
How Pakistan shot down Indian jets with Chinese tech
Listen to article
Just after midnight on May 7, the screen in the Pakistan Air Force's operations room lit up in red with the positions of dozens of active enemy planes across the border in India.
Air Chief Mshl. Zaheer Sidhu had been sleeping on a mattress just off that room for days in anticipation of an Indian assault.
New Delhi had claimed Islamabad for backing militants who carried out an attack the previous month in Indian Kashmir, which killed 26 civilians. Despite Islamabad denying any involvement, India had vowed a response, which came in the early hours of May 7 with air strikes on Pakistan.
Sidhu ordered Pakistan's prized Chinese-made J-10C jets to scramble. A senior Pakistani Air Force (PAF) official, who was present in the operations room, said Sidhu instructed his staff to target Rafales, a French-made fighter that is the jewel of India's fleet and had never been downed in battle.
"He wanted Rafales," said the official.
The hour-long fight, which took place in darkness, involved some 110 aircraft, experts estimate, making it the world's largest air battle in decades.
The J-10s shot down at least one Rafale, Reuters reported in May, citing US officials. However Pakistan downed at least 6 jet aircrafts in the war. Its downing surprised many in the military community and raised questions about the effectiveness of Western military hardware against untested Chinese alternatives.
Read More: FO slams India's 'Operation Mahadev' as 'entirely fabricated'
Shares of Dassault, which makes the Rafale, dipped after reports the fighter had been shot down. Indonesia, which has outstanding Rafale orders, has said it is now considering purchasing J-10s – a major boost to China's efforts to sell the aircraft overseas.
But Reuters interviews with two Indian officials and three of their Pakistani counterparts found that the performance of the Rafale wasn't the key problem: Central to its downing was an Indian intelligence failure concerning the range of the China-made PL-15 missile fired by the J-10 fighter. China and Pakistan are the only countries to operate both J-10s, known as Vigorous Dragons, and PL-15s.
The faulty intelligence gave the Rafale pilots a false sense of confidence they were out of Pakistani firing distance, which they believed was only around 150 km, the Indian officials said, referring to the widely cited range of PL-15's export variant.
"We ambushed them," the PAF official said, adding that Islamabad conducted an electronic warfare assault on Delhi's systems in an attempt to confuse Indian pilots. Indian officials dispute the effectiveness of those efforts.
"The Indians were not expecting to be shot at," said Justin Bronk, air warfare expert at London's Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) think-tank. "And the PL-15 is clearly very capable at long range."
A Chinese Chengdu J-10 fighter aircraft performs a flight during the Aviadarts competition, as part of the International Army Games 2021, at the Dubrovichi range outside Ryazan, Russia, August 27, 2021.PHOTO: REUTERS
The PL-15 that hit the Rafale was fired from around 200km (124.27 mi) away, according to Pakistani officials, and even farther according to Indian officials. That would make it among the longest-range air-to-air strikes recorded.
India's defense and foreign ministries did not return requests for comment about the intelligence mistakes. Delhi hasn't acknowledged a Rafale being shot down, but France's air chief told reporters in June that he had seen evidence of the loss of that fighter and two other aircraft flown by India, including a Russian-made Sukhoi. A top Dassault executive also told French lawmakers that month that India had lost a Rafale in operations, though he didn't have specific details.
Pakistan's military referred to past comments by a spokesperson who said that its professional preparedness and resolve was more important than the weaponry it had deployed. China's defense ministry did not respond to Reuters' questions. Dassault and UAC, the manufacturer of the Sukhoi, also did not return requests for comment.
"Situational awareness"
Reuters spoke to eight Pakistani and two Indian officials to piece together an account of the aerial battle, which marked the start of four days of fighting between the two nuclear-armed neighbors that caused alarm in Washington. The officials all spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss national security matters.
Not only did Islamabad have the element of surprise with its missiles' range, the Pakistani and Indian officials said, but it managed to more efficiently connect its military hardware to surveillance on the ground and in the air, providing it with a clearer picture of the battlefield. Such networks, known as "kill chains," have become a crucial element of modern warfare.
Four Pakistani officials said they created a "kill chain," or a multi-domain operation, by linking air, land and space sensors. The network included a Pakistani-developed system, Data Link 17, which connected Chinese military hardware with other equipment, including a Swedish-made surveillance plane, two Pakistani officials said.
The system allowed the J-10s flying closer to India to obtain radar feeds from the surveillance plane cruising further away, meaning the Chinese-made fighters could turn their radars off and fly undetected, according to experts. Pakistan's military did not respond to requests for comment on this point.
Delhi is trying to set up a similar network, the Indian officials said, adding that their process was more complicated because the country sourced aircraft from a wide range of exporters.
Retired UK Air Mshl. Greg Bagwell, now a fellow at RUSI, said the episode didn't conclusively prove the superiority of either Chinese or Western air assets but it showed the importance of having the right information and using it.
'The winner in this was the side that had the best situational awareness,' said Bagwell.
Change in the tactics
After India in the early hours of May 7 struck targets in Pakistan that it claimed terrorist infrastructure, Sidhu ordered his squadrons to switch from defense to attack.
Also Read: India's rhetoric fueling instability: FO
Five PAF officials said India had deployed some 70 planes, which was more than they had expected and provided Islamabad's PL-15s with a target-rich environment. India has not said how many planes were used.
The May 7 battle marked the first big air contest of the modern era in which weaponry is used to strike targets beyond visual range, said Bagwell, noting both India and Pakistan's planes remained well within their airspaces across the duration of the fight.
Five Pakistani officials said an electronic assault on Indian sensors and communications systems reduced the situational awareness of the Rafale's pilots.
The two Indian officials said the Rafales were not blinded during the skirmishes and that Indian satellites were not jammed. But they acknowledged that Pakistan appeared to have disrupted the Sukhoi, whose systems Delhi is now upgrading.
Other Indian security officials have deflected questions away from the Rafale, a centerpiece of India's military modernization, to the orders given to the air force.
India's defense attaché in Jakarta told a university seminar that Delhi had lost some aircraft "only because of the constraint given by the political leadership to not attack (Pakistan's) military establishments and their air defenses."
India's chief of defense staff Gen. Anil Chauhan previously told Reuters that Delhi quickly "rectified tactics" after the initial losses.
After the May 7 air battle, India began targeting Pakistani military infrastructure and asserting its strength in the skies. Its Indian-made BrahMos supersonic cruise missile repeatedly sliced through Pakistan's air defenses, according to officials on both sides.
On May 10, India claimed it struck at least nine air bases and radar sites in Pakistan. It also hit a surveillance plane parked in a hangar in southern Pakistan, according to Indian and Pakistani officials. A ceasefire was agreed later that day, after US officials held talks with both sides.
'Live inputs'
In the aftermath of the episode, India's deputy army chief Lt. Gen. Rahul Singh accused Pakistan of receiving 'live inputs' from China during the battles, implying radar and satellite feeds. He did not provide evidence and Islamabad denies the allegation.
When asked at a July briefing about Beijing's military partnership with Pakistan, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning told reporters the work was "part of the normal cooperation between the two countries and does not target any third party."
Beijing's air chief Lt. Gen. Wang Gang visited Pakistan in July to discuss how Islamabad had used Chinese equipment to put together the "kill chain' for the Rafale, two PAF officials said.
China did not respond when asked about that interaction. The Pakistani military said in a statement in July that Wang had expressed "keen interest in learning from PAF's battle-proven experience in Multi Domain Operations."

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Business Recorder
2 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Three soldiers martyred in Mastung terrorist attack: ISPR
Three soldiers of the Pakistan Army, including a major, embraced martyrdom in Mastung district after Indian-sponsored terrorists from the group 'Fitna al Hindustan' targeted a security forces' vehicle using an improvised explosive device (IED), the military's media wing said on Wednesday. According to the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR), the attack occurred during the night between August 5 and 6. The martyred personnel were identified as Major Muhammad Rizwan Tahir (31), a resident of Narowal District; Naik Ibni Amin (37), hailing from Swabi District; and Lance Naik Muhammad Younas (33), from Karak District. 'Major Rizwan was a valiant officer who had participated in numerous counter-terrorism operations and always led from the front,' the ISPR said, lauding the fallen officer's bravery. 257 killed in 501 terror attacks in Balochistan in six months: Home Dept Following the attack, security forces swiftly launched a sanitization operation in the area. Four terrorists linked to the attack were neutralized during the operation. The ISPR reiterated that such operations would continue until the area was completely cleared of hostile elements. 'Security forces of Pakistan are determined to wipe out the menace of Indian-sponsored terrorism from the country, and such sacrifices of our brave men further strengthen our resolve,' the statement added. PM condemns attack Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif strongly condemned the attack and expressed deep sorrow over the martyrdom of the soldiers. 'The entire nation salutes our martyrs,' he said in a statement issued by the PM Office. He offered prayers for the elevation of ranks of the martyrs and extended condolences to the bereaved families. The premier also praised the swift response by security forces that led to the killing of four terrorists, describing the troops as a 'steel wall' protecting the nation. He reaffirmed the government's commitment to eradicating all forms of terrorism and paid tribute to the security forces' unmatched sacrifices in the fight against militancy.
1724919650-0%2FUntitled-design-(5)1724919650-0-640x480.webp&w=3840&q=100)

Express Tribune
3 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Governor rules out talks with terrorists
Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Governor, Faisal Karim Kundi, has declared that there will be no negotiations with those who defy the Constitution or challenge the writ of the state. He urged individuals supporting terrorists to cease providing them shelter, warning that intelligence-based operations will be conducted against them. Addressing the Qaumi Istehkam-e-Pakistan Conference in Peshawar and speaking to the media, the Governor emphasized that Pakistan's armed forces are capable of responding to any threat. "If our military can respond to our eternal enemy within 72 hours, a handful of terrorists hold no significance. They can be neutralized in minutes," he said. He added that while a large-scale military operation is not underway, intelligence-based actions are ongoing because locals do not want to be displaced again. Criticizing the provincial government, he said, "The K-P government is playing Jirga-Jirga while refusing to act decisively. We cannot hold talks with those who reject the Constitution." Addressing propaganda claims that the situation in certain areas is being worsened to exploit mineral resources, he countered, "If that's true, where are the mines in DI Khan, Tank, Lakki Marwat, and Bannu? This narrative is being used to undermine the army." On PTI's protests, Governor Kundi remarked that the party has been reduced to a "neighborhood group" and will soon be unable to hold rallies even in alleyways. He criticized CM Gandapur, calling him a "good boy" who has compromised on major issues. "It's unfortunate that the province's chief executive doesn't have time for Kashmiris," he added. Taking aim at PTI leader Omar Ayub, he said, "The grandson of a dictator should not lecture us on democracy. These are the same people who stood with Nawaz Sharif and General Musharraf, and are now aligned with Imran Khan. While we visit Garhi Khuda Bakhsh, they head to Corps Commander House." He recalled that PTI was handed a peaceful province in 2013 but failed to maintain law and order. Paying tribute to the armed forces, police, and security personnel, the Governor said, "It is the duty of every citizen to stand against terrorism. We want peace and prosperity in the province, which is rich in natural resources. Development, be it roads, schools, or hospitals, can only happen once peace is ensured." He stressed the need for better relations with neighboring countries but said Pakistan must rely on itself. "No savior will come from abroad," he said. Referring to past military victories, he stated, "The world called for peace when our army responded to Indian aggression. Even today, the Indian prime minister remains stunned by that response. The nation stood with the military then and continues to do so now." "We salute the martyrs of our armed forces, as well as the police and other officers who have sacrificed for the nation," he concluded.


Express Tribune
3 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Kashmir, Khan and echoes of betrayed promises
The writer is a public policy analyst based in Lahore. She can be reached at durdananajam1@ Listen to article August 5 has come to symbolise two distinct narratives in Pakistan. For supporters of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) — which now represents an overwhelming majority of the population, thanks to the establishment's relentless and illogical rivalry with Imran Khan — it marks the second anniversary of their leader's incarceration. At the official level, however, the day is commemorated in solidarity with the people of Indian-occupied Kashmir, whose semi-autonomous status and special rights were stripped following the abrogation of Articles 370 and 35-A of the Indian constitution. Yet, one suspects that most Pakistanis are aware of the constitutional intricacies affecting Kashmiris. Given the mass exodus from Pakistan and the alarming rise in poverty, it's understandable why many would hesitate to wish the same fate upon Kashmiris — being absorbed into a nation deliberately kept broken and dysfunctional by its ruling elite. The condition of those living in Pakistan-administered Azad Kashmir is, perhaps, evidence enough of this grim reality. In 2018, PTI emerged as one of Pakistan's most popular political parties. By 2025, it has reclaimed that status. In the intervening years, PTI governed for three years before being pushed to the political margins through a familiar tactic: the formation of a united opposition. In Pakistan, political unity is rare and usually reserved for two occasions — when legislation serves personal or business interests; and when the ruling party must be ousted under the guise of national interest. Many analysts and PTI loyalists argue that Imran Khan should have declined the premiership in 2018. They believe that leveraging his popularity from the opposition benches could have secured him a sweeping mandate in subsequent elections — free from establishment strings. With legislative strength, he could have pursued bold reforms with full institutional backing. Instead, Khan opted for hybrid governance, believing he would be treated differently than his predecessors. Like most Pakistanis, he assumed that his unwavering loyalty to Pakistan would earn him institutional support. After all, no previous leader had prioritised national interest over personal gain. From 2014 to 2018, Khan relentlessly branded the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) as "thieves", embedding this narrative deep into public consciousness. Despite reservations about his alliance with the establishment, many hoped Khan's government would be allowed to function independently, free from judicial interference. Over time, he cultivated an aura of indispensability. His trust in the establishment led him — and the public - to believe that the very "thieves" he helped remove would never return to power until held accountable. But like all constructs built on fragile assumptions, this belief crumbled under the weight of reality. By April 9, 2021, Khan's popularity had waned, largely due to the inevitable governance challenges arising from a hybrid and compromised system. Yet, overnight, he surged back to prominence when PTI was ousted and replaced by the very political actors the establishment had long vilified. The irony was not lost on the public. The next day, Pakistanis across the country — and in diaspora communities in the US and the UK — took to the streets. Their protest wasn't just about PTI's removal; it was a collective mourning of the collapse of trust in the establishment and the erosion of democratic values. When Shahbaz Sharif was appointed Prime Minister, he was facing indictment in a multi-million-dollar financial fraud case. Instead of facing justice, he was greeted with rose petals - a stark reminder of the selective accountability that plagues Pakistan's political system. By April 10, 2021, Imran Khan stood alone as the only credible figure in Pakistan's political landscape — for an vast majority of the population. As predicted, Khan remained the most popular leader in 2024 and won the elections with a resounding mandate. Had he trusted the democratic process instead of relying on power brokers, the trajectory might have been different. His two-year resistance to unconstitutional interventions and the public's shattered trust in the military have plunged the country into a state of collective frustration. The illegitimacy of the PDM 2.0 government is evident to all — except those who engineered it. The people stand with Khan because they see in him a reflection of their own victimhood at the hands of a power structure that, though designed to serve the nation, has become its greatest adversary. Today, the pressing question is: Can Imran Khan survive the ruthless persecution of his party and the inhumane conditions of his imprisonment? History offers a sobering pattern. Pakistan's most popular leaders — those who believed in the power of the people — Liaquat Ali Khan, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and Benazir Bhutto — all met unnatural ends. Khan's defiance of absolute power and his rivals' surrender to it have set the tone for Pakistan's future. The king stands naked. No matter how desperately he tries to cloak himself, the people see through the hypocrisy, illegitimacy and usurpation of power. August 5 stands as a testament to the resilience of people who refuse to be silenced. In commemorating this day, Pakistanis are not just mourning losses — they are reclaiming their right to choose, to question, and to hope.