text:
Talk:Pakistan Armed Forces

I want to talk about Israel. You see how many innocent children are being killed there. Our first Kaaba is Al-Aqsa Mosque.People are not allowed there. Why Pakistan Army is silent, we are Muslims, our job is to help our Muslim brothers and sisters. We will fight and Israel will conquer. We can do it, God is with us.We have the power of faith. Please think about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jatteatty (talk • contribs) 03:25, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Recent edits
This article seems to be the target of POV edits in favor of Pakistani nationalism. Unfortunately, the links provided do not seem to discuss the topics referenced (meaning that the claims are apparently unsourced) so I reverted. siafu 21:54, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Response
I didn't originally write the sentence in question, so I'm nto exactly married to the wording. However, the sources I was able to come up with just by searching the BBC website do seem to indicate that the Pakistani military has recently been targeting civilians as part of their support for Bush's war on terror. ,  The original edit, which as far as I'm able to tell was placed here, seems to be exclusively in reference to Balochistan, but much of what I'm finding is in reference to Waziristan; here's another on that subject from Amnesty International. siafu 03:53, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Which is why the "brutal" human rights violations is POV ,serious human rights violations probably have been made and duely noted but not against a whole province and/or an ethnic group.Plus the operations mentioned were small scale in Balochistan hence dont even suffice a mention here unlike Operations in Waziristan which are still ongoing but have been left out of the article.The human rights abuses here sholud be carefully reworded if the overall view of the editors is that there is lack of such evidence.--Raju1 06:59, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * The "brutal" is in reference to the massacre in Bangladesh. For that, there is ample evidence. siafu 14:00, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * No its not the sentence reads as follows:Recently the army has been engaging in similar human rights violations in Balochistan. The Army of Pakistan's Operation 2005, as reported by the BBC is one of the most brutal in recent years by any country.
 * Which is obviously taken out of context and not supported.--PrinceA 00:01, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Major Editing
I have made several major edits to the article including removing/rewording controversial material, adding some information, grammar editting and designating special headings for article layout. Personally, I think the article is approaching good encyclopedia standards and the neturality tag is not needed as I have reworded, removed or given counter points to much of the unverifiable and unfactual information. Hopefully this dispute is resolved now. Please tell me what you guys think about these edits. Thanks.--Anonymous editor 01:19, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

Yes thank you for your participation.I believe its much much better than before and all parties concerned have their view points in the article.So Good job.Thank you!--PrinceA 03:48, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks for your comment. Well I'm satisfied. :)--Anonymous editor 03:50, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

 * made some edits, in the previous version it seemed like the indians have done nothing & its the pakastinis that have made "the bomb" & "the missiles" for no reasons . For Bangladest U can read any new books by the generals & solders at that time . Farhansher 04:27, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * The reference to "Indian agents" is quite dubious. Please refer to the book "Witness to Surrender" by Major Siddique Salique, who was the PR officer of Pakistan Army and was posted in Dhaka to aid General Niaji, Tikka Khan and Rao Forman Ali. It's quite an interesting book, where Salique discusses the war from the eye of a Pakistani Army officer, one related closely to the top command. It has quite detailed references to Operation Searchlight. Here are some more references on the topic:

 * Source 1: [United States Library of Congress: Country Studies - Bangladesh. More specifically, please refer to the section on [The War for Bangladeshi Independence, 1971], and [The Liberation War].
 * Source 2: [BBC Country Profile: Bangladesh]
 * Source 3: [The India-Pakistan War Of 1971: A Modern War], by KYLE, R.G., Major, Royal Canadian Artillery, Marine Corps Command and Staff College.

 * Surely, the independence of Bangladesh was India's benefit, and they supplied Mukti Bahini with arms and help to fight the Pakistan Army. But to say the massacres of Bengalis by Indians is quite a distortion of history. I do understand that the war was unfortunate, and resulted in bad decision in part of the Pakistan Army and some politicians, but denying the massacre of 1 million to 3 million people is quite a big distortion. The number 3 million is disputed, but that's the official Government of Bangladesh figure. Other credible sources put the number to at least 1 million to 1.5 million. Here is a good link to many different sources for the number of dead. --Ragib 05:01, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Okay. I edited some things and also reworded the allegation ("Indian agents") because we should try to avoid POV. I also want to find some sources for the rest of the material here. Ragib, feel free to add what you said to the article (India benefit thing). Thanks. --Anonymous editor 04:37, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

Further editing proposals
User:Farhansher, please don't get me wrong, I do not intend to vilify the Pakistan army beyond reasonable doubt here, and I'd definitely like to remove POV from the article. The issue about the 1971 atrocities belong to Pakistani Civil War a.k.a. Bangladesh Liberation War. However, the sentence that "Indian agents added hatred in East Pakistani's against West Pakistani's" is again somewhat of an overstatement. I am not pushing for putting a huge detailed list of allegation/counter allegation here, as it is not the place for that sort of discussion. But please do not attribute the 1971 war on "Agents", there are more complex socio-economic history behind that. I do propose a major rewrite of the article, which currently looks quite messy. Here is my proposed structure:
 * History
 * Structure
 * Detailed structure (units, brigades, headquarters)
 * Rank Structure
 * Equipment
 * Details on equipment
 * Major conflicts
 * Indo-Pakistan war of 1948 (brief detail, with link to the article on the war)
 * Indo-Pakistan war of 1965 (brief detail, with link to article)
 * Pakistani Civil War (brief detail, with links to article)
 * Indo-Pakistan war of 1971 (brief detail, with links to article)
 * Peacetime activities
 * Political links
 * See also
 * External links

How does this sound? --Ragib 05:34, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

NO hard feelings man, I am searching for the sources right now. Actually I have read a lot of these things ( what I added to the article...the generals' claims )in Daily Dawn & Daily Jung & seen them on local media, but as I can see uptil now , resources are scarce on the net. So feel free to undo what U like. Farhansher 05:46, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Overall, I like your idea about the organization of the layout greatly. I think very brief info should be given on the major conflicts (like you said). Here is my proposal of the structure below. Please note the changes and tell me what you think. Thanks. --Anonymous editor 05:56, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

 * Well sounds very good . Although peace time activities can also include brief describtion of other events, like bosnia etc .Farhansher 06:03, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Ofcourse. There we go, I added that to the proposal. Thanks. --Anonymous editor 06:05, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

 * Sounds good. I'd just say that for the war, we should focus on the facts of the war, not causes/effects etc. For example, in the Bangladesh Liberation war/Pakistan Civil war part, we can mention the start, the number of army/navy/airforce deployed, locations, major battles, who was in charge, number of fatalities (again, not focusing on allegations/counter allegations of massacre/indian agent provocation etc)/outcome etc. This would be definitely a way to stick to facts rather than pass our own judgements on who started the war and who provoked it. A possible wording may be that "Military of Pakistan was involved in the Pakistan Civil war between March 25 and December 16, 1971. It was an armed conflict between the military and the East Pakistani dissidents, rebel factions of East Pakistani members of Army, guerrilla force called Mukti Bahini. Total number of personnel deployed was (90k??). Major battles took place in x,y,z. Total civilian fatality is claimed to be officially 3 million by Bangladesh Govt, but some other sources put the number to between 1 million to 3 million. Military command was headed by Tikka Khan, later replaced by Gen Niazi. The later part of the war between Dec 3 and Dec 16 overlaps with Indo-Pak war of 1971 (see below). The outcome was the surrender of Niaji to Muktibahini-Indian Army joint command on Dec 16 (see below)". By this type of wording, we can be brief, neutral, and also state the facts in a non-POV manner. How does this sound? --Ragib 06:13, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * It's good. Lets start the editing. --Anonymous editor 20:11, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

I have made several edits, improved and tidied up the page added pictures from other articles related to the Pakistan Military and listed the future plans of the Pakistan military Faraz 18:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Proposed structure
I have a skeleton for the article at Military of Pakistan/Temp. Please check it out and start filling out the empty sections. Thanks. --Ragib 05:42, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * What do you think of my proposal, I think that the minor modifications I made to the layout might fit the info of this article a little better simply because of the type of info involved. Well anyways tell me what you think and then we can start implementing this the temp and eventually to the original. Thanks. --Anonymous editor 06:03, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

Marines
I just got here; isn't there now a Pak Marine Corps? —iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 06:09, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC) No! there isn't any. -- S M S  Talk 09:30, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

 * Yes, Pakistan has a marine corps under the Pakistan Navy. Source.Pk-user (talk) 14:08, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

PAF Awards for Valor
What is the source for Squadron Leader Muhammad Mahmood Alam's credit to 4 IAF kills in under 30 seconds? Please add it if the source is reliable as 4 air to air kills in less than 30 seconds sounds very dubious. (Bobbo9000 (talk) 15:39, 16 September 2008 (UTC))

Vandalism: one caption refers to "General Humza Saeed, gay rapist"
I've deleted the last two words. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.64.25.38 (talk) 12:03, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Proposed Name Change
I think that the name of this article should be changed to "Pakistan Armed Forces", since that is the official name of the Pakistani Military, and "Military of Pakistan" should redirect to the page.

Reenem (talk)

Also, the name in Urdu script does not match the name in the Urdu name written in Roman Urdu. The roman Urdu name should be Pak Musalah Afwaj.

Pakistan army
(discussion is from Pakistan )... the same applies here as well... I won't comment the line here, but just mention that a citation is needed.. Please note that the citation provided in Pakistan was unreliable...

"The armed forces of Pakistan are the sixth-largest in the world.[66]" ...

1) The reference leads to some blog!

2) Please read List of countries by military expenditures ... A country which does not/cannot spend nearly as much the top 10 countries in the list can obviously not have a top 10 military!

3) Placing Pakistan at #4 will mean placing some of the following other nuclear powers below it, which is absurd to even comprehend! (USA, China, UK, France, Germany, Russia, India, Israel, ) Especially considering the economic status of the country!

4) Though I'm not going to base by judgement on the ratings given |here, it is nevertheless a MUCH better citation to base an article on!

5) As long as we don't have a credible source like a CIA report or something, we need to base our conclusions on Military spending.

 * Even according to List of countries by number of troops, it's 7th largest! So, it's either 7th largest or the citation is wrong or both... But the two can't be accurate at the same time....

Now, we need not care about what a country or it's citizen thinks! I'm of the view that Pakistan deserves to be #1 considering the disproportionate passion of it's people. But unfortunately that is not the case and what is not true "cannot" show up on wikipedia as long as I'm not blocked! Based on these arguments I'm going to comment that statement because that's much better than terming the whole section/article disputed! Please escalate the matter to an admin or find a better citation and undo/uncomment the statement.

Amartya ray2001 (talk) 00:05, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

 * Issue resolved... someone changed it to 7th largest which is accurate... Thanks a ton... did not expect someone to do it so soon :)

Amartya ray2001 (talk) 00:15, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Edit request on 8 February 2013
Gwadar Port is not on the hormuz straights

218.188.93.140 (talk) 08:21, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.- Happysailor  (Talk) 20:35, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Book for further reading section
By Princeton's Aqil Shah: *

 * Added. -- S M S   Talk 07:26, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 February 2014
Someone please fix the flags on all of the countries that are listed as foreign suppliers; an additional good addition, time-permitting, would be the inclusion of the actual rank structure of the Pakistani armed forces, to include pictures of ranks and titles.

128.97.229.200 (talk) 01:51, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

 * [[Image:Pictogram voting comment.svg|20px]] Note:  This article is no longer semi-protected, but under Pending changes, so you can make these edits yourself, but they will be reviewed before they become part of the article. Arjayay (talk) 09:15, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Current Deployments
I was meaning to modify the caption on the map in this section as the writing is... less than perfect, but having looked at the image itself, the resolution is so low it's not entirely clear what it's trying to illustrate. Is it just there as a map of the region, and if so, why a 1997 map and why the link to deployment? Either way, is such a map necessary and if so is it worth trying to source a more clear and perhaps recent image? DoctorAdjective (talk) 21:37, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 18:07, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Copy edit Jan 2017
I noticed this article was removed from the copy edit backlog on 2 Jan, but I see a few small issues with it so I'll do what I can over the next day or two. – Reidgreg (talk) 15:30, 5 January 2017 (UTC) Ok, finished my copy edit of the article. Here are my notes: That's about it. If you have any questions or comments, please post them here. I'll keep the article on my watchlist for a while and will try to be available for follow-up. Thanks. - Reidgreg (talk) 04:04, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Style: this article uses dmy dates, serial commas, spaced en dashes (MOS:NDASH), and Pakistani English. Defence seems preferred to Defense, so I made that change, as well as colour and a couple others.
 * So many acronyms! I believe they're all defined in the prose now.
 * Are "service" and "branch" official hierarchical designations or loose, informal descriptors? They aren't always applied consistently, but if they're informal they might not have to be.
 * There seems to be widespread misuse of Inter-Services . As I read it, the three main service branches are Army, Navy, Air Force. "Inter-service" means "between services" so should only apply to something that involves two or more of those three.  For example, Inter-Services Public Relations does PR for Army, Navy and Air Force.  Inter-Services Intelligence is a combined intelligence service, coordinating army intelligence, navy intelligence and air force intelligence.  But the Army, Navy, Air Force are not themselves inter-services.
 * A fair amount of linking/piping work, so that it's clear what is being linked. Military service, for example, is an article on serving in the military, not an article on a branch of an armed forces.  Khaki was incorrectly linked to Khakistocracy.  Lots of redirects.  Also, it's not recommended to have multiple links immediately adjacent to each other, which can confuse the reader.  Trimmed a lot of overlinking (eg: Universal Camouflage Pattern linked four times in a paragraph).
 * Links to Eastern Pakistan seem to redirect to what is now Bangladesh, so if somebody could find a better link that'd be great.
 * There's some material about military technology which should probably be moved from § Main branches to § Defence industry
 * Under § Organization, At the JS HQ, it forms with... and lists various offices and directors. But it doesn't say what they are forming or how, making it uncertain how they are related.
 * There is a section where the Navy provided 43,850 kg of food and relief goods to flood victims in the context of a nationwide operation over five years. Is there a copying or unit error there?  That's only two truckloads of weight, hardly a multi-year national mobilization.
 * The Islamabad-based Strategic Force Organization (SFO) has a three-tier system which forms by combing the Nuclear Command Authority, Strategic Plans Division (SPD), and each of three Inter-Services strategic force commands. I'd guess that "combing" is a typo of "combining", but not sure if it might be listing the three tiers of the "system".  Also, "forms" makes the relationship confusing.  And there seems to be some ambiguity between SPD and SPD Force there and in the sentence afterwards.
 * There is conflicting sourced information regarding the number of Marines battalions deployed at Sir Creek. A timeline might help.
 * Another unclear passage: the strategic arsenal are kept under an inter-services own strategic commands

Current CJCSC
As of 2017, the current Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee is Zubair Mahmood Hayat. The infobox needs to be updated. I can't seem to find 'edit' option for the infobox.

- Jan 8, 2017 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.88.232.94 (talk) 16:17, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

1971 Bangladesh genocide
I attemted to add information about the 1971 Bangladesh genocide. When doing so I made the egregious typo of putting the death toll at "300 000 to 3 000 000 000" which was properly recognized as an obvious error. I apologize for this and have now addded the information again, with the proper death toll, and with proper sources in both academic books and news articles. If someone finds fault with this information or the sources I encourage them to modify the sentence accordingly - many more sources are listed in 1971 Bangladesh genocide. It seems clear, however, that some mention of the genocide should be made in the History section. Hotchpotcher (talk) 12:14, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Pakistan Armed Forces. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120304115412/http://www.defencejournal.com/2002/june/loveaffair.htm to http://www.defencejournal.com/2002/june/loveaffair.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121015080738/http://www.cnbcpakistan.com/900-SPD-soldiers-pass-graduation-from-Abbotabad-centers-news-2559.html to http://www.cnbcpakistan.com/900-SPD-soldiers-pass-graduation-from-Abbotabad-centers-news-2559.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111009003349/http://www.onepakistan.com/news/local/karachi/81137-pn-model-village-handed-over-to-idps.html to http://www.onepakistan.com/news/local/karachi/81137-pn-model-village-handed-over-to-idps.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070707171404/http://www.pakistantimes.net/2007/04/20/top4.htm to http://www.pakistantimes.net/2007/04/20/top4.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:01, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on Pakistan Armed Forces. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120119141137/http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country%2C%2CCSCOAL%2C%2CPAK%2C%2C486cb123c%2C0.html to http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country,,CSCOAL,,PAK,,486cb123c,0.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081119144117/http://dailymailnews.com/200809/06/dmcolumnpage.html to http://dailymailnews.com/200809/06/dmcolumnpage.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070317132339/http://www.pafcombat.com/misc/gallantry-awards.htm to http://www.pafcombat.com/misc/gallantry-awards.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041027075253/http://www.publicintegrity.org/icij/Default.aspx to http://www.publicintegrity.org/icij/default.aspx
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121015164857/http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/08/16/pakistan-s-military-steps-in-on-flood-relief.html to http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/08/16/pakistan-s-military-steps-in-on-flood-relief.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927003311/http://www.nti.org/f_wmd411/f2i3.html to http://www.nti.org/f_wmd411/f2i3.html
 * Added tag to http://resourcecentre.savethechildren.se/sites/default/files/documents/2243.pdf.
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141204043352/http://www.ideaspakistan.gov.pk/paf.php to http://ideaspakistan.gov.pk/paf.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141213085906/http://www.app.com.pk/en_/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=59626&Itemid=1 to http://www.app.com.pk/en_/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=59626&Itemid=1
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141204043431/http://ideaspakistan.gov.pk/pak_navy.php to http://ideaspakistan.gov.pk/pak_navy.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161029192738/http://www.paknavy.gov.pk/chron_history.html to http://www.paknavy.gov.pk/chron_history.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150904011519/http://www.centcom.mil/en/news/press-releases/pakistan-assumes-command-of-combined-task-force-151 to http://www.centcom.mil/en/news/press-releases/pakistan-assumes-command-of-combined-task-force-151
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051104005228/http://www.pakistan.gov.pk/ministries/index.jsp?MinID=6&cPath=59 to http://www.pakistan.gov.pk/ministries/index.jsp?MinID=6&cPath=59

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:01, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Changing In Defence Minister
Khawaja Asif Is not A defence minister Please change it, Current Defence minister is 'Khurram Dastagir Khan'. Tayyabsiddique (talk) 14:39, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. Community Tech bot (talk) 19:22, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Zubair Mahmood Hayat.jpg

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. Community Tech bot (talk) 16:25, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Zafar Mahmood Abbasi.jpg

Relations strained under Donald Trump
Since his election, Trump has been critical of providing more military and financial aid to Pakistan since its real motive of participating in anti terror operations in now in question since Osama bin Laden was busted and killed in a US marines covert operation unknown even to Pakistan top brass, near Pakistan Army Area in Abotabad, Pakistan, while Pakistan army had continually repeating that Osama has not been in Pakistan since long and was living in Afghanistan. This was further darkened by long history of Pakistan Army and ISI being blamed for terrorism across its neighbour India. This even resulted in protests across Pakistan including burning effigies of Donald Trump. There is no artcle for this on the page as these are recent developments. AbhinavKumar1998 (talk) 11:19, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
 * This not a forum. Please be specific with what you wish to edit. Adamgerber80 (talk) 01:34, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Terrorism wing of pakistan army
There is a wikipedia page about the topic which is directly related to the this page, |this edit was reverted without any discussion, before revert lets discuss the issue and than make changes Selfprjectiontube (talk) 10:13, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
 * the referenced page, clearly mentioned that ISI is the terrorist wing of pakistan armed forces Pakistan_and_state-sponsored_terrorism Selfprjectiontube (talk) 12:43, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Some comments: Wikipedia cannot be used as a reference (and FWIW the claim you make does not even appear in that article). All articles with material that is likely to be challenged need secondary, reputable, verifiable sources. A neutral point of view is required with all material.  The ISI is *not* the "terrorist wing" of the PAF; no reputable source will support that claim.  There is certainly evidence (such as the statements of former President Musharraf) that Pakistan sponsored militants entering a number of foreign zones of conflict, and that would be appropriate for this article, but this is an entirely different issue than that of the claim you inserted.--Goldsztajn (talk) 08:46, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:36, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Pakistan-Coast-Guard.JPG

Criticism of Pakistan Armed Forces
Just now I added a starter section called "Criticism" near the end of the article. Soon after, a IP wants to remove it. Since it is an IP, it has become a pending change. I guess I can't do anything about that since that would be besides the point of the review and akin to pushing. But I do intend to understand why it can't stay if it goes, and that consensus should be sought properly. What's wrong with a little criticism? DTM (talk) 11:10, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I am not correlated with pak armed forces but as I checked at wikipedia policy "Avoid sections and articles focusing on criticisms or controversies" many of claims and stuff can be contributed to according to who and also can be into body of article under other sections. Wikipedia is not soapbox for promotion or advocacy of any way and any sort, and some stuff can go more for some blogs or personal websites. Brzikraken (talk) 18:06, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
 * This applies for the entire article. Each section is promoting an aspect of the Pak Armed Forces. As per user being blocked, I have restored the criticism section. It doesn't seem undue. DTM (talk) 08:18, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
 * But then that line written by the sockpuppet also makes sense of distributing the content under respective sections rather than create an entirely new one. Let's see how to go about this. DTM (talk) 09:25, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Before being blocked, Brzikraken took reference to Criticism in this edit writing in the summary "As per wiki policy WP:NOCRIT". However, WP:NOCRIT is an essay. While this is only an ESSAY note must be made that "Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints."... accordingly the essay has to be understood in terms of this article and to what extent this applies as a norm/minority viewpoint rather than a policy or guideline over here. DTM (talk) 09:36, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Since you have been really helpful with policy, please help me navigate this. Am I in the affirmative here or does Brzikraken have a point. I would have linked Bharatiya29 but seems they are blocked, they had given an affirmative during the AFD for the criticism. How do I counter what Brzikraken wrote? DTM (talk) 10:13, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * A "criticism" section can be well avoided since such sections do attract negative POVs. As for the IP disruption, I have requested ECP on RFPP now. I will be back here soon. Aman Kumar Goel(Talk) 15:09, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I would prefer a section called "Dominance in Pakistan" or something similar, in place of "criticism". Aman Kumar Goel(Talk) 15:18, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree, it sounds good about "Dominance in Pakistan" eventually instead of "dominance" "influence". 109.93.105.4 (talk) 00:14, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 10 May 2020
Change infobox national military (SERVICE BRANCHES): delete "Paramilitary forces", "Pakistan Marines", "Pakistan Coast Guards" -- these are not the official 3 branches of the Pakistan Armed Forces. The 3 branches of the Pakistan Armed Forces are: Pakistan Army, Pakistan Air Force, Pakistan Navy. Xeed.rice (talk) 05:12, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. Branches that are contained within other branches are usually included in infoboxes - see United States Armed Forces. Just like with the US Marine Corps, the Pakistan Marines are part of the Pakistan Navy. I think cases can be made for the exclusion of the Pakistan Coast Guard and the Paramilitary Forces, but all such changes would be too controversial to make without a consensus. —  Tartan357   ( Talk ) 05:29, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

PAKISTAN Army is professional army — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.188.223.248 (talk) 04:20, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Pakistan Marines
They are part of the navy and not independence, not sure why this is in infobox. Shadow4dark (talk) 19:18, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Assalamualaikum
What kind of page is this?? I mean how can it help me? I wanna get some website that will inform me about pakarmy updates Ayeshafarhan1947 (talk) 00:34, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Staff_Headquarters_(Pakistan)
Gamg 111.119.178.168 (talk) 05:35, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Reserves
I can't seem to find good sources on reserves of the Pakistani military. None of the book series The Military Balance I've consulted seem to contain this info (eg 2010, 2021 etc). Additionally, they list the National Guard of Pakistan under "paramilitary". According to The Military Balance 2021, Pakistan has 291,000 paramilitary consisting of: But nothing about Pakistan's reserves. Are these reserves part of the army? What are they called? Where are the figures in Pakistan Armed Forces coming from? Pinging, , ,. VR talk 03:41, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 * The National Guard (185,000)
 * Frontier Corps (70,000)
 * Pakistan Rangers (25,000)
 * Airport Security Force (9,000)
 * Maritime Security Agency (2,000)
 * Pakistan Coast Guard (unspecified)
 * Also, Pakistan has something called "Army Reserve North" and "Army Reserve South". Are those part of the "Active personnel" or the "reservists"? VR talk 03:44, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:10, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Pakistan Air Force IL-78 & Dassault Mirage-III.jpg

Medical
I am go to Army Because I love Pakistan 39.36.213.234 (talk) 14:30, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Computer
Any one job plz 103.167.158.84 (talk) 00:37, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 April 2023
active military 780,000 reserve force 1,000,000 defence budget 15.0 billion Mustaqim raja (talk) 22:59, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.  JTP (talk • contribs) 23:02, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Israel
I want to talk about Israel. You see how many innocent children are being killed there. Our first Kaaba is Al-Aqsa Mosque.People are not allowed there. Why Pakistan Army is silent, we are Muslims, our job is to help our Muslim brothers and sisters. We will fight and Israel will conquer. We can do it, God is with us.We have the power of faith. Please think about it. Jatteatty (talk) 07:16, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Pakistan Armed Forces


text:
File:Kerbdog-Kerbdog.jpg

Summary
Kerbdog - Kerbdog album cover. Copyright 1994 Mercury Records. Image uploaded under fair use doctrine.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: File:Kerbdog-Kerbdog.jpg


text:
Talk:Ten thousand years

?
Could you be more specific? Mao is the only person that could have used this, and even then I'm not sure it was used.
 * Some modern Paramount Leaders, pseudo-emperors, are extensively saluted to with this phrase.

context
This article should compare  history of  ten_thousand_years  ago.

Further, where many articles concentrate excessively on North America, this one does not do so sufficiently, as there are other ways to apply this phrase, as in what I had actually been searching  google  for, @ the moment that I had located this: "... there for a hundred years, or a thousand years, or  ten_thousand_years."

title: Talk:Ten thousand years


text:
Lockheed Constellation

The Lockheed Constellation ("Connie") is a propeller-driven, four-engined airliner built by Lockheed Corporation starting in 1943. The Constellation series was the first pressurized-cabin civil airliner series to go into widespread use. Its pressurized cabin enabled commercial passengers to fly well above most bad weather for the first time, thus significantly improving the general safety and ease of air travel.

Several different models of the Constellation series were produced, although they all featured the distinctive triple-tail and dolphin-shaped fuselage. Most were powered by four 18-cylinder Wright R-3350 Duplex-Cyclones. In total, 856 were produced between 1943 and 1958 at Lockheed's plant in Burbank, California, and used as both a civil airliner and as a military and civilian cargo transport. Among their famous uses was during the Berlin and the Biafran airlifts. Three served as the presidential aircraft for Dwight D. Eisenhower, one of which is featured at the National Museum of the United States Air Force.

Initial studies
Lockheed had been working on the L-044 Excalibur, a four-engined, pressurized airliner, since 1937. In 1939, Transcontinental and Western Airlines (TWA), at the instigation of major stockholder Howard Hughes, requested a 40-passenger transcontinental airliner with a range of 3,500 mi —well beyond the capabilities of the Excalibur design. TWA's requirements led to the L-049 Constellation, designed by Lockheed engineers, including Kelly Johnson and Hall Hibbard. Willis Hawkins, another Lockheed engineer, maintains that the Excalibur program was purely a cover for the Constellation.

Development of the Constellation
The Constellation's wing design was close to that of the Lockheed P-38 Lightning, differing mostly in size. The triple tail allowed the aircraft to fit into existing hangars, while features included hydraulically boosted controls and a deicing system used on wing and tail leading edges. The aircraft had a maximum speed over 375 mph, faster than that of a Japanese Zero fighter, a cruise speed of 340 mph, and a service ceiling of 24000 ft.

According to Anthony Sampson in Empires of the Sky, Lockheed may have undertaken the intricate design, but Hughes's intercession in the design process drove the concept, shape, capabilities, appearance, and ethos. These rumors were discredited by Johnson. Howard Hughes and Jack Frye confirmed that the rumors were false in a letter dated November 1941.

World War II
With the onset of World War II, the TWA aircraft entering production were converted to an order for C-69 Constellation military transport aircraft, with 202 aircraft intended for the United States Army Air Forces (USAAF). The first prototype (civil registration NX25600) flew on January 9, 1943, a short ferry hop from Burbank to Muroc Field for testing. Edmund T. "Eddie" Allen, on loan from Boeing, flew left seat, with Lockheed's own Milo Burcham as copilot. Rudy Thoren and Kelly Johnson were also aboard.

Lockheed proposed the model L-249 as a long-range bomber. It received the military designation XB-30, but the aircraft was not developed. A plan for a very long-range troop transport, the C-69B (L-349, ordered by Pan Am in 1940 as the L-149), was cancelled. A single C-69C (L-549), a 43-seat VIP transport, was built in 1945 at the Lockheed-Burbank plant.

The C-69 was mostly used as a high-speed, long-distance troop transport during the war. In total, 22 C-69s were built before the end of hostilities, but seven of these never entered military service, as they were converted to civilian L-049s on the assembly line. The USAAF cancelled the remainder of the order in 1945. Some aircraft remained in USAF service into the 1960s, serving as passenger ferries for the airline that relocated military personnel, wearing the livery of the Military Air Transport Service. At least one of these airplanes had rear-facing passenger seats.

Postwar use

After World War II, the Constellation came into its own as a fast civilian airliner. Aircraft already in production for the USAAF as C-69 transports were finished as civilian airliners, with TWA receiving the first on 1 October 1945. TWA's first transatlantic proving flight departed Washington, D.C., on December 3, 1945, arriving in Paris on December 4 via Gander and Shannon.

TWA transatlantic service started on February 6, 1946, with a New York-Paris flight in a Constellation. On June 17, 1947, Pan American World Airways (Pan Am) opened the first-ever scheduled round-the-world service with its L-749 Clipper America. The famous flight "Pan Am 1" operated until 1982.

As the first pressurized airliner in widespread use, the Constellation helped establish affordable and comfortable air travel. Operators of Constellations included TWA, Eastern Air Lines, Pan Am, Air France, BOAC, KLM, Qantas, Lufthansa, Iberia Airlines, Panair do Brasil, TAP Portugal, Trans-Canada Air Lines (later renamed Air Canada), Aer Lingus, VARIG, Cubana de Aviación, Línea Aeropostal Venezolana, Northwest Airlines, and Avianca, the national airline of Colombia.

Records
Sleek and powerful, Constellations set many records. On April 17, 1944, the second production C-69, piloted by Howard Hughes and TWA president Jack Frye, flew from Burbank, California, to Washington, D.C., in 6 hours and 57 minutes (about 2300 mi at an average 331 mph). On the return trip, the aircraft stopped at Wright Field in Ohio to give Orville Wright his last flight, more than 40 years after his historic first flight near Kitty Hawk, North Carolina. He commented that the Constellation's wingspan was longer than the distance of his first flight.

On September 29, 1957, a TWA L-1649A flew from Los Angeles to London in 18 hours and 32 minutes—about 5420 mi at 292 mph. The L-1649A holds the record for the longest-duration, nonstop passenger flight aboard a piston-powered airliner. On TWA's first London-to-San Francisco flight on October 1–2, 1957, the aircraft stayed aloft for 23 hours and 19 minutes (about 5350 mi at 229 mph).

Obsolescence
Jet airliners such as the de Havilland Comet, Boeing 707, Douglas DC-8, Convair 880, and Sud Aviation Caravelle rendered the Constellation obsolete. The first routes lost to jets were the long overseas routes, but Constellations continued to fly domestic routes. The last scheduled passenger flight of a Constellation in the contiguous United States was made by a TWA L749 on May 11, 1967, from Philadelphia to Kansas City, Missouri; the last scheduled passenger flight in North America was by Western Airlines' N86525 in Alaska, Anchorage to Yakutat to Juneau on 26 November 1968.

Constellations carried freight in later years, and were used on backup sections of Eastern Airlines' shuttle service between New York, Washington, and Boston until 1968. Propeller airliners were used on overnight freight runs into the 1990s, as their low speed was not an impediment. An Eastern Air Lines Connie holds the record for a New York–to–Washington flight from take off to touchdown in just over 30 minutes. The record was set prior to speed restrictions by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) below 10,000 ft.

One of the reasons for the elegance of the aircraft was the dolphin-shaped fuselage, a continuously variable profile with no two bulkheads the same shape, which was expensive to build. Manufacturers have subsequently favored tube-shaped fuselages for subsequent airliner designs, as the cylindrical cross-section design is more resistant to pressurization changes and less expensive to build.

After ending Constellation production, Lockheed chose not to develop a first-generation jetliner, sticking to its military business and production of the turboprop Lockheed L-188 Electra. Lockheed did not build a large passenger aircraft again until its L-1011 Tristar debuted in 1972. While a technological marvel, the L-1011 was a commercial failure, and Lockheed left the commercial airliner business permanently in 1983.

Variants

The initial military versions carried the Lockheed designation of L-049; as World War II came to a close, some were completed as civilian L-049 Constellations followed by the L-149 (L-049 modified to carry more fuel tanks).

The first purpose-built passenger Constellations were the more powerful L-649 and L-749 (which had more fuel in the outer wings), L-849 (an unbuilt model to use the R-3350 turbo-compound engines adopted for the L-1049 ), L-949 (an unbuilt, high-density seating-cum-freighter type, what would come to be called a "combi aircraft").

These were followed by the L-1049 Super Constellation (with longer fuselage), L-1149 (proposal to use Allison turbine engines) and L-1249 (similar to L-1149, built as R7V-2/YC-121F), L-1449 (unbuilt proposal for L1049G, stretched 55 in, with new wing and turbines) and L-1549 (unbuilt project to stretch L-1449 95 in).

The final civilian variant was the L-1649 Starliner (all new wing and L1049G fuselage).

Military versions included the C-69 and C-121 for the Army Air Forces/Air Force and the R7O R7V-1 (L-1049B) EC-121 WV-1 (L-749A) WV-2 (L-1049B) (widely known as the Willie Victor) and many variant EC-121 designations for the Navy.

Operators
After TWA's initial order was filled following World War II, customers rapidly accumulated, with over 800 aircraft built. In military service, the U.S. Navy and Air Force operated the EC-121 Warning Star variant until 1978, nearly 40 years after work on the L-049 began. Cubana de Aviación was the first airline in Latin America to operate Super Constellations.

Appearances in film
A TWA-liveried Connie appears in the 1957 Audrey Hepburn/Fred Astaire film "Funny Face." The footage shows take off, a brief shot in flight over Paris, and landing. Finally, it is visible in background, parked on tarmac along with 1950s era mobile passenger stairs. Footage begins at film time stamp 32:40.

Commercial

 * On display
 * L-049
 * N90831 — on display at the Pima Air & Space Museum in Tucson, Arizona. This is a former C-69 transport, s/n 42-94549, that was converted for civilian service, and was one of the first TWA aircraft.
 * N86533 — on display at the TAM Museum, located in São Carlos, Brazil. Previously, it served as a children's attraction at the entrance of Silvio Pettirossi International Airport in Asunción, Paraguay. It is painted in the markings of Panair do Brasil.
 * N9412H — parked adjacent to a flight school and cafe at Greenwood Lake Airport in West Milford, New Jersey. It was delivered as Air France's first Constellation in June 1946 as L-049 F-BAZA, before being sold to Frank Lembo Enterprises in May 1976 for $45,000 for use as a restaurant and lounge. It was flown to the airport in July 1977, and, along with the airport, was sold to the State of New Jersey in 2000. In 2005, the interior was refurbished for use as a flight school office.
 * N2520B — on display in Aerosur livery, on the first ring road in Santa Cruz de la Sierra, Bolivia. It is known as El Avión Pirata.
 * L-749
 * F-ZVMV — on display at the Musée de l'Air et de l'Espace (The Museum of Air and Space) located at Paris-Le Bourget Airport near Le Bourget, France, 10 km north of Paris. It initially served with Pan American Airways, before being transferred to Air France, with which it served until 1960. Afterwards, it was used by the Compagnie Générale des Turbo-Machines (General Company of Turbomachinery) as an engine testbed until December 1974.
 * L-1049 Super Constellation
 * CF-TGE — on display at the Museum of Flight in Seattle, Washington. It is painted in the markings it carried during its service with Trans-Canada Air Lines from 1954 to the 1960s. After TCA service, it was sold to World Wide Airways and later retired in Montreal by 1965; it was renovated as a restaurant and bar in and around the Montreal area, and sold and moved again to Toronto and used as convention facility by the Regal Constellation Hotel. It was sold again and stored at Toronto Pearson International Airport. Finally, it was sold to the Museum of Flight, restored in Rome, New York, and shipped to Seattle for display.
 * 44-0315 — on display at the Air Mobility Command Museum at Dover Air Force Base in Dover, Delaware. Last registered N1005C it is painted to represent a USAF C-121C, but was never actually delivered to the air force.
 * D-ALIN — on display at the Flugausstellung Hermeskeil, near Hermeskeil, Germany. It is a former Lufthansa Super Constellation, and was the actual aircraft that Konrad Adenauer flew into Moscow in 1955, when he negotiated the release of German POWs.
 * D-ALEM — on display near Munich International Airport at Munich, Germany. Last registered F-BHML it is painted to represent Super Constellation D-ALEM, Lufthansa's first long-haul aircraft of 1955.
 * IN315 — on display at the Naval Aviation Museum at Dabolim in Goa, India. This aircraft is a former Air India Super Constellation (VT-DHM Rani of Ellora) that was later transferred to the Indian Navy
 * L-1649 Starliner
 * N974R — on display in front of the Fantasy of Flight attraction in Lakeland, Florida.
 * ZS-DVJ — On display at Rand Airport in Germiston in Trek Airways colours. Used to be at OR Tambo International Airport, South Africa at the South African Airways Technical area. The aircraft is owned by the South African Airways Museum Society.

 * Under restoration or in storage
 * L-049
 * N7777G — painted in TWA colors (although this aircraft never flew for TWA) it is stored at the Large Item Storage facility for the UK Science Museum at Wroughton, near Swindon. This aircraft was used by the Rolling Stones to transport equipment during their 1973 Australian tour. It is the only Constellation in the United Kingdom.
 * L-1049 Super Constellation
 * F-BRAD — to display by the Amicale du Super Constellation located at the Nantes Airport in Nantes, France. It was delivered to Air France on November 2, 1953, and was upgraded to a L-1049 G in 1956, serving until August 8, 1967, having totaled 24,284 hours under Air France's colors. After retirement, it was sent to Spain, to be registered EC-BEN, briefly flying humanitarian and medevac missions in Biafra. Aero Fret bought it in 1968, brought it back home to France, registered it as F-BRAD, and operated it on cargo hauls until 1974. When the Constellation landed in Nantes one last time to be scrapped, it was ultimately saved by Mr. Gaborit, who revamped it somewhat by his own modest means to finally park it near the terminal, accessible to visitors for a few years, until the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Nantes-Atlantique Airport bought it, to contract the Amicale du Super Constellation to undergo a complete restoration of the aircraft.
 * HI-542CT City of Miami — parked on an unused runway at the Rafael Hernández Airport in Aguadilla, Puerto Rico. It was struck by a runaway DC-4 on February 3, 1992, resulting in damage to the right wing and main spar.
 * N6937C Star of America — to airworthiness by the National Airline History Museum in Kansas City, Missouri. This aircraft was originally built in 1957, stored for several years, and then delivered to cargo carrier Slick Airways. It was restored in 1986 by the Save-a-Connie, Inc. organization, later renamed as the National Airline History Museum. It was originally painted in red and white with Save-a-Connie, but was later repainted in the 1950s livery of TWA to resemble its original Star of America Constellation. The aircraft appeared at New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport at the original TWA terminal designed by Eero Saarinen to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the airline with the paint scheme donated by TWA in Kansas City for the occasion. The Star of America has appeared at many airshows and was even used in The Aviator, the 2004 film depicting the life of TWA's one-time owner Howard Hughes, the man often credited with helping design and develop the original Constellation series.
 * L-1649 Starliner
 * N7316C — returned to airworthiness by Lufthansa Technik North America in Auburn, Maine. This aircraft was purchased at auction in 2007, along with C/N 1038, by the Deutsche Lufthansa Berlin Foundation. Lufthansa has built a hangar at the airport, which will allow the aircraft to be restored indoors. Lufthansa  announced in March 2018 that it will be transported back to Germany and further restoration decisions will be made after it arrives.  As of the end of 2019 the plan is to restore the aircraft for static display in a museum. According to reports from the US, the aircraft was dismantled (as apparently was the Ju-52 D-AQUI) without the requisite documentation that would have allowed the return-to-flight work to continue.
 * N8083H — This aircraft was purchased at auction in 2007, along with C/N 1018, by the Deutsche Lufthansa Berlin Foundation, and stripped of all usable spares to support the restoration of C/N 1018. The aircraft was subsequently sold and transported to JFK International Airport to become a cocktail bar in the TWA Hotel, a retro-aviation themed hotel built on the former TWA Flight Center.

Military

 * Airworthy
 * C-121C
 * S/N 54-0156 — Flies with the Super Constellation Flyers Association out of Basel, as the Breitling Super Constellation. Its restoration was sponsored by Swiss watch manufacturer Breitling, and is now registered in the Swiss Aircraft registry as HB-RSC. This Constellation is one of two flying in the world.
 * S/N 54-0157 — Flies with the Historical Aircraft Restoration Society (HARS) out of Shellharbour Airport near Wollongong, Australia. Following its restoration, it was painted in pseudo-Qantas livery, including the Qantas logo on the tail, (with the usual Qantas lettering along the fuselage and on the wing-end fuel tanks replaced with the word "CONNIE") and registered as VH-EAG. This Constellation is the other of two flying in the world.
 * S/N 48-0613 Bataan — to airworthiness by Lewis Air Legends in San Antonio, Texas. This aircraft was used as a personal transport by General Douglas MacArthur during the Korean War, and later by other Army general officers until 1966, when it was transferred to NASA. Following its permanent retirement in 1970, it was placed on display at a museum at Fort Rucker near Daleville, Alabama. It was acquired by the Planes of Fame Air Museum at Chino, California, in 1992, and overhauled into airworthy condition for a flight to Dothan, Alabama, where it received additional work. After a thorough restoration back to its original configuration with a "VIP interior", it was placed on display at the Planes of Fame secondary location in Valle, Arizona. Then, in 2015, it was sold to Lewis Air Legends, and prepped for a ferry flight to Chino, arriving there on January 14, 2016. On June 20th, 2023, the Air Legends Foundation’s Lockheed VC-121A Constellation took off on its first post-restoration flight from Chino Airport. The aircraft flew to the 2023 EAA AirVenture Oshkosh in Oshkosh, Wisconsin.

 * On display
 * VC-121A
 * S/N 48-0609 — on display at Jeongseok Airport on Jeju Island, South Korea. It was donated to Korean Air in 2005, and restored to airworthy condition at Tucson, Arizona. It was then ferried to South Korea, where it made its final flight, under its own power, from Seoul to its current location for static display. It has been repainted in 1950s Korean Air colors, and rendered unable to fly by the presence of unserviceable engines.
 * S/N 48-0612 — on display at the Dutch National Aviation Museum Aviodrome. It was restored to airworthy condition and ferried from Tucson, Arizona, to the Netherlands, where restoration continued. It is now painted in the KLM livery of the 1950s, depicting a KLM Lockheed L-749A. Renamed Flevoland, this was the only airworthy example of the "short" version of the Constellation until an engine failure grounded the aircraft.
 * S/N 48-0614 Columbine — on display at the Pima Air and Space Museum in Tucson, Arizona. This aircraft was used by Dwight D. Eisenhower during his role as Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe commander before he became president. It is on loan from the National Museum of the U.S. Air Force.
 * VC-121E
 * S/N 53-7885 Columbine III — on display at the National Museum of the United States Air Force at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base near Dayton, Ohio. Columbine III was used as Dwight D. Eisenhower's presidential aircraft, and was eventually retired to the museum in 1966, where it is now displayed in the museum's Presidential Gallery (Building 4). The interior of the aircraft is open to the public.
 * C-121C
 * S/N 54-0155 — on display at Lackland Air Force Base near San Antonio, Texas
 * S/N 54-0177 — on display at the National Air and Space Museum, Udvar-Hazy Center located at Dulles Airport in Virginia.
 * S/N 54-0180 — on display at Charleston Air Force Base near North Charleston, South Carolina.
 * C-121J
 * BuNo 131643 — From March 2020 onwards, the aircraft is on static display at the Qantas Founders Outback Museum. Formerly stored in derelict condition at Ninoy Aquino International Airport in Manila, Philippines and impounded at the airport from June 1988 to September 2014, when it was secured for removal and static preservation by the Qantas Founders Outback Museum, Longreach.
 * EC-121K
 * BuNo 137890 — on display at Tinker Air Force Base near Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.
 * BuNo 141297 — on display at the Museum of Aviation at Robins Air Force Base near Warner Robins, Georgia.
 * BuNo 141309 — on display at the Aerospace Museum of California at the former McClellan Air Force Base in North Highlands, California. This aircraft is a former navy aircraft on loan from the National Museum of the United States Air Force. It is painted in the markings of a USAF EC-121 Warning Star.
 * BuNo 141311 — on display at the Chanute Aerospace Museum at the former Chanute AFB in Rantoul, Illinois.
 * BuNo 143221 — on display at the National Museum of Naval Aviation at NAS Pensacola near Pensacola, Florida.
 * EC-121T
 * S/N 52-3418 — on display at the Combat Air Museum in Topeka, Kansas. This aircraft was delivered to the Air Force in October 1954. It served an additional 22 years, until it was retired and flown to Davis Monthan AFB for storage on April 7, 1976. It June 1981, it was ferried to Topeka, Kansas, with Frank Lang in command.
 * S/N 52-3425 — on display at the Peterson Air and Space Museum at Peterson AFB in Colorado Springs, Colorado. Previously assigned to the 966th AEWCS at McCoy AFB, Florida, and then the 79th AEWCS at Homestead AFB, Florida. It was the last operational EC-121 and was deployed by the 79th AEWCS to NAS Keflavik, Iceland. It was delivered to Peterson AFB in October 1978.
 * S/N 53-0548 — on display at the Yanks Air Museum in Chino, California. Stored at Camarillo Airport, from 2000 to 2012, this aircraft made its final flight, to Chino, on January 14, 2012.
 * S/N 53-0554 — on display at the Pima Air & Space Museum in Tucson, Arizona., it is undergoing restoration on its radome.
 * S/N 53-0555 — on display at the National Museum of the United States Air Force at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base near Dayton, Ohio, in the museum's Southeast Asia Gallery (Building 2).

 * Under restoration or in storage
 * WV-1
 * BuNo 124438 — to airworthiness by Gordon Cole at Salina, Kansas. This aircraft was the first of two WV-1s delivered to the U.S. Navy in 1949. Essentially, it was a prototype for the EC-121 Warning Star that followed. Retired from the Navy in 1957, it served the FAA from 1958 to 1966, before being flown to Salina in 1967 for retirement. It remains parked there, and was last flown in 1992.
 * VC-121A
 * S/N 48-0610 Columbine II — to airworthiness by Dynamic Aviation in Bridgewater, Virginia. This aircraft served as the first Air Force One, during the presidency of Dwight D. Eisenhower, before it was replaced by Columbine III as Eisenhower's primary presidential aircraft in 1954. After a long period of storage at Marana Regional Airport, near Tucson, Arizona, this aircraft made its first flight, since 2003, in March 2016, when it was ferried to Bridgewater for additional restoration.

 * EC-121T
 * S/N 51-3417 — in storage at Helena Regional Airport in Helena, Montana. Acquired by the Castle Air Museum of Atwater, California, in 2014.

title: Lockheed Constellation


text:
Pro Bowl

The National Football League All-Star Game (1939–1942), Pro Bowl (1951–2022), or Pro Bowl Games (since 2023) is an annual event held by the National Football League (NFL) featuring the league's star players.

The format has changed throughout the years. Between 1939 and 1942, the NFL experimented with all-star games pitting the league's champion against a team of all-stars. The first official Pro Bowl was played in January 1951, matching the top players in the American/Eastern Conference against those in the National/Western Conference. From the merger with the rival American Football League (AFL) in 1970 up through 2013 and also in 2017, it was officially called the AFC–NFC Pro Bowl, matching the top players in the American Football Conference (AFC) against those in the National Football Conference (NFC). From 2014 through 2016, the NFL experimented with an unconferenced format, where the teams were selected by two honorary team captains (who are each in the Hall of Fame), instead of selecting players from each conference. The players were picked in a televised "schoolyard pick" prior to the game.

For years, the game suffered from lack of interest for its perceived low quality, with observers and commentators expressing their disfavor with it. It drew lower television ratings than regular season NFL games, although the game drew similar ratings to the all-star games of the other major North American sports leagues, such as the Major League Baseball All-Star Game. However, the biggest concern was to avoid injuries to the star players. The Associated Press wrote that players in the 2012 game were "hitting each other as though they were having a pillow fight". Despite these criticisms, however, players who were selected to the Pro Bowl were nonetheless honored in a similar standing to their counterparts in the other leagues, and being named to it is considered to be a significant accomplishment for any player. In September 2022, the NFL announced that the Pro Bowl game would switch to a non-contact flag football game in 2023, as well as a partnership with Peyton Manning's Omaha Productions to revamp Pro Bowl week as the "Pro Bowl Games".

Unlike the other major North American sports leagues, which hold their all star weekends roughly midway through their regular seasons, the NFL has held theirs at or near the end of NFL season. Before the merger, the game was played annually after the NFL Championship Game. Between 1970 and 2009, the Pro Bowl was usually held the weekend after the Super Bowl. From 2010 to 2022, it was played on the Sunday before the Super Bowl and since 2023, it was played on the first Thursday and first Sunday of February; as a result, players from the two teams competing in the Super Bowl will not participate.

History of the Pro Bowl
The first "Pro All-Star Game", featuring the all-stars of the 1938 season (as well as three players from the Los Angeles Bulldogs and Hollywood Bears, who were not members of the league), was played on January 15, 1939, at Wrigley Field in Los Angeles. The NFL All-Star Game was played again in Los Angeles in 1940 and then in New York and Philadelphia in 1941 and 1942 respectively. Although originally planned as an annual contest, the all-star game was discontinued after 1942 because of travel restrictions put in place during World War II. During the first five all-star games, an all-star team would face that year's league champion. The league champion won the first four games before the all-stars were victorious in the final game of this early series.

The concept of an all-star game was not revived until June 1950, when the newly christened "Pro Bowl" was approved. The game was sponsored by the Los Angeles Publishers Association. It was decided that the game would feature all-star teams from each of the league's two conferences rather than the league champion versus all-star format which had been used previously. This was done to avoid confusion with the Chicago College All-Star Game, an annual game which featured the league champion against a collegiate all-star team. The teams would be led by the coach of each of the conference champions. Immediately prior to the Pro Bowl, following the 1949 season, the All-America Football Conference, which contributed three teams to the NFL in a partial merger in 1950, held its own all-star game, the Shamrock Bowl.

The first 21 games of the series (1951–1972) were played in Los Angeles. The site of the game was changed annually for each of the next seven years before the game was moved to Aloha Stadium in Halawa, Hawaii, for 30 straight seasons from 1980 through 2009. The 2010 Pro Bowl was played at Sun Life Stadium, the home stadium of the Miami Dolphins and host site of Super Bowl XLIV, on January 31, the first time ever that the Pro Bowl was held before the championship game (a decision probably due to increasingly low Nielsen ratings from being regarded as an anti-climax to the Super Bowl). With the new rule being that the conference teams do not include players from the teams that will be playing in the Super Bowl, the Pro Bowl then returned to Hawaii in 2011 but was again held during the week before the Super Bowl, where it remained for three more years.

The 2012 game was met with criticism from fans and sports writers for the lack of quality play by the players. On October 24, 2012, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell had second thoughts about the Pro Bowl, telling a Sirius XM show that if the players did not play more competitively [in the 2013 Pro Bowl], he was "not inclined to play it anymore". During the ensuing off-season, the NFL Players Association lobbied to keep the Pro Bowl, and negotiated several rule changes to be implemented for the 2014 game. Among them, the teams would no longer be AFC vs. NFC, and instead be selected by captains in a fantasy draft. For the 2014 game, Jerry Rice and Deion Sanders were chosen as alumni captains, while their captains were Drew Brees and Robert Quinn (Rice), along with Jamaal Charles and J. J. Watt (Sanders).

On April 9, 2014, the NFL announced that the 2015 Pro Bowl would be played the week before the Super Bowl at University of Phoenix Stadium in Glendale, Arizona, on January 25, 2015. The game returned to Hawaii in 2016, and the "unconferenced" format was its last.

For 2017, the league considered hosting the game at Maracanã Stadium in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, which would have been the first time the game had been hosted outside the United States. The NFL was also considering future Pro Bowls in Mexico and Germany to leverage international markets. A report released May 19, 2016, indicated that the 2017 Pro Bowl would instead be hosted at a newly renovated Camping World Stadium in Orlando, Florida; Orlando beat out Brazil (which apparently did not make the final round of voting), Honolulu, Super Bowl host site Houston, and a bid from Sydney, Australia, for the hosting rights. On June 1, 2016, the league announced that it was restoring the old conference format.

Since the 2017 Pro Bowl, the NFL has also hosted a series of side events leading up to the game called the Pro Bowl Skills Showdown, which includes competitions like passing contests and dodgeball among the players.

The 2021 Pro Bowl game was canceled by the COVID-19 pandemic, and new host Allegiant Stadium in Las Vegas was held over to the 2022 Pro Bowl. The roster was still voted on and named, and alternative broadcast and streaming events were held during the week of the game.

In May 2022, Commissioner Roger Goodell questioned the future of the Pro Bowl, arguing that it "doesn't work", and that "another way to celebrate the players" was needed. On September 26, 2022, it was announced that the NFL would host the 2023 event as "The Pro Bowl Games"—in partnership with Peyton Manning's Omaha Productions—which will replace the culminating event with a flag football game.

Player selection
Players are voted into the Pro Bowl by the coaches, the players themselves, and the fans. Each group's ballots count for ⅓, or 33.3%, of the votes. Fans vote on their preferred players at NFL.com. Replacements are selected should any selected player be unable to play for injuries, self-withdrawal, or Super Bowl contention. Prior to 1995, only the coaches and the players made Pro Bowl selections.

In order to be considered a Pro Bowler for a given year, a player must either have been one of the initial players selected to the team, or a player who accepts an invitation to the Pro Bowl as an alternate; invited alternates who decline to attend are not considered Pro Bowlers. Since 2010, players of the two teams that advance to the Super Bowl will not play in the Pro Bowl, and they are replaced by alternate players. Players who would have been invited as an alternate but could not play because they were slated to play in that season's Super Bowl are also considered Pro Bowlers (for example, Tom Brady in 2016).

From 2014 to 2016, players did not play according to conference; instead, they were placed in a draft pool and chosen by team captains.

Coaching staff
When the Pro Bowl was held after the Super Bowl, the head coaches were traditionally the head coaches of the teams that lost in the AFC and NFC championship games for the same season of the Pro Bowl in question. From 1978 through 1982, the head coaches of the highest ranked divisional champion that lost in the Divisional Playoff Round were chosen. For the 1983 Pro Bowl, the NFL resumed selecting the losing head coaches in the conference championship games. In the 1999 Pro Bowl, New York Jets head coach Bill Parcells, after his team lost to the Denver Broncos in the AFC Championship Game, had to decline for health reasons and Jets assistant head coach Bill Belichick took his place.

When the Pro Bowl was moved to the weekend between the Conference Championship games and the Super Bowl in 2009, the team that lost in the Divisional Playoff Round with the best regular season record would have their coaching staffs lead their respective conference Pro Bowl team returning to the format used from 1978 to 1982. It remained that way through 2013; it resumed in 2017. If the losing teams of each conference had the same regular season record the coaches from the higher-seeded team will get the Pro Bowl honor. From 2014 to 2016, the Pro Bowl coaches came from the two teams with the best records that lost in the Divisional Playoffs. (In the 2015 Pro Bowl, when John Fox left his coaching job with Denver after his playoff loss to Indianapolis that year, John Harbaugh of Baltimore took over. The next year saw Green Bay's assistant coach Winston Moss took over as Mike McCarthy resigned from coaching for illness.)

After changing to the Pro Bowl Games format in 2022, Manningcast hosts Peyton Manning and Eli Manning served as the "honorary" coaches for the AFC and NFC respectively. Peyton spent his entire playing career exclusively in the AFC with the Indianapolis Colts and Denver Broncos, while Eli played his whole career with the New York Giants in the NFC.

Game honors
A Player of the Game was honored 1951–1956. 1957–1971, awards were presented to both an Outstanding Back and an Outstanding Lineman. In 1972 and since 2014, there are awards for both an Outstanding Offensive Player and an Outstanding Defensive Player. 1973–2007, only one Player of the Game award was honored (though thrice this award has been presented to multiple players in a single game). In 2008 the award was changed to Most Valuable Player (MVP).

Players are paid for participating in the game with the winning team receiving a larger payout. The chart below shows how much the players of their respective teams earn:

Rule differences
Although there is no official rule against tackling, the players in the Pro Bowl have come to a gentlemen's agreement to do little if any tackling. On the vast majority of plays, the ball carrier either gives up as soon as a defensive player grabs him, or goes out of bounds to avoid contact. In that sense it is essentially a two-hand touch football game. A future ban on tackling and contact is being considered.

In addition to the above, the Pro Bowl does have different rules from regular NFL games to make the game safer with a view towards incorporating some of these rules to future NFL regular season games.

 * No motion or shifting by the offense
 * Offense must have a running back and tight end in all formations
 * Offense may have up to three receivers on the same side
 * Intentional grounding is legal
 * No rushing the passer
 * More than one forward pass thrown on the same play is allowed
 * Defense must run a 4–3 at all times, though the Cover 2 and press coverage is allowed
 * No blitz; DEs and tackles can rush on passing plays, provided they are on same side of ball
 * No blindside or below the waist blocks
 * No rushing the punter
 * No rushing the kicker
 * No rushing the holder
 * Coin toss determines who receives first; loser receives to start third period. Procedure repeats at the start of first overtime.
 * Kickoffs are eliminated (including free kicks)
 * Punt returns are eliminated by the automatic fair catch
 * Teams will start on their own 25-yard line after any score or at the start of each half/odd overtime
 * If a team that would otherwise be kicking off wants to attempt to retain possession (situations where an onside kick would be attempted if there were kickoffs), they may run a single scrimmage play from their own 25-yard line; should the ball be advanced 15 yards forward, the team retains possession
 * Receivers may flinch or raise either foot without incurring penalty
 * 35-second play clock to run plays
 * Deep middle safety must be aligned within hash marks
 * Replay reviews are allowed
 * 44-player roster per team
 * Two-minute warning in effect for all quarters, plus overtime
 * Game clock runs on incompletions except at two minutes left in half or overtime period
 * Very limited contact is allowed much like touch football, provided the ball carrier is surrounded by opponents

In case of a tie after regulation, multiple 15-minute OT periods will be played (with each team receiving two time outs per period), and in the first overtime teams receive one possession to score unless one of them scores a safety on its first possession. True sudden death rules apply thereafter if both teams have had their initial possession and the game remains tied. The Pro Bowl is not allowed to end in a tie, unlike preseason and regular season games. (In general, beyond the first overtime, whoever scores first wins. The first overtime starts as if the game had started over, like the NFL Playoffs.)

2023 and hereafter has a flag football game which is a 50-yard by 28-yard field (like arena football), seven players on field per team, two 10-minute halves, 15-minute halftime, plus multiple best-of-three round plays from the 5-yard line for 1 point or 10-yard line for two points, from double overtime hereafter, championship game only. In overtime, no matter if a touchdown is scored or not, teams get one possession. If the teams are tied after one possession, true sudden death rules apply hereafter. No punts due to short field.

Pro Bowl uniforms
The teams are made of players from different NFL teams, so using their own uniforms would be too confusing. However, the players do wear the helmet of their respective team, but the home jerseys and pants are either a solid blue for the NFC or solid red for the AFC, with white jerseys with blue or red accents, respectively, for the away team.

The early Pro Bowl, contested by the National Football League's Eastern and Western Division stars and played at the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum, featured the same uniforms from the 1950s to mid-1960s; the Eastern team wore scarlet jerseys with white numerals and a white crescent shoulder stripe, white pants with red stripe, red socks, and a plain red helmet. The Western team wore white jerseys with royal-blue numerals and a Northwestern University-style Ukon triple stripe on the sleeves, white pants with blue stripe and socks and a plain blue helmet. Perhaps oddly, the Eastern team wore home dark jerseys, although the host city team, the Los Angeles Rams, were members of the Western Conference. From January 1967 to January 1970 both teams wore gold helmets with the NFL logo on the sides; the Eastern helmets featured a red-white-red tri-stripe and the Western a similar blue-white-blue tri-stripe. In fact, the players brought their own game helmets to Los Angeles, which were then spray-painted and decorated for the contest. For the 1970 game the helmets featured the '50 NFL' logo, commemorating the league's half-century anniversary.

In the earliest years of the AFC–NFC Pro Bowl, the players did not wear their unique helmets. The AFC All-Stars wore a solid red helmet with a white A on it, while the NFC players wore a solid white helmet with a blue N on it. The AFC's red helmets were paired with white jerseys and red pants, while the NFC's white helmets were paired with blue jerseys and white pants. Beginning with the 1979 game, players wore the helmets of their respective teams.

Two players with the same number who were elected to the Pro Bowl could wear the same number for that game, which was not always the case in the past.

The 2008 Pro Bowl included a unique example of several players from the same team wearing the same number in a Pro Bowl. For the game, Washington Redskins players T Chris Samuels, TE Chris Cooley, and LS Ethan Albright all wore the number 21 (a number normally inappropriate for their positions) in memory of their teammate Sean Taylor, who had been murdered during the 2007 season.

On October 7, 2013, Nike unveiled the uniforms for the 2014 Pro Bowl, which revealed that the red, white and blue colors that the game uniforms bore throughout its entire history would not be used for the game. As the NFC–AFC format was not used between 2014 through 2016, team 1 sported a white uniform with bright orange and team 2 sported a gray uniform with volt green. The new uniforms received mixed reviews from fans and sports columnists alike, one even mentioning that the game would look like an "Oregon vs. Oklahoma State" game.

Since 2017, when the conference format was restored, the league took an approach similar to the NFL Color Rush initiative, in which jerseys, pants, and socks were all a uniform color (red for the AFC, blue for the NFC).

With the switch to the Pro Bowl Games format in 2023, players are no longer required to wear standard football uniforms, helmets and pads. Instead they wore red (for AFC) or blue (for NFC) shirts and either gray shorts or pants. Some players would also wear caps as headgear and compression tights.

NFL All-Star Games (1938–1942)

 * No Most Valuable Player awards were presented during these games.

Stadiums that have hosted the Pro Bowl

 * Wrigley Field (1939)
 * Gilmore Stadium (January and December 1940)
 * Polo Grounds (January 1942)
 * Shibe Park (December 1942)
 * Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum (1951–1972, 1979)
 * Texas Stadium (1973)
 * Arrowhead Stadium (1974)
 * Miami Orange Bowl (1975)
 * Louisiana Superdome (1976)
 * Kingdome (1977)
 * Tampa Stadium (1978)
 * Aloha Stadium (1980–2009, 2011–2014, 2016)
 * Sun Life Stadium (2010)
 * University of Phoenix Stadium (2015)
 * Camping World Stadium (2017–2020, 2024)
 * Allegiant Stadium (2022–2023)

Players with most invitations
As of the 2024 Pro Bowl, 29 players have been invited to at least 11 Pro Bowls in their careers. Except for those that are current active or not yet eligible, each of these players have been inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame. With his selection in the 2022 Pro Bowl, quarterback Tom Brady has the all-time invitations record at 15. Of currently active players, offensive lineman Trent Williams has the most Pro Bowl invitations with 11.

Television
The Pro Bowl was originally broadcast on an alternative basis by CBS and NBC from 1971 to 1974, while the other network broadcast the Super Bowl. The game was then broadcast as part of the Monday Night Football package on ABC from 1975 to 1987. Sister network ESPN took it over as part of the ESPN Sunday Night Football package from 1988 to 1994. The game then returned to ABC for the 1995 through 2003 games. In the early 2000s, after suffering through several years of dwindling ratings ABC considered moving the game to Monday night, but the network instead decided to sell off the rights for the 2004–2006 games to ESPN.

For the 2007 to 2014 Pro Bowls, the network which aired the Super Bowl that season also aired the Pro Bowl. The 2007 game on CBS was held on the Saturday after Super Bowl XLI because of the 49th Grammy Awards. The 2008 game was on Fox, broadcaster of Super Bowl XLII. Likewise, the 2009 game was on NBC, broadcaster of Super Bowl XLIII. CBS sold off their rights to the 2010 game to ESPN, which was played a week before the Super Bowl at the Super Bowl site, Sun Life Stadium. CBS also declined to broadcast the 2013 game, which was instead shown on NBC. The 2014 game, also shown on NBC, was the final Pro Bowl on network television for four years.

ESPN then began holding exclusive rights to the Pro Bowl starting in 2015. In 2018, the Pro Bowl returned to network television for the first time in four years as part of a joint ABC/ESPN simulcast (both sister networks are owned by The Walt Disney Company). Disney XD was added to the simulcast for 2019. The ESPN/ABC simulcasts of the game continued through 2022.

Throughout his broadcasting career, the late John Madden declined to be part of the announcing crew when his network carried the Pro Bowl for his aviatophobia and claustrophobia (a joke referencing both is made in the Madden NFL '97 video game before the beginning of the Pro Bowl in season mode, where Madden quips that he drove his "Madden Bus" to Hawaii, rather than flying). Until Madden's retirement from broadcasting after the 2009 Pro Bowl, it had only occurred twice: Former San Diego Chargers quarterback and MNF personality Dan Fouts, whom Madden had replaced, took his place on ABC in 2003, and Cris Collinsworth took his place on NBC in 2009 (Collinsworth ended up replacing Madden permanently upon the latter's retirement).

In conjunction with the Professional Bowlers Association, the Pro Bowl also sponsors a charity bowling tournament the occurs during the weekend leading up to the game. The tournament is open to all NFL players regardless of whether they have been selected to play in the Pro Bowl. Winners are announced at halftime, and are presented with a check in their name payable to their favorite charity.

Most watched Pro Bowls

 * Since 2000

Blackout policy
Prior to 2015, the Pro Bowl was still subject to the NFL's blackout policies, requiring the game to be blacked out within 75 mi of the stadium site if the game does not sell out all of the stadium's seats. However, with the lifting of the NFL's blackout rules in 2015, the game can be shown within the host stadium regardless of attendance.

Quality
For decades, the Pro Bowl has been criticized as a glamor event more than a football game. This is due to the voluntary nature of the game, the arbitrary voting process, and the fear of player injury.

While players are financially compensated for participating in the Pro Bowl, for a star player, the pay can be less than 1% of their salary. Many star players have excused themselves from participation over the years, meaning that the very best players are not necessarily featured. Not having the best players in the Pro Bowl was exacerbated by the introduction of fan voting (see section below).

Another criticism of the game is that the players—particularly on defense—are not competing at the same level of intensity as they would during the regular season or the playoffs. This is because player injury plays a much greater part in a team's success in the NFL as compared to the other major American sports. For this reason, unlike the NBA, NHL, and MLB (which host their all-star events as a mid-season break), the Pro Bowl was historically held after the completion of the season and playoffs. This means that a player injured in the Pro Bowl would have at least six months to rehab before the next season begins. However, starting in 2010, the Pro Bowl was moved from the week after the Super Bowl to the week before it. Because of the above-noted fear of injury, players from the two teams participating in the Super Bowl were banned from participation, thus increasing the absence of star players.

In the 2012 game, the lack of defensive effort was apparent, not only to anyone watching, but additionally evidenced by the combined score of 100 points. Brett Keisel, an NFL player watching the game said, "They probably should have just put flags on them," indicating that the quality was about on the level of flag football. Commissioner Roger Goodell stated that the game needed to improve, otherwise it would be eliminated. It is worth noting that entire teams have declined to participate after losing the conference championship, like the 2015 New England Patriots, which had seven starters on the Pro Bowl roster. This, among other factors, caused the 2016 Pro Bowl to be more of a game featuring emerging players, with a record of 133 players selected overall (including those who were absent), and ended up including rookie quarterback Jameis Winston instead of recognized veterans Tom Brady and Carson Palmer, who were both in the conversation for the 2015 NFL season MVP before losing in their respective conference finals. In 2022 and 2023, Josh Allen turned down invitations to the Pro Bowl in favor of playing in the AT&T Pebble Beach Pro-Am golf tournament, decisions that he stated were to allow himself to recover from several minor injuries. In 2023, Las Vegas Raiders running back Josh Jacobs called the event "stupid" and stated that he would prefer to go on vacation rather than play in the game. The event was set to be hosted in Las Vegas that year.

Selection process
Voting by fans makes up 1/3 of the vote for Pro Bowl players. Some teams earn more selections of their players because fans often vote for their favorite team and not necessarily the best player. In the 2008 Pro Bowl, the Dallas Cowboys had thirteen players on the NFC roster, an NFL record. "If you're in a small market, no one really gets to see you play", said Minnesota Vikings cornerback Antoine Winfield, who spent much of his early career with the small-market Buffalo Bills. "If you're a quiet guy, it's hard to get the attention. You just have to work hard and play." Winfield made the Pro Bowl in 2008 after ten seasons of being shut out.

The player voting has also been subject to significant criticism. It is not uncommon for players to pick the same players over and over again; former offensive lineman (and Sports Illustrated analyst) Ross Tucker has cited politics, incumbency, personal vendettas, and compensation for injury in previous years as primary factors in players' choices. Thus, players who have seen their play decline with age can still be perennially elected to the Pro Bowl for their popularity among other players, something particularly common among positions such as the offensive line, where few statistics are available. For example, in 2010, Baltimore Ravens linebacker Terrell Suggs admitted voting for Ryan Fitzpatrick (then the backup quarterback of the Buffalo Bills) over eventual league most valuable player Tom Brady not because he thought Fitzpatrick was the better player but as a vote of disrespect toward Brady's team, the New England Patriots.

Some players have had a surprisingly small number of Pro Bowl selections despite distinguished careers. Hall of Fame fullback John Riggins was selected only once in his career from 1971 to 1985. He was not selected in the year after which he set the record for rushing touchdowns in a season and his team made it to the Super Bowl (although he did make the All-Pro team). Hall of Fame linebacker Ray Nitschke only made the Pro Bowl once, despite being named All-Pro seven times and being the MVP of the 1962 NFL Championship Game. Defensive back Ken Riley never made the Pro Bowl in his 15 seasons, even though he recorded 65 interceptions, the fourth-highest total in NFL history at the time of his retirement. Former Jacksonville Jaguars halfback Fred Taylor, who is 15th in all-time rushing yards, was elected to his only Pro Bowl in 2007, despite averaging 4.6 yards per carry for his career, better than all but five running backs ranked in the top 30 in all-time rushing. Aaron Smith made it to the Pro Bowl once in 13 years (2004) despite winning two Super Bowl rings with the Pittsburgh Steelers and being named to the Sports Illustrated 2000s All Decade Team and defensive teammates such as Troy Polamalu, Casey Hampton, and James Harrison being named to multiple Pro Bowls during his career; Smith would often be ranked as one of the NFL's most underrated players during his career.

title: Pro Bowl


text:
Lube

Lube may refer to:

 * Lubricant, a substance (usually a liquid) introduced between two moving surfaces to reduce the friction and wear between
 * more specifically, in colloquial usage, personal lubricant

Places

 * Lube Parish, an administrative unit in Latvia
 * Lubě, a municipality and village in the Czech Republic
 * Lube, a village in the commune of Coslédaà-Lube-Boast in France

Companies and organizations

 * Lube Motorcycles, former Spanish motorcycle manufacturer, based in Bilbao
 * Mr. Lube, Canadian chain of quick oil change garages
 * Lubeh, a Russian band, sometimes romanized as Lube
 * Volley Lube, an Italian volleyball club

title: Lube