DOCSLIB.ORG

Chapter 7. Drag Polar

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Chapter 7. Drag Polar CENTRO UNIVERSITARIO DE LA DEFENSA ACADEMIA GENERAL DEL AIRE CONCEPTUAL AIRCRAFT DESIGN MILITARY TRAINING FIGHTER Trabajo Fin de Grado Autor: A.A.D. Francisco Medina Sarmiento (LXVI – CGEA-EOF) Director: Francisco Javier Sánchez-Velasco Co-director: José Serna Serrano Grado en Ingeniería en Organización industrial Curso: 2014/2015 – convocatoria: Junio Tribunal nombrado por la dirección del Centro Universitario de la Defensa de San Javier, el día ____ de ____________ de 20____. Presidente: Dr. D. Manuel Caravaca Garratón Secretario: Dr. D. Alejandro López Belchí Vocal: Col. Dr. Andrés Dolón Payán Realizado el acto de defensa del Trabajo Fin de Grado, el día____ de _________ de 20____, en el Centro Universitario de la Defensa de San Javier. Calificación: __________________________. EL PRESIDENTE EL SECRETARIO EL VOCAL CONCEPTUAL AIRCRAFT DESIGN MILITARY TRAINING FIGHTER RESUMEN: El presente trabajo trata sobre el anteproyecto/diseño conceptual de una aeronave, concretamente de un entrenador militar avanzado de tipo caza. En el mismo se describen las características de la aeronave obtenidas mediante leyes de diseño sencillas basadas en un análisis de aeronaves similares existentes en el mercado. ABSTRACT: The following work deals about the draft/conceptual design of an airplane, specifically, a lead-in fighter trainer. Within we will describe the general characteristics of the aircraft, obtained by simple design rules. A mi hermano José Eugenio, incansable trabajador y constante ejemplo a seguir Content Chapter 1. Introduction ................................................................................. 1 1.1. Goal and definitions ............................................................................................................... 1 1.2. LIFT concept ............................................................................................................................. 3 1.3. Training ...................................................................................................................................... 4 1.3.1. Screening ........................................................................................................................................... 5 1.3.2. Primary aircraft training ............................................................................................................. 5 1.3.3. Basic training ................................................................................................................................... 5 1.3.4. Lead-In Fighter Training ............................................................................................................. 6 1.3.5. Operational transition .................................................................................................................. 8 Chapter 2. Similar aircraft .......................................................................... 11 2.1. T-38 Talon [14] ..................................................................................................................... 11 2.2. MiG-21 [1] ............................................................................................................................... 13 2.3. Hawker Siddeley HS-1182 Hawk [1] ............................................................................ 15 Chapter 3. Fuselage design......................................................................... 17 Chapter 4. Weight calculations ................................................................. 21 4.1. Maximum payload (MPL): ................................................................................................ 21 4.2. Operative Empty Weight (OEW): .................................................................................. 23 4.3. Fuel weight (FW): ................................................................................................................ 24 4.4. Maximum Take-off Weight (MTOW): ........................................................................... 27 Chapter 5. Wing loading and T/W ratio ................................................. 29 5.1. Stall ............................................................................................................................................ 30 5.2. Take-off distance .................................................................................................................. 30 5.3. Landing distance .................................................................................................................. 32 5.4. Instantaneous turn .............................................................................................................. 32 Chapter 6. Geometric definition ............................................................... 35 6.1. Airfoil Geometry ................................................................................................................... 35 6.2. Wingtip .................................................................................................................................... 36 6.3. Wing Sweep ............................................................................................................................ 37 6.4. Tapper ratio ........................................................................................................................... 37 6.5. Wing incidence ...................................................................................................................... 38 6.6. Wing vertical location ........................................................................................................ 38 6.7. Tail arrangement ................................................................................................................. 38 Chapter 7. Drag Polar ................................................................................... 41 Chapter 8. Payload-Range Diagram ........................................................ 45 Chapter 9. Conclusions and further studies ......................................... 47 9.1. Methodology .......................................................................................................................... 47 9.2. Further research .................................................................................................................. 48 9.3. Technological improvements to implement ............................................................. 49 Appendix A. Similar planes tables ........................................................... 51 .1. T-38 Talon ................................................................................................................................. 51 .2. MiG-21 Fishbed ....................................................................................................................... 55 .3. Sidderley Hawk ....................................................................................................................... 57 References ....................................................................................................... 61 Acronyms list C.U.D. Centro Universitario de la Defensa A.G.A. Academia General del Aire T.F.G. Trabajo Fin de Grado LIFT Lead-In Fighter Training MFD Multifunction Display NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization HOTAS Hands On Throttle And Stick HUD Head Up Display HMD Helmet Mounted Display AP AutoPilot AOA Angle of Attack CAS Calibrated AirSpeed IAI Israel Aircraft Industries MPL Maximum PayLoad TO Technical Order OEW Operative Empty Weight MTOW Maximum Take-Off Weight FW Fuel Weight NM Nautical Miles TOD Take-off Distance Chapter 1. Introduction 1.1. Goal and definitions The goal of this work is to perform the evaluation of an advanced military training jet. With the appearance of 5th generation of fighter aircraft and the rapid advance in technology, the training platforms used by some Air Forces are beginning to be obsolete. In advance to the expected obsolescence, it is necessary to provide new systems to meet the demand. We will start by explaining the concept of a military training jet, best known as “trainer”. When we talk about a military trainer we make reference to a jet that belongs to an air force and it is used mainly as a training platform for the future pilots. As we will see later, these jets also fulfill a secondary role, such as that of advanced trainers, prepared to carry weapons and perform low profile missions, such as counterinsurgency, when necessary. As the technology advances, new generations of fighter aircraft appear, thus, it becomes necessary to upgrade the technology used for future pilots training. The first jet trainers were modifications of the original design of an aircraft, however, nowadays most Air Forces own trainers that correspond to an operative fighter or a group of them. In Table 1 we can see how the concept has changed through the years. 1 Chapter 1. Introduction Year Operative fighter Jet trainer Country 1940 Great Britain Gloster Meteor [1] Gloster Meteor two-seat[1] 1959 USA F5 Freedom Fighter[1] T-38 Talon[1] 1996 Russia Yakovlev Yak-130[1] Sukhoi PAK FA[1] Table 1. Operative fighters and their jet trainers One of the common characteristics of these jets is the existence of dual controls to allow the instructor and the student to fly the airplane, giving the instructor the capacity to control the airplane to facilitate the student’s learning and to ensure it is being flown safely. For the achievement of this goal, there are two main arrangements of instructor-student, side-by-side
Load more

Recommended publications
  • LESSON 3 Significant Aircraft of World War II
    LESSON 3 Significant Aircraft of World War II ORREST LEE “WOODY” VOSLER of Lyndonville, Quick Write New York, was a radio operator and gunner during F World War ll. He was the second enlisted member of the Army Air Forces to receive the Medal of Honor. Staff Sergeant Vosler was assigned to a bomb group Time and time again we read about heroic acts based in England. On 20 December 1943, fl ying on his accomplished by military fourth combat mission over Bremen, Germany, Vosler’s servicemen and women B-17 was hit by anti-aircraft fi re, severely damaging it during wartime. After reading the story about and forcing it out of formation. Staff Sergeant Vosler, name Vosler was severely wounded in his legs and thighs three things he did to help his crew survive, which by a mortar shell exploding in the radio compartment. earned him the Medal With the tail end of the aircraft destroyed and the tail of Honor. gunner wounded in critical condition, Vosler stepped up and manned the guns. Without a man on the rear guns, the aircraft would have been defenseless against German fi ghters attacking from that direction. Learn About While providing cover fi re from the tail gun, Vosler was • the development of struck in the chest and face. Metal shrapnel was lodged bombers during the war into both of his eyes, impairing his vision. Able only to • the development of see indistinct shapes and blurs, Vosler never left his post fi ghters during the war and continued to fi re.
    [Show full text]
  • 5.2 Drag Reduction Through Higher Wing Loading David L. Kohlman
    5.2 Drag Reduction Through Higher Wing Loading David L. Kohlman University of Kansas |ntroduction The wing typically accounts for almost half of the wetted area of today's production light airplanes and approximately one-third of the total zero-lift or parasite drag. Thus the wing should be a primary focal point of any attempts to reduce drag of light aircraft with the most obvious configuration change being a reduction in wing area. Other possibilities involve changes in thickness, planform, and airfoil section. This paper will briefly discuss the effects of reducing wing area of typical light airplanes, constraints involved, and related configuration changes which may be necessary. Constraints and Benefits The wing area of current light airplanes is determined primarily by stall speed and/or climb performance requirements. Table I summarizes the resulting wing loading for a representative spectrum of single-engine airplanes. The maximum lift coefficient with full flaps, a constraint on wing size, is also listed. Note that wing loading (at maximum gross weight) ranges between about 10 and 20 psf, with most 4-place models averaging between 13 and 17. Maximum lift coefficient with full flaps ranges from 1.49 to 2.15. Clearly if CLmax can be increased, a corresponding decrease in wing area can be permitted with no change in stall speed. If total drag is not increased at climb speed, the change in wing area will not adversely affect climb performance either and cruise drag will be reduced. Though not related to drag, it is worthy of comment that the range of wing loading in Table I tends to produce a rather uncomfortable ride in turbulent air, as every light-plane pilot is well aware.
    [Show full text]
  • Feeling Supersonic
    FlightGlobal.com May 2021 How Max cuts hurt Boeing backlog Making throwaway Feeling aircraft aff ordable p32 Hydrogen switch for Fresson’s Islander p34 supersonic Will Overture be in tune with demand? p52 9 770015 371327 £4.99 Big worries Warning sign We assess A380 Why NOTAM outlook as last burden can delivery looms baffl e pilots 05 p14 p22 Comment Prospects receding Future dreaming Once thought of as the future of air travel, the A380 is already heading into retirement, but aviation is keenly focused on the next big thing Airbus t has been a rapid rise and fall for on who you ask. As we report else- Hydrogen is not without its the Airbus A380, which not so where in this issue, there are those issues, of course, but nonethe- long ago was being hailed as the banking on supersonic speeds be- less it appears more feasible as a future of long-haul air travel. ing the answer. power source for large transport IThe superjumbo would be, The likes of Aerion and Boom Su- aircraft than batteries do at pres- forecasts said, the perfect tool for personic view the ability to shave ent, even allowing for improving airlines operating into mega-hubs significant time from journeys as a energy densities. such as Dubai that were beginning unique selling point. However, there are others who to spring up. While projects are likely to be see hydrogen through a differ- But the planners at Airbus failed technologically feasible, to be able ent filter. They argue that so- to take into consideration the to sell these new aircraft in signif- called sub-regional aircraft – the efficiency gains available from icant volumes their manufacturers Britten-Norman Islander, among a new generation of widebody will have to ensure that supersonic others – can be given fresh impetus twinjets that allowed operators to flight is not merely the domain of if a fuel source can be found that is open up previously uneconomical the ultra-rich.
    [Show full text]
  • P-38J Over Europe 1170 US WWII FIGHTER 1:48 SCALE PLASTIC KIT
    P-38J over Europe 1170 US WWII FIGHTER 1:48 SCALE PLASTIC KIT intro The Lockheed P-38 Lightning was developed to a United States Army Air Corps requirement. It became famous not only for its performance in the skies of WWII, but also for its unusual appearance. The Lightning, designed by the Lockheed team led by Chief Engineer Clarence 'Kelly' Johnson, was a complete departure from conventional airframe design. Powered by two liquid cooled inline V-1710 engines, it was almost twice the size of other US fighters and was armed with four .50 cal. machine guns plus a 20 mm cannon, giving the Lightning not only the firepower to deal with enemy aircraft, but also the capability to inflict heavy damage on ships. The first XP-38 prototype, 37-457, was built under tight secrecy and made its maiden flight on January 27, 1939. The USAAF wasn´t satisfied with the big new fighter, but gave permission for a transcontinental speed dash on February 11, 1939. During this event, test pilot Kelsey crashed at Mitchell Field, NY. Kelsey survived the cash but the airplane was written off. Despite this, Lockheed received a contract for thirteen preproduction YP-38s. The first production version was the P-38D (35 airplanes only armed with 37mm cannon), followed by 210 P-38Es which reverted back to the 20 mm cannon. These planes began to arrive in October 1941 just before America entered World War II. The next versions were P-38F, P-38G, P-38H and P-38J. The last of these introduced an improved shape of the engine nacelles with redesigned air intakes and cooling system.
    [Show full text]
  • Make America Boom Again: How to Bring Back Supersonic Transport,” Eli Dourado and Samuel Hammond Show That It Is Time to Revisit the Ban
    MAKE AMERICA BOOM AGAIN How to Bring Back Supersonic Transport _____________________ In 1973, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) banned civil supersonic flight over the United States, stymieing the development of a supersonic aviation industry. In “Make America Boom Again: How to Bring Back Supersonic Transport,” Eli Dourado and Samuel Hammond show that it is time to revisit the ban. Better technology—including better materials, engines, and simulation capabilities—mean it is now possible to produce a supersonic jet that is more economical and less noisy than those of the 1970s. It is time to rescind the ban in favor of a more modest and sensible noise standard. BACKGROUND Past studies addressing the ban on supersonic flight have had little effect. However, this paper takes a comprehensive view of the topic, covering the history of supersonic flight, the case for supersonic travel, the problems raised by supersonic flight, and regulatory alternatives to the ban. Dourado and Hammond synthesize the best arguments for rescinding the ban on supersonic flights over land and establish that the ban has had a real impact on the development of supersonic transport. KEY FINDINGS The FAA Should Replace the Ban on Overland Supersonic Flight with a Noise Standard The sonic boom generated by the Concorde and other early supersonic aircraft was very loud, and as a result the FAA banned flights in the United States from going faster than the speed of sound (Mach 1). This ban should be rescinded and replaced with a noise standard. A noise limit of 85–90 A-weighted decibels would be similar to noise standards for lawnmowers, blenders, and motorcy- cles, and would therefore be a reasonable standard during daytime hours.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cost of Replacing Today's Air Force Fleet
    CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE The Cost of Replacing Today’s Air Force Fleet DECEMBER 2018 Notes The years referred to in this report are federal fiscal years, which run from October 1 to September 30 and are designated by the calendar year in which they end. All costs are expressed in 2018 dollars. For the years before 2018, costs are adjusted for inflation using the gross domestic product price index from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Costs for years after 2018 are adjusted for inflation using the Congressional Budget Office’s projection of that index. On the cover: An F-15C Eagle during takeoff. U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sergeant Joe W. McFadden. www.cbo.gov/publication/54657 Contents Summary 1 Today’s Air Force Aircraft and Their Replacement Costs 1 BOX 1. MAJOR AIRCRAFT IN THE AIR FORCE’S FLEET AND THEIR PRIMARY FUNCTIONS 2 How CBO Made Its Projections 5 Projected Costs of New Fighter Aircraft 6 F-35A 7 Light Attack Aircraft 7 Penetrating Counter Air Aircraft 8 Managing Procurement Costs in Peak Years 9 Appendix: Composition of the Current Air Force Fleet and CBO’s Estimate of Replacement Costs 11 List of Tables and Figures 18 About This Document 19 The Cost of Replacing Today’s Air Force Fleet Summary different missions (seeBox 1 and the appendix). They The U.S. Air Force has about 5,600 aircraft, which range range widely in age from the 75 new aircraft that entered in age from just-delivered to 60 years old.
    [Show full text]
  • Conquering the Night Army Air Forces Night Fighters at War
    The U.S. Army Air Forces in World War II Conquering the Night Army Air Forces Night Fighters at War PRINTER: strip in FIGURE NUMBER A-1 Shoot at 277% bleed all sides Stephen L. McFarland A Douglas P–70 takes off for a night fighter training mission, silhouetted by the setting Florida sun. 2 The U.S. Army Air Forces in World War II Conquering the Night Army Air Forces Night Fighters at War Stephen L. McFarland AIR FORCE HISTORY AND MUSEUMS PROGRAM 1998 Conquering the Night Army Air Forces Night Fighters at War The author traces the AAF’s development of aerial night fighting, in- cluding technology, training, and tactical operations in the North African, European, Pacific, and Asian theaters of war. In this effort the United States never wanted for recruits in what was, from start to finish, an all-volunteer night fighting force. Cut short the night; use some of it for the day’s business. — Seneca For combatants, a constant in warfare through the ages has been the sanctuary of night, a refuge from the terror of the day’s armed struggle. On the other hand, darkness has offered protection for operations made too dangerous by daylight. Combat has also extended into the twilight as day has seemed to provide too little time for the destruction demanded in modern mass warfare. In World War II the United States Army Air Forces (AAF) flew night- time missions to counter enemy activities under cover of darkness. Allied air forces had established air superiority over the battlefield and behind their own lines, and so Axis air forces had to exploit the night’s protection for their attacks on Allied installations.
    [Show full text]
  • FLYING the FLOGGER Reflections on an Early Post-Cold War Mig-23 Experience
    FLYING THE FLOGGER Reflections on an Early Post-Cold War MiG-23 Experience Benjamin S. Lambeth1 Mikoyan’s MiG-23UB dual-control company demonstrator The author, an Honorary Daedalian since 2002, is a civil-rated pilot and defense analyst specializing in air warfare. He was a senior research associate at the RAND Corporation for 37 years and is now a nonresident senior fellow with the Center for Stra- tegic and Budgetary Assessments. Before joining RAND in 1974, he served as a Soviet military analyst at the Central Intelligence Agency. During the last years of the Cold War and for a short time thereafter, when access by Western defense professionals to the USSR’s and post-Soviet Russia’s military leaders and military aviation industry was remarkably unrestricted, he had the rare privilege of flying four invitational fighter sorties with four of the country’s top-ranked industry test pilots. This article recalls the highlights of the most instructive among them. My ties with the Mikoyan Design Bureau, first established after I met then-chief test pilot Valery Menitsky at the Farnborough Air Show in 1988, opened the door for me to fly a MiG-23 (NATO code-name FLOGGER) at the Zhukovsky Flight Test Center during the 1993 Moscow Aviation and Space Salon. Four years before, at Menitsky’s behest, I had been the first American to fly the MiG-29 and the first Westerner invited to fly a combat aircraft of any type inside Soviet airspace since the end of World War II. Having previously flown both the MiG-29 and later the Su-30 with Anatoly Kvochur, formerly of Mikoyan and at the time with Russia’s Gromov Flight Research Institute, getting a shot at the MiG-23 was a step backward into aviation history.
    [Show full text]
  • Subsonic Aircraft Wing Conceptual Design Synthesis and Analysis
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by GSSRR.ORG: International Journals: Publishing Research Papers in all Fields International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) ISSN 2307-4531 (Print & Online) http://gssrr.org/index.php?journal=JournalOfBasicAndApplied --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Subsonic Aircraft Wing Conceptual Design Synthesis and Analysis Abderrahmane BADIS Electrical and Electronic Communication Engineer from UMBB (Ex.INELEC) Independent Electronics, Aeronautics, Propulsion, Well Logging and Software Design Research Engineer Takerboust, Aghbalou, Bouira 10007, Algeria [email protected] Abstract This paper exposes a simplified preliminary conceptual integrated method to design an aircraft wing in subsonic speeds up to Mach 0.85. The proposed approach is integrated, as it allows an early estimation of main aircraft aerodynamic features, namely the maximum lift-to-drag ratio and the total parasitic drag. First, the influence of the Lift and Load scatterings on the overall performance characteristics of the wing are discussed. It is established that the optimization is achieved by designing a wing geometry that yields elliptical lift and load distributions. Second, the reference trapezoidal wing is considered the base line geometry used to outline the wing shape layout. As such, the main geometrical parameters and governing relations for a trapezoidal wing are
    [Show full text]
  • Aircraft Collection
    A, AIR & SPA ID SE CE MU REP SEU INT M AIRCRAFT COLLECTION From the Avenger torpedo bomber, a stalwart from Intrepid’s World War II service, to the A-12, the spy plane from the Cold War, this collection reflects some of the GREATEST ACHIEVEMENTS IN MILITARY AVIATION. Photo: Liam Marshall TABLE OF CONTENTS Bombers / Attack Fighters Multirole Helicopters Reconnaissance / Surveillance Trainers OV-101 Enterprise Concorde Aircraft Restoration Hangar Photo: Liam Marshall BOMBERS/ATTACK The basic mission of the aircraft carrier is to project the U.S. Navy’s military strength far beyond our shores. These warships are primarily deployed to deter aggression and protect American strategic interests. Should deterrence fail, the carrier’s bombers and attack aircraft engage in vital operations to support other forces. The collection includes the 1940-designed Grumman TBM Avenger of World War II. Also on display is the Douglas A-1 Skyraider, a true workhorse of the 1950s and ‘60s, as well as the Douglas A-4 Skyhawk and Grumman A-6 Intruder, stalwarts of the Vietnam War. Photo: Collection of the Intrepid Sea, Air & Space Museum GRUMMAN / EASTERNGRUMMAN AIRCRAFT AVENGER TBM-3E GRUMMAN/EASTERN AIRCRAFT TBM-3E AVENGER TORPEDO BOMBER First flown in 1941 and introduced operationally in June 1942, the Avenger became the U.S. Navy’s standard torpedo bomber throughout World War II, with more than 9,836 constructed. Originally built as the TBF by Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corporation, they were affectionately nicknamed “Turkeys” for their somewhat ungainly appearance. Bomber Torpedo In 1943 Grumman was tasked to build the F6F Hellcat fighter for the Navy.
    [Show full text]
  • F—18 Navy Air Combat Fighter
    74 /2 >Af ^y - Senate H e a r tn ^ f^ n 12]$ Before the Committee on Appro priations (,() \ ER WIIA Storage ime nts F EB 1 2 « T H e -,M<rUN‘U«sni KAN S A S S F—18 Na vy Air Com bat Fighter Fiscal Year 1976 th CONGRESS, FIRS T SES SION H .R . 986 1 SPECIAL HEARING F - 1 8 NA VY AIR CO MBA T FIG H TER HEARING BEFORE A SUBC OMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE NIN ETY-FOURTH CONGRESS FIR ST SE SS IO N ON H .R . 9 8 6 1 AN ACT MAKIN G APP ROPR IA TIO NS FO R THE DEP ARTM EN T OF D EFEN SE FO R T H E FI SC AL YEA R EN DI NG JU N E 30, 1976, AND TH E PE RIO D BE GIN NIN G JU LY 1, 1976, AN D EN DI NG SEPT EM BER 30, 1976, AND FO R OTH ER PU RP OSE S P ri nte d fo r th e use of th e Com mittee on App ro pr ia tio ns SPECIAL HEARING U.S. GOVERNM ENT PRINT ING OFF ICE 60-913 O WASHINGTON : 1976 SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS JOHN L. MCCLELLAN, Ark ans as, Chairman JOH N C. ST ENN IS, Mississippi MILTON R. YOUNG, No rth D ako ta JOH N O. P ASTORE, Rhode Island ROMAN L. HRUSKA, N ebraska WARREN G. MAGNUSON, Washin gton CLIFFORD I’. CASE, New Je rse y MIK E MANSFIEL D, Montana HIRAM L.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Complete [PDF]
    Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses No.1, Development Enclave, Rao Tula Ram Marg Delhi Cantonment, New Delhi-110010 Journal of Defence Studies Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.idsa.in/journalofdefencestudies Critical Analysis of Pakistani Air Operations in 1965: Weaknesses and Strengths Arjun Subramaniam To cite this article: Arjun Subramaniam (201 5): Critical Analysis of Pakistani Air Op erations in 1965: Weaknesses and Strengths, Journal of Defence Studies, Vol. 9, No. 3 July-September 2015, pp. 95-113 URL http://idsa.in/jds/9_3_2015_CriticalAnalysisofPakistaniAirOperationsin1965.html Please Scroll down for Article Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.idsa.in/termsofuse This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re- distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Views expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the IDSA or of the Government of India. Critical Analysis of Pakistani Air Operations in 1965 Weaknesses and Strengths Arjun Subramaniam* This article tracks the evolution of the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) into a potent fighting force by analysing the broad contours of joint operations and the air war between the Indian Air Force (IAF) and PAF in 1965. Led by aggressive commanders like Asghar Khan and Nur Khan, the PAF seized the initiative in the air on the evening of 6 September 1965 with a coordinated strike from Sargodha, Mauripur and Peshawar against four major Indian airfields, Adampur, Halwara, Pathankot and Jamnagar.
    [Show full text]