technology intensification from earlier era of it.
The US changed doctrinally just within rolling thunder (early lessons to late).... to linebacker and then decades later to GW1....in response to how IAD impacts compared to original 50s SAC doctrine vs "USSR only" that initially molded the post ww2 USAF....down to the level of pilots training + "bulky aircraft" it was stuck with vis a vis the USN when the 60s came around....and SEAD/DEAD became a big deal in the new context + strategic restraint opted for Vietnam.
All these concepts affect a relative bite sized tactical one-off correlation, back then or now....the tech just scales up and intensifies as it does....i.e North Vietnam would have done "even better" with AWACs...and conceptually its IAD and CAP (and tactics from weaknesses exploited by opponent limitation and constraint no matter their apex assets)... transcends and amplifies to today.
Fewer vectors (w.r.t relatively static assets like the SAMs themselves) is more clear cut to analyse in "proof is in the pudding way" as far less vectors added in deployment operationally.
It either intercepts well or it doesn't w.r.t its more limited "other factors" being things like the rest of IAD + C-UAS tiered around it...and the softening of these done by drones to whichever degrees....and the importance of all of this given the golden egg nest of assets + infra its responsible for protecting.
It's not got stages of strike package selection, flying, timing, delivery, rotation, maneuver space, no SEAD+DEAD, center of mass exposed for opponent BVR in time state 5 compared to time state 3 etc....the SAMs just dont fly to begin with....or have X amount of A2G (hammeer scalp) baked in that limits A2A (i.e rafale choice making in sortie that affects the dynamic factors)....as to say 3/72 attrition result in end for X amount of payload release in the context.
The static stuff being less complicated simply has to be hardened otherwise the opponent just easily and reliably drains and strikes your infra and assets contained within. These are more readily more scaleable to one-offs in higher conflict tiers too, so if its optimal return and low risk gauged of escalation, this is an issue in the end static wise.....just like lack of apex sharpness (for tactical strikes) is its issue for IAF currently in the more dynamic side of things.
- Messages
- 11,083
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
