4 ms·

From the article: > Pakistan said India hit three sites with missiles, and a military spokesman told Reuters his country shot down five Indian aircraft, a clai

From the article: > Pakistan said India hit three sites with missiles, and a military spokesman told Reuters his country shot down five Indian aircraft, a claim not confirmed by India. That’s a huge loss of aircraft! Are there any corroborating reports or more details about the aircraft/shootdown?

alephnerd 1y ago
Hasn't been confirmed. The Indian government says all pilots are accounted for. It's the fog of war, and OSINT/couch generalling in the manner that people did with Israel or Ukraine won't work with India and Pakistan. India has been leveraging the DPDP and national security laws really heavily to remove leaks on social media over the past couple weeks. All major social media platforms have a representative the Indian government coordinates with on information takedowns. Major reason Musk backed off on his stance about X takedowns with India unlike with Brazil. And on Pakistan's side, while there have been leaks on social media of troop movements, Pakistan has been implementing China's Great Firewall domestically for the past couple years now. If it was truly deemed critical, Pakistan would most likely lock down their domestic Internet.
breadwinner 1y ago
No credible photos have surfaced so far—if the claim were true, some likely would have. It’s possible the Pakistan army is making this statement for domestic audiences, perhaps to deflect pressure to respond.
aaron695 1y ago
Planes down confirmed - https://x.com/Doha104p3/status/1919922881892430275 https://x.com/Doha104p3/status/1919922881892430275 5 planes not yet, but it seems more than one. Indian and Pakistan TV are saying 3. Indian planes crashed in India.
- breadwinner 1y ago
  That post is not from any credible source.
ranger207 1y ago
There won't be corroborating reports for months if not years. The public transparency of the Ukrainian battlefield is an anomaly; typically (as in past India-Pakistan incidents) both sides will claim more successes than actually happened and it'll take unbiased parties to figure out what actually happened after both sides release their records. This isn't typically due to malice; it's simply difficult in most cases to verify exactly what damage you've dealt. The wide prevalence of public videos in Ukraine puts a lower bound on claims by both sides, but that's historically very unusual.
- matusp 1y ago
  I think that level of transparency is the new norm. Everybody has mobile phones and you can have a new satelite imaginery every few hours. It's pretty difficult to hide a jet loss, unless it happens at sea.
  - jajko 1y ago
    Satellite imagery doesn't go to (or is paid by via some crowdsourcing) public. Maybe 90% of the videos ie on r/CombatFootage are from drones, maybe even basic DJI ones but operated by military. Its a voluntary decision of those in command to share these, from both sides, nothing less and nothing more, to continuous amazement of both civilian and military communities watching those (some stuff I saw I'd never say is possible or would happen, no need to go to details some of it is beyond brutal). You are maybe mixing Syria war footage - there are tons of them from around 2016, done as you say via phones or maybe some cheap gopros or consumer cameras of that time. That's not a typical Ukraine war footage.
  - ranger207 1y ago
    Even Ukraine is less transparent than popularly believed. Probably less than half of drone strikes are recorded, and the Ukrainian government is effective at keeping some areas blacked out. For example, the Kursk offensive didn't have any public drone footage until after it had stablized. Situations like the current India-Pakistan strikes are particularly difficult, as the OSINT analysts don't have established sources and procedures yet, plus the sources are heavily biased. Ukrainian footage is very biased as well, which doesn't come up frequently in popular discussions. But most people in the West are more inclined to believe Ukrainian reports (which is helped by Ukraine's past general trustworthiness and Russia's untrustworthiness; it's not totally misplaced), but are more likely to give more even weight to reports on both sides of India-Pakistan, which will inevitably be contradictory. Plane shootdowns are particularly difficult. People have a very limited view of the airspace, and even if a plane is hit by a missile and explodes a couple seconds later, those couple seconds can take the plane out of view. Typical tactics include flying low, popping up for a better view, and delivering weapons as they dive again. The pop up is the most vulnerable part, and where they're most likely to be hit. If someone on the ground hears a jet fly over, looks for it, finds it, sees a missile explode near it, and watches it head towards the ground, they're likely to assume it's been hit and is going down, but it's equally likely that it wasn't hit and is simply returning to a low and safe altitude. Combine this with night or weather and the fact that many of these fights take place in rural areas instead of over cities, and it's very easy for civilians on both sides to claim more kills than were even planes in the air. Even militaries aren't immune from this. They get reports from pilots, who are notorious overreporters of kills. In addition to all the factors people on the ground have also have the fact that theyore being shot at and usually can't actually watch a target hit the ground. Air defense units have the same factors, plus it's not always clear who exactly shot a target down. Both your unit and the one a couple miles away on the other side of the city fired a missile, and both saw the plane go down out of view, and both are likely to claim a kill. Military intelligence should be able to correlate these reports and take into account these known biases but that takes time, and an uncareful spokesperson wanting to get a positive report out to the public may give out unverified reports to the press. Battlefields are more transparent than ever, but the fog of war hasn't been completely blown away
curiosity42 1y ago
Most likely Drop Tanks getting confused as downed aircrafts.
unstuck3958 1y ago
I live in Kashmir. Can verify the two have been shot down at least.
sbmthakur 1y ago
Their claim went from 2 to 3 to 6 to 5. So, I will be careful about such news.
- OJFord 1y ago
  Also from 'we have captured some Indian soldiers' to 'we have not' (both times the Pakistani defence minister) in an hour or so.
- hyruo 1y ago
  You can't expect Russia to admit that SU30 and MiG29 were shot down by Pakistan.
  - sbmthakur 1y ago
    I also don't expect US to openly admit to a potential F-16 crash. It's just bad for business.
arjun1296 1y ago
[dead]
ryzvonusef 1y ago
france confirms at least one rafale is down, acc to cnn[1], not sure about others. [1]: https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/india-pakistan-attack-kashmir-tourists-intl-hnk#cmadq2i4j00003b6tu7krhsys https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/india-pakistan-attac...

alephnerd 1y ago

Hasn't been confirmed. The Indian government says all pilots are accounted for. It's the fog of war, and OSINT/couch generalling in the manner that people did with Israel or Ukraine won't work with India and Pakistan. India has been leveraging the DPDP and national security laws really heavily to remove leaks on social media over the past couple weeks. All major social media platforms have a representative the Indian government coordinates with on information takedowns. Major reason Musk backed off on his stance about X takedowns with India unlike with Brazil. And on Pakistan's side, while there have been leaks on social media of troop movements, Pakistan has been implementing China's Great Firewall domestically for the past couple years now. If it was truly deemed critical, Pakistan would most likely lock down their domestic Internet.

breadwinner 1y ago

No credible photos have surfaced so far—if the claim were true, some likely would have. It’s possible the Pakistan army is making this statement for domestic audiences, perhaps to deflect pressure to respond.

aaron695 1y ago

Planes down confirmed - https://x.com/Doha104p3/status/1919922881892430275 https://x.com/Doha104p3/status/1919922881892430275 5 planes not yet, but it seems more than one. Indian and Pakistan TV are saying 3. Indian planes crashed in India.

breadwinner 1y ago
That post is not from any credible source.

ranger207 1y ago

There won't be corroborating reports for months if not years. The public transparency of the Ukrainian battlefield is an anomaly; typically (as in past India-Pakistan incidents) both sides will claim more successes than actually happened and it'll take unbiased parties to figure out what actually happened after both sides release their records. This isn't typically due to malice; it's simply difficult in most cases to verify exactly what damage you've dealt. The wide prevalence of public videos in Ukraine puts a lower bound on claims by both sides, but that's historically very unusual.

matusp 1y ago
I think that level of transparency is the new norm. Everybody has mobile phones and you can have a new satelite imaginery every few hours. It's pretty difficult to hide a jet loss, unless it happens at sea.
- jajko 1y ago
  Satellite imagery doesn't go to (or is paid by via some crowdsourcing) public. Maybe 90% of the videos ie on r/CombatFootage are from drones, maybe even basic DJI ones but operated by military. Its a voluntary decision of those in command to share these, from both sides, nothing less and nothing more, to continuous amazement of both civilian and military communities watching those (some stuff I saw I'd never say is possible or would happen, no need to go to details some of it is beyond brutal). You are maybe mixing Syria war footage - there are tons of them from around 2016, done as you say via phones or maybe some cheap gopros or consumer cameras of that time. That's not a typical Ukraine war footage.
- ranger207 1y ago
  Even Ukraine is less transparent than popularly believed. Probably less than half of drone strikes are recorded, and the Ukrainian government is effective at keeping some areas blacked out. For example, the Kursk offensive didn't have any public drone footage until after it had stablized. Situations like the current India-Pakistan strikes are particularly difficult, as the OSINT analysts don't have established sources and procedures yet, plus the sources are heavily biased. Ukrainian footage is very biased as well, which doesn't come up frequently in popular discussions. But most people in the West are more inclined to believe Ukrainian reports (which is helped by Ukraine's past general trustworthiness and Russia's untrustworthiness; it's not totally misplaced), but are more likely to give more even weight to reports on both sides of India-Pakistan, which will inevitably be contradictory. Plane shootdowns are particularly difficult. People have a very limited view of the airspace, and even if a plane is hit by a missile and explodes a couple seconds later, those couple seconds can take the plane out of view. Typical tactics include flying low, popping up for a better view, and delivering weapons as they dive again. The pop up is the most vulnerable part, and where they're most likely to be hit. If someone on the ground hears a jet fly over, looks for it, finds it, sees a missile explode near it, and watches it head towards the ground, they're likely to assume it's been hit and is going down, but it's equally likely that it wasn't hit and is simply returning to a low and safe altitude. Combine this with night or weather and the fact that many of these fights take place in rural areas instead of over cities, and it's very easy for civilians on both sides to claim more kills than were even planes in the air. Even militaries aren't immune from this. They get reports from pilots, who are notorious overreporters of kills. In addition to all the factors people on the ground have also have the fact that theyore being shot at and usually can't actually watch a target hit the ground. Air defense units have the same factors, plus it's not always clear who exactly shot a target down. Both your unit and the one a couple miles away on the other side of the city fired a missile, and both saw the plane go down out of view, and both are likely to claim a kill. Military intelligence should be able to correlate these reports and take into account these known biases but that takes time, and an uncareful spokesperson wanting to get a positive report out to the public may give out unverified reports to the press. Battlefields are more transparent than ever, but the fog of war hasn't been completely blown away

curiosity42 1y ago

Most likely Drop Tanks getting confused as downed aircrafts.

unstuck3958 1y ago

I live in Kashmir. Can verify the two have been shot down at least.

sbmthakur 1y ago

Their claim went from 2 to 3 to 6 to 5. So, I will be careful about such news.

OJFord 1y ago
Also from 'we have captured some Indian soldiers' to 'we have not' (both times the Pakistani defence minister) in an hour or so.
hyruo 1y ago
You can't expect Russia to admit that SU30 and MiG29 were shot down by Pakistan.
- sbmthakur 1y ago
  I also don't expect US to openly admit to a potential F-16 crash. It's just bad for business.

arjun1296 1y ago

[dead]

ryzvonusef 1y ago

france confirms at least one rafale is down, acc to cnn[1], not sure about others. [1]: https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/india-pakistan-attack-kashmir-tourists-intl-hnk#cmadq2i4j00003b6tu7krhsys https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/india-pakistan-attac...