Kashmir Conflict 2025 - News ONLY

Galaxy said:
Why would India not use Meteors? The PAF is no joke. As usual the IAF got arrogant…sorry they did this in 2019 with a MiG-21 and payed.
Click to expand...
Has the IAF ever publicly released any materials showing Rafale equipped with Meteor ?
I’ve heard that the Meteor were excluded from the deal.
 
Galaxy said:
Why would India not use Meteors? The PAF is no joke. As usual the IAF got arrogant…sorry they did this in 2019 with a MiG-21 and payed.
Click to expand...
My personal explation, unless we see meteors, is that IAF was likely prohibited to shoot first, relying on ew and intimidation instead.
They already were doing a very ugly thing (Muridke and Bahawalpur are a huge escalation, they are far from the border; and they apparently clearly knew they will likely get collaterals).

Single strike is usually not enough to trigger a war, but this one was by default a kind of strike where it was just on a fence. Maybe they learned from Iran and Israel, underestimating that those two, above all else, are far from one another, and play chess by phone. Modi gov needs to look tough (on a nuclear state), but they don't really plan to "find out".

Result was a failed demonstration of force, which, as far as i understand, will still likely get a retaliatory strike.
 
Ainen said:
My personal explation, unless we see meteors, is that IAF was likely prohibited to shoot first, relying on ew and intimidation instead.
They already were doing a very ugly thing (Muridke and Bahawalpur are a huge escalation, they are far from the border; and they apparently clearly knew they will likely get collaterals).

Single strike is usually not enough to trigger a war, but this one was by default a kind of strike where it was just on a fence. Maybe they learned from Iran and Israel, underestimating that those two, above all else, are far from one another, and play chess by phone. Modi gov needs to look tough (on a nuclear state), but they don't really plan to "find out".

Result was a failed demonstration of force, which, as far as i understand, will still likely get a retaliatory strike.
Click to expand...

India did buy Meteors from what i read and why would India bomb Pakistan but be prohibited from shooting? That would be so insane that if someone came up with that order they surely had some screws lose in their heads. Pakistan is never shy about shooting at Indian aircraft or shelling India, I see no reason there would be restrictions.

Let’s see if this causes a knee jerk reaction for India to buy F-35s or SU-57s. India loves shiny new toys even if it doesn’t know how to use them properly. At least with stealth aircraft there is more survivability and room for error but there is a problem. Would the US now want to sell F-35s knowing how reckless India is? Would India be interested in the SU-57 especially since they created new engines, missiles, helmet, ect? Would India even buy the SU-57 due to threats and sanctions from the US and Europe on purchasing Russian weapons.
 
Galaxy said:
Why would they be excluded? Why even pay all that money for Rafales if they wouldn’t come with modern BVR capabilities? India could have just equipped SU-30s with combat proven R-37Ms that have actually downed aircraft and likely have better range than Meteors.
Click to expand...
Do they have R-37Ms in particular?
 
Galaxy said:
Why would they be excluded? Why even pay all that money for Rafales if they wouldn’t come with modern BVR capabilities? India could have just equipped SU-30s with combat proven R-37Ms that have actually downed aircraft and likely have better range than Meteors.
Click to expand...
I can only propose two hypotheses: either IAF lost trust in Russian-made fighters and equipment after 2019, or the French side offered more kickbacks
1746638370422.png
from Aero India 2023.
 
Last edited:
Galaxy said:
Let’s see if this causes a knee jerk reaction for India to buy F-35s or SU-57s. India loves shiny new toys even if it doesn’t know how to use them properly. At least with stealth aircraft there is more survivability and room for error but there is a problem. Would the US now want to sell F-35s knowing how reckless India is? Would India be interested in the SU-57 especially since they created new engines, missiles, helmet, ect? Would India even buy the SU-57 due to threats and sanctions from the US and Europe on purchasing Russian weapons.
Click to expand...

F-35 is unlikely due to the presence of Russian made SAM in India and Russia would only sell them the Export version of the Su-57. They wanted Russia all the way back to change large aspects of the aircraft to suit their own needs and get Russia to pay the majority of that.

Now we see how that turned out in the long run.

So no F-35 and at max, as a friendly gesture, Su-57E.

I don't necessarily think the Rafale is a problem, the Rafale can use various French made stand off munitions to strike without getting into danger. In my eyes it's operational failure of the IAF and not a failed performance of the Dassault Rafale. It's just how Saudi Arabia manages to lose F-15s during the intervention in Yemen.

Yes the public won't care, prepare for memes about the Rafale on place like reddit or twitter, but the reality is obviously more complex and nuanced.
 
EmoBirb said:
Do they have R-37Ms in particular?
Click to expand...

There is no evidence India has any R-37Ms. The R-37M would have put the PAF on the defensive as it’s claimed to have a kill of 220KM which no other missile comes close to achieving. It’s also extremely difficult to evade due to its high speed and large radar.

Weapons alone won’t fix the problems the IAF is experiencing. They need to clean houses first.
 
Rules of Engagement are obviously in question. Think Vietnam.

However,

1. I read here and there that India sent a rather large package on this mission (could someone link something trustworthy on this topic?), what generally means DCA, SEAD, Sweep and a large cover for package egress. How can it be that none Pakistani aircraft were shot down?

2. If J-10 are indeed the killer here, how can such result not be seen as a scratch in Rafale reputation when that was a plane against which it was designed specifically to offer a credible superiority.

3. Is everyone in line with one single Rafale loss? Where are we on that aspect? What are the other aircraft lost?

4. Nobody noticed how the strike by a single UAV seems to have exploited the time interval trick to defeat Pakistani radar. You can see how it flew at very slow speed at high altitude, presumably against the wind when it releases its guided munitions.

5. Did other jets used toss bombing from a rather high altitude (see how the AASM impacts vertically)? Would had that any impact in the loss ratio?
 
Last edited:
TomcatViP said:
Rules of Engagement are obviously in question. Think Vietnam.

However,

1. I read here and there that India sent a rather large package on this mission (could someone link something trustworthy on this topic?), what generally means DCA, SEAD, Sweep and a large cover for package egress. How can it be that none Pakistani aircraft were shot down?

2. If J-10 are indeed the killer here, how can such result not be seen as a scratch in Rafale reputation when that was a plane against which it was designed specifically to offer a credible superiority.

3. Is everyone in line with one single Rafale loss? Where are we on that aspect? What are the other aircraft lost?

4. Nobody noticed how the strike by a single UAV seems to have exploited the time interval trick to defeat Pakistani radar. You can see how it flew at very slow speed at high altitude, presumably against the wind when it release its guided munition.

5. Did other jets used toss bombing from a rather high altitude (see how the AASM impacts vertically)? Would had that any impact in the loss ratio?
Click to expand...
None of the jets crossed the border, word is that they used Bramos launched from Su-30s. Which probably explains why all the aircrafts downed are found within indian borders
 
A little surprised they apparently used Bramos as a land attack missile maby against Pakistan air defense radars? Because in the picture of the "Booster" seemed to have Russian writing on it but I admittedly was under the impression it.was a high speed anti ship missile
 
Springtime said:
A little surprised they apparently used Bramos as a land attack missile maby against Pakistan air defense radars? Because in the picture of the "Booster" seemed to have Russian writing on it but I admittedly was under the impression it.was a high speed anti ship missile
Click to expand...
Brahmos is can be used against land based and sea based targets. Such dual use isn't uncommon, I think the tomahawk got that capability added to it, the AGM-158 has an ALCM and AShM variant, Russia also used plenty of missiles against targets in Ukraine which are conventionally considered AShMs, like Kh-22 or Zircon.
 
The AA-13 Axehead LRAAM has been mentioned several times in this thread but is there any proof that the IAF has it in its' inventory?
 
missilematters.substack.com

Operation Sindoor: Indian Air Strikes and Pakistani Air Defenses

Assessment of force employment, platform vulnerability, and technological shifts
missilematters.substack.com missilematters.substack.com

In the early hours of May 7, India launched a series of missile and air strikes — designated Operation Sindoor — against nine sites across Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir. The operation was presented as retaliation for the April 22 Pahalgam attack, which killed 26 civilians, most of them Indian tourists. According to Indian officials, the strikes targeted terrorist infrastructure linked to groups such as Jaish-e-Mohammed and Lashkar-e-Taiba.

While several targets inside Pakistan were reportedly hit, greater attention has focused on the apparent success of Pakistan’s Air Force in shooting down multiple Indian aircraft — including a Dassault Rafale F3R multirole fighter aircraft, the most advanced platforms in India’s inventory, introduced only in July 2020. This post summarizes the available information, and outlines some initial implications.
Click to expand...
Weapon systems and casualties

According to Indian sources, Indian forces employed SCALP-EG land-attack cruise missiles and AASM HAMMER guided bombs during the strike. India likely operates the export variant of the SCALP-EG, which has a reduced range of approximately 250 kilometers. The HAMMER guided bombs have a maximum range of up to 70 kilometers, assuming release at optimal altitude and speed (i.e. high altitude/high velocity).

Following the attack, images surfaced on social media showing the booster section and nose cap of a BrahMos PJ-10 cruise missile recovered on Indian territory. Both components are jettisoned shortly after launch, indicating that the missile was used in the operation. The BrahMos is a supersonic cruise missile based on the Russian 3M55 Oniks and was developed by the Indo-Russian joint venture BrahMos Aerospace, and has a range of 300-500 kilometers (depending on the variant).

However, rather than focusing on the targets struck and ammunitions used, much of the attention shifted to Indian losses. Shortly after the operation, Indian news outlets reported that Pakistan had shot down several Indian fighter jets involved in the strike. These reports were later deleted, likely following pressure from government officials—a pattern not unfamiliar in the context of past India-Pakistan military engagements.

That said, some Indian casualties have since been confirmed, and the available evidence does not reflect well on India’s performance.

Imagery of wreckage suggests that India lost at least one Mirage 2000H, one MiG-29UPG or Su-30MKI (imagery shows the K-36DM ejection seat, which is used in both aircraft, leaving the identification uncertain), and one Dassault Rafale F3R. Among these, only the downing of the Rafale has been officially acknowledged—confirmed by a high-ranking French intelligence official, according to CNN.

Interestingly, all wreckage has been located inside Indian territory, in some cases as far as around 100 km behind the border, indicating that Indian aircraft likely did not attempt to penetrate Pakistani airspace, which aligns with the use of stand-off munitions.

To down the Indian multirole fighter jets, Pakistan reportedly used the PL-15E — a claim supported by recovered missile debris and components. The PL-15E is the export version of China’s PL-15 beyond-visual-range air-to-air missile (BVRAAM). It has a range of approximately 145 km, compared to the 200–300 km range of the domestic variant. The missile features a dual-pulse motor (providing burn-out speed in excess of Mach 5, then gradually slowing down), midcourse guidance via data link, and an active AESA radar seeker for terminal homing.

The PL-15E is integrated with Pakistan’s JF-17 Block III and J-10CE fighter aircraft. The J-10CE is equipped with a larger nose cone and a more powerful AESA radar, and can detect and track targets at distances exceeding the maximum range of the PL-15E. In contrast, the smaller AESA radar on the JF-17 Block III has a detection range of only 100–120 km, and is therefore unable to exploit the missile’s full range. Given that the downed Indian aircraft were located deep inside Indian territory, it stands to reason that J-10CE aircraft were used to launch the PL-15E missiles. However, this remains unconfirmed, and midcourse guidance could also have been provided by other assets — most notably Pakistan’s Saab 2000 Erieye AEW&C aircraft, of which it is known to operate nine.

Implications of the outcome

The engagement has several implications.

First, this was not a good day for the Indian Air Force. Historically, India has maintained a qualitative edge over Pakistan in the air domain. In recent years, however, as Pakistan has acquired more advanced Chinese platforms, observers have speculated that the technological gap may be closing. Last night’s events appear to lend weight to that assessment.

That said, force employment likely played a greater role than technology in the outcome. As noted, India appears to have relied exclusively on stand-off munitions during the strike, meaning its aircraft had no operational need to loiter in what turned out to be contested airspace. Instead of returning to their bases, they likely conducted defensive counter-air (DCA) missions, anticipating possible Pakistani retaliation. In doing so, however, Indian pilots clearly misjudged the engagement envelope of Pakistani fighter jets.

Second, and conversely, the episode reflects well on the Pakistani Air Force. Pakistan clearly anticipated the attack, positioned the appropriate countermeasures, and succeeded in downing multiple Indian aircraft. In doing so, it closed a fairly complex kill chain involving early warning, surveillance, target acquisition, tracking, and engagement. This is no small feat and suggests a degree of professionalism and technical capability.

That said, Pakistan was unable to fully prevent the strike and still suffered damage on its own territory. The success is therefore relative and only compared to previous engagements in which Indian aircraft operated in and around Pakistani airspace with fairly little consequence.

Third, the first confirmed combat loss of a modern Rafale fighter jet casts a shadow over Dassault’s recent momentum. In recent years, the Rafale has been the subject of overwhelmingly positive coverage, largely due to its export success and reputation as a high-performance multirole platform. This incident arguably introduces a setback to that narrative.

Importantly, this does not imply that the Rafale is a poor platform (the Eurofighter or the F-16 may have performed exactly the same). However, it does underscore its limitations as a fourth-generation aircraft, particularly in terms of survivability. While it remains unclear to what extent this incident was due to platform limitations versus operational error — the latter likely being the more decisive factor — it is reasonable to assume that Pakistani aircraft would have not been able to acquire and track a fifth-generation stealth platform like the F-35 at similar ranges, given its significantly lower radar cross-section.

Fourth, the air-to-air engagement casts Chinese aerospace technology in a favorable light. The Chinese-origin air-to-air missile, along with the platforms used to deliver it, appear to have performed effectively. This adds to the growing body of evidence that Chinese weapon systems must be taken seriously. While Russian technology has consistently underperformed in recent conflicts, there is no compelling reason to assume Chinese systems would fare similarly in a Taiwan contingency.

Fifth, and relatedly, there is likely something Western — and particularly American — military intelligence can take away from this engagement regarding Chinese technology. This marks the first confirmed operational use of the PL-15E, and, as noted, parts of the missile, including components of its AESA radar, have been recovered. U.S. military intelligence will likely find this material valuable and may be able to extract insights into Chinese missile design, guidance systems, and performance characteristics.
Click to expand...
 
NMaude said:
The AA-13 Axehead LRAAM has been mentioned several times in this thread but is there any proof that the IAF has it in its' inventory?
Click to expand...
None, and it would need the appropriately configured radar, stores management system etc. You can't just sling it on an Su-30MKI.
 
Galaxy said:
It definitely looks like it’s from a Rafale. This further reinstates my suspicion that Indian military planers have the IQ of a door knob. This aircraft has the abilities to strike targets from hundreds of KMs away, their jammers and RCS is also reportedly impressive so how does this happen? Either Pakistan has world class aircraft and SAMs or Indians are using Rafales as dive bombers
Click to expand...

I'm a Pakistani and I was dead scared for what our J-10s, Vipers and Jeffs were in store for with the Rafales and their Meteors. Absolutely could not believe my ears when I heard on the news that we bonked a Rafale. Legit thought that maybe the guys were lying or it was bad NCTR. Did not believe the claims until I saw pictures of the wreck for myself, especially the tail with serial. I seriously cannot even begin to think how they managed to get a Rafale shot down
 
TomcatViP said:
Well, what links this to a Chinese built fighter victory? Does not PAF flies also Mirage and F-16?
Click to expand...
Apparently the Foreign Minister received the Chinese Ambassador the following morning and told him that all the kills were done by the J-10s with PL-15s and that's what I've heard from some other sources
 
Is combat for now purely on air?
Strikes, A2A combat, AA…

Pakistan is moving VT-4s to the border by the way.
 
ComradeVortex said:
Has been any other action by Pakistan that hasn’t been "defensive"
Click to expand...

The Government had been saying all day yesterday that the shooting of the Indian jets on the night of 6/7 May was a counterattack of sorts and that Pakistan will follow up with a formal retaliatory attack at Indian military at time and place of its choosing. So far I don't believe this retaliatory attack has happened. Though it was suspected that it would happen in early to late morning hours of 8th May (today).
 
ComradeVortex said:
If they are using drones it will be interesting if they’ll use something similar from Ukraine.

E.G. Mass Geran swarms. I have my doubts though. Pakistani AD is strong, while Ukrainian AD has been strained for 3 years.
Click to expand...
Update: it was just drones, some idiot mistook the SAMs Pakistan fired for Indian SRBMs.

But yeah quite a few sensitive HQs and other units in and around Gujranwala city and district.
 

India and Pakistan fire shells across de facto border in Kashmir​


India and Pakistan fired shells at each other over their de facto border in the disputed Kashmir region on Wednesday night, according to a statement from the Indian defense spokesperson in Indian-administered Kashmir.
The Pakistani army had fired “small arms and artillery guns” across the Line of Control that divides Kashmir, to which the Indian army “responded proportionately,” said Lt. Col. Suneel Bartwal, India’s defense spokesperson in Jammu.

 
On Telegram channels, the comment of the Russian military Voevoda Broadcasting seems to underline the law of retaliation with the ever-increasing purchases of weapons from Moscow in favor of Western hardware with the laconic statement: - By the way, before the Special Military Operation, the Indians were offered to buy the R-37M and adapt them to the Su-30MKI. I smiled like a skin - that was the answer - now let's buy French. What is the conclusion, now?”

Anyway, I would still blame the Indians. Both platforms are capable. It’s them that they can’t use them.
 

Two drones shot down over Pakistani city of Lahore, source says​


Police in Lahore said two drones were shot down over the Pakistani city on Thursday, a police official who asked for anonymity told CNN, a day after India launched deadly strikes on its neighbor.
The source did not say what kind of drones they were, nor where they had come from. Officials were “examining the details about these machines” and looking into where they came from and who they belonged to, the source said.
Lahore is roughly 13 miles from the Indian border and is home to around 13 million people.
The drones came within range of a jamming system — which interferes with the signal drones use to communicate with their operators, sometimes causing them to fall — the source said.
Pakistan’s Airport Authority announced on Thursday that Lahore’s airport would remain non-operational until at least 12 p.m. local time, without giving a reason.
 
Pakistan has been shelling continuously overnight in Indian Kashmir, close to the LoC.
 
Springtime said:
A little surprised they apparently used Bramos as a land attack missile maby against Pakistan air defense radars? Because in the picture of the "Booster" seemed to have Russian writing on it but I admittedly was under the impression it.was a high speed anti ship missile
Click to expand...
Most of Soviet (and presumably Russian) supersonic anti-ship missiles have secondary land-attack mode against targets with identifable radar signature.
 
A bit late, sorry, and several newscomers are involved here, too, who perhaps aren‘t familiar, what the phrase „NEWS ONLY“ in the title means, so it probably would be a bit rude to lash out with reply bans …Those letters simply mean : News only, no comments, no opinions, and above all, no grousing and no 1-vs-1 debates.
For the mentioned newcomers : It’s a measure, we introduced several yeras ago, exactly for themes, like this one, which inevitably leads to quarreling, mocking, trolling and so on, just have a look at many of the posts here. Though you may not find all, as I tried to clean up a bit ….
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom