What's new

15 Jordanian F-16 for sale

That is because Lockmart does not provide a current product page for upgrades of Block-15 aircraft. Please do a bit more thorough research on the topic before posting a conclusive statement. The SLEP program was carried out for the USAF's block 40/50 programs, the appropiate program for older blocks is Falcon UP & Falcon STAR
http://web.archive.org/web/20130516...il/PressReleases/36-b/2006/Pakistan_06-11.pdf
http://www.defensenews.com/story/de...4/tai-talks-upgrade-pakistani-f-16s/84854448/
Falcon UP and Falcon STAR were meant to ensure the F-16A/Bs reach their intended 8000 service life, it is not known if there's a program to extend the life of the A/B from 8000 to 12,000 hours. That said, this C/D SLEP could be an option if the PAF tries to pursue ex-USAF F-16C/Ds stored in AMARC.
 
If they can be upgraded by Turkey then PAF should go for them.
 
1 mlu falcon up and star were started at th request of foreign customer and not USAF , USAF joined later
2 f7/a5 needed overall after every 800 and 500 hundred hours for max 2 to three times but OEM extended hours after inspection and recommendations past max life of 2400 for f7 and 1500 for a5

3 mirage operated are past useful life but extension/inspection by dassult /recommendation by OEM
4 worst case lm will need to be paid for review and certify life past 8000 hours and some upgrades recommendation

End of all the fuss
 
Falcon UP and Falcon STAR were meant to ensure the F-16A/Bs reach their intended 8000 service life, it is not known if there's a program to extend the life of the A/B from 8000 to 12,000 hours. That said, this C/D SLEP could be an option if the PAF tries to pursue ex-USAF F-16C/Ds stored in AMARC.
The C/Ds too were meant to last 8000, the SLEP takes their Falcon UP and Falcon STAR upgrades further. Structurally, SLEP can be applied to all F-16s.
 
The C/Ds too were meant to last 8000, the SLEP takes their Falcon UP and Falcon STAR upgrades further. Structurally, SLEP can be applied to all F-16s.
Well whether it's making it to 8000 or going past it, I imagine the actual work is basically the same.
 
That is because Lockmart does not provide a current product page for upgrades of Block-15 aircraft. Please do a bit more thorough research on the topic before posting a conclusive statement. The SLEP program was carried out for the USAF's block 40/50 programs, the appropiate program for older blocks is Falcon UP & Falcon STAR
http://web.archive.org/web/20130516...il/PressReleases/36-b/2006/Pakistan_06-11.pdf
http://www.defensenews.com/story/de...4/tai-talks-upgrade-pakistani-f-16s/84854448/

The Block 15 airframe is different from Block 40 airframe

The Falcon STAR program (structural augmentation Roadmap ) is for enhancing the
life of Block 15 to 8000 Hours

http://www.f-16.net/f-16-news-article892.html

http://www.f-16.net/f-16-news-article991.html

Block 15 Airframe being of an earlier generation has its Full Life upto 8000 Hours
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The C/Ds too were meant to last 8000, the SLEP takes their Falcon UP and Falcon STAR upgrades further. Structurally, SLEP can be applied to all F-16s.

From its inception; Block 40 and beyond the Airframe
was different and better than the Block 15 airframe

Hence the SLEP programme to take it further upto 12000 Hours because the Airframe
can endure it
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article7.html

Structure & Avionics
The configured engine bay has options for either the General Electric F110-GE-100 (Block 40) or the Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-220 (block 42), although the two engines are not routinely interchangeable.

The airframe was provided with greater structural strength, which raised the 9G capability from 26,900 pounds to 28,500 pounds. Maximum take-off weight was increased to 42,300lbs (19,187kg).

The undercarriage legs were made longer in order to provide more adequate clearance for the two underfuselage LANTIRN pods, and were beefed up to handle the increased weight. The aircraft also has bulged landing gear doors to accommodate the larger wheels and tires, and the landing lights were moved to the nose gear doors.
 
Last edited:
The Block 15 airframe is different from Block 40 airframe

The Falcon STAR program (structural augmentation Roadmap ) is for enhancing the
life of Block 15 to 8000 Hours

http://www.f-16.net/f-16-news-article892.html

http://www.f-16.net/f-16-news-article991.html

Block 15 Airframe being of an earlier generation has its Full Life upto 8000 Hours
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


From its inception; Block 40 and beyond the Airframe
was different and better than the Block 15 airframe

Hence the SLEP programme to take it further upto 12000 Hours because the Airframe
can endure it
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article7.html

Structure & Avionics
The configured engine bay has options for either the General Electric F110-GE-100 (Block 40) or the Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-220 (block 42), although the two engines are not routinely interchangeable.

The airframe was provided with greater structural strength, which raised the 9G capability from 26,900 pounds to 28,500 pounds. Maximum take-off weight was increased to 42,300lbs (19,187kg).

The undercarriage legs were made longer in order to provide more adequate clearance for the two underfuselage LANTIRN pods, and were beefed up to handle the increased weight. The aircraft also has bulged landing gear doors to accommodate the larger wheels and tires, and the landing lights were moved to the nose gear doors.

How did you conclude the SLEP having anything to do with raising the payload capacity? Nor have you provided the proof that at any point, the block 40 airframe is the only airframe to undergo SLEP.
http://www.janes.com/article/53641/turkey-to-upgrade-f-16-block-30-aircraft

The Turkish block 30's have already done 8000 hours and yet are undergoing SLEP, would you care to explain that?

Or rather, what is SLEP? What does it imply and do specifically for the USAF machines as you are trying hard to prove.
 
Last edited:
I think it's closer to US$300Bn

we are talking about a country which 70%+ people are youth and they need jobs at home, thanks to these @ssholes our skilled labour is going elsewhere.
 
But the question is, would these F-16's be able to not only deny air superiority to MKIs but also be able to dominate them?
Inside Pakistan Airspace, with data linking to AWACS and ground stations, yes F-16's can easily counter MKI.
In Indian airspace, depends upon alot of factors like enemy AD aerial assets available, deception on PAF part, way points with least amount of SAM's etc. F-16 will encounter Mig-29 along with MKI backed by AWACS and ground SAM's so the picture is not so rosy.

18 Block 52+ might just be able to do that but they will have to contend with 270 MKIs.........and what happens when all MKIs are upgraded to Super MKI standard and our very small fleet of F-16's is still stuck on MLU largely and some on Block 52+?
18 is a small number but not everything depends upon F-16 Block 52+. There are 45 F-16 MLU available which are also capable of countering MKI entering Pakistani airspace.
The 13 F-16 ADF will always be used for CAP or intercept or escort role. So this is a dedicated squadron which will not be burdened like other F-16 for ground strikes.

Infact ,PAF can make active all retired F-6 to beef up the numbers in case of war. So the AD flight might look like this:
2 X F-16
2 X JF-17
2 X F-7 P

Or
2 X JF-17
2 X Mirage III
2 X active F-6

Or
2 X F-16
2 X Mirage III
2 X F-7 P

This can happen because PAF will always conserve F-16's for 100 kinds of other missions that it has planned in case of war.

Super Sukhoi's main advantage is AESA. JF-17 Block III is slated to have an AESA and HMDS with new gen A2A missiles, so lets see how that comes out. In any case, IRST is a good concept for A2A dog fights also.

Instead, we should rather have a JF-17 that has state of the art AESA radar, EM/ECM & ECCM, high usage of superior composites, RAM Coatings, largely stealth with the assistance of design/RAM & avionics, much more powerful engine with supercruise, higher service ceiling, longer range and duration
You should read QUWA on JF-17 Block III specs
http://quwa.org/2015/08/30/jf-17-iii-jf-17-block-3/

I propose that PAF makes a JF-17 Block IV, an EW aircraft on lines of EA-18G. This aircraft should be used to escort strike flight groups into enemy territory.
It should have High band and low band jamming pods apart from other pods like EW and detection. May or may not carry an A2A missile.
..........basically the JFT should be able to take on anything in the IAF arsenal and out-perform it with Pakistani skies. And on top of it all, they should have a weapons package like no other. And we should have atleast 300 of these.
JFT can already take on IAF in own skies but PAF will always use a combo of aircrafts in AD role like the way i wrote above because to counter F-16 or F-7P or JF-17, the IAF SU30MKI needs to use different tactics which is not possible in the short duration of engagement. PAF will fully exploit the advantages of every aircraft type in A2A combat and hide its weaknesses by complementing strength from another type of aircarft.
so if u have in mind that PAF will use 4 X JF-17 or 4 X F-16 to counter IAF, forget it. it will always send in mixed types of aircrafts.

The 300 number is massive. I think 150 Block III should be enough. Rest of the money should be spent on acquiring a 5th gen aircraft

Plus, we should have J-31's in service within the next 5-10 years.
I agree but J-31 in my opinion is a force multiplier kind of aircraft. This should be the main strike aircraft for attacks inside enemy territory. It cannot carry much ordnance, almost equal to Mirage III/V or F-7 P.

It will be interesting to see if PAF acquired and inducts 5th gen J-31 before IAF does. If its possible, this will give a huge boost to PAF offensive and defensive capabilities.

The AESA radar it uses will categorise its lethality e.g will it act as mini AWACS, will it use its radar to guide other 4th gen PAF aircraft towards targets, will it use its radar mainly for jamming enemy aircrafts radars and confusing or blinding them etc.

It will also be interesting to see how PAF uses it in combo with other aircrafts. will it lead the attack or stay behind the formation, will it act as deception aircraft only in a PAF strike in India, will it be configured to use external loads compromising stealth etc etc
It's time to let go of the F-16's, they served us well........but very soon they will only be a liability instead of an asset. That is unless we are able to get upgrade packages for all our F-16's that upgrade them to Block 60.......which again is a dream.
The F-16's have good capabilities which still other PAF aircraft dont have. These include range, targeting pod and payload. Pakistan has access to TAI to upgrade F-16's when required. Block 60 or newer F-16 V configuration is not possible.
The F-16 ADF can still carry 6 A2A missiles with a 2-3 fuel tanks unlike JF-17 (4 with 1 or 2 fuel tanks), Mirage III/V (4) and F-7 P (4).
So realistically, we need to put 80% of our eggs in JF-17's basket and 20% in J-31's basket. Within 5 years, the JFT can be a formidable 4.5 gen fighter.
I recommend 50% for JF-17 and 50% for a new aircraft like J-31.
 
I also have a wish-list for PAF.
From top Russian made Air Superiority fighters in the likes of SU-35, top-notch European planes like Typhoon and Rafale with all the associated goodies. Block-60 plus, if not atleast hundred BLK-52 then..
Dedicated ground attack and SEAD/DEAD squadrons. Not bad if PAF could get her hands on F18 also. And yes, what about 5th generation, why cant Pakistan get into elite club, which will be operating F35...
And definitely, how can I forget J11 from China, dedicated for PN operations. JF17 new block, stealth features etc.
If I add to it my wishes for Transport, AWACS, SAM, I could get banned for being another Nishan.
Having said this, the problem is not only money but other geo-political and diplomatic problems, which are much much bigger then financial constraints.
Realistically speaking, what options PAF have?
Rafale, Typhoon, Grippen...? No
F18, F35..? No
F16 Blk 52.. Yes but lots of ifs, buts with that
J11? No
J10? Yes but it could not add significant capabilities unless buying in huge numbers.
J31? Have to wait for atleast 7-8 years for that.
SU35? Yes but God knows, if its rumor or Russians are playing some card to get Indians into business. How many will come? Training, integration, support structure for new type? Nothing confirm at the moment.

Thanks God, PAF is run by professionals, not fan boys like me. They know very well their limitations, their operational requirement, strategies. If their adversary has access to more options or is acquiring/upgrading her capabilities.. they will not sit idle. They will get their hands on best available and realistic option. These F16s is one of those options.

Who can predict, what Mig29 vs F16 v JF17 would be? How SU30 will perform? War is not a 1 vs 1 duel. Is war so simple? A radar lock or SD10 or AIM-120 will not distinguish, if its going after MKI or Mirage or LCA. Same is true for their planes vs PAF.
 
There is no such news of being shot down by a Mig-29 in actual combat. What you are trying to recount is the initial encounters western pilots had with the Mig-29's acquired by the Luftwaffe after the reunification of Germany at the end of the cold war.

During the various exercises carried out, the western aircraft found themselves at a severe disadvantage in a turning fight against a Mig-29 due to the combination of the AA-11 and the early monocle sight used by the Mig-29 pilots. However, in all other realms including BVR combat; the Mig-29 was thoroughly outclassed. @ghazi768 hope this clears it up.

That being said, today's Mig-29 is a little different as it embodies all those lessons of ergonomics and user friendliness to a much better degree than say 20 years ago.

You are right, archer was a rude awakening for US planners, resulted in them quickly hurrying for AIM-9X. But the lessons which are being derived in here from exposure to german Mig-29s are not entirely correct. In start, western pilots found their tactics to be lacking and needed many adjustments to negate or try to negate the advantage and were generally successful.
In terms of VWR combat, HOBS is not much different when used at a range. In dog fights it does give an advantage in that it provides you better chance and more time to train a missile and acquire a lock while restraining your opponent from making some approaches terms of BFM.

But one has to actually see or participate in a close-in dogfight to understand it clearly and see what it means. After the advent of reliable IR missiles even before all aspect ones, the ball of a dog fight had got compressed and has now even compressed more. opponents are forced to 'stick' with each other to try avoiding giving an opponent more of a chance to be able to train a missile and even if he does, try taking benefit of too close a range to be useful. This results in even more 'turn and burn' kind of manoeuvres, with each trying to stick close while trying to get a chance of a firing opportunity and at the same time deny other and force the opponent to lose energy and when forced to regain it, provide a chance to convert it into a firing opportunity. Experience in such fights still counts a lot, ability to out-manoeuvre, deny opportunities and retain and conserve your energy still matters a lot, plus if you have an energy efficient fighter with more fuel to burn can be a significant bonus. 2/3rd 'kills' still occur when one opponent is forced to try breaking out of a fight mostly for fuel concerns.
I think PAF is very mindful of what HOBS and all aspect IR brings to a fight and may have taken steps in this regard already.
 
Why on earth...
PAF has been operating these F-16 since the 1980s.
We need diversity in our airpower like having Su35's to assist also in Naval patrols or Euro fighters.
It was exactly the right time to move into newer jets deadlines for 5th generation 2023 We could've used Euro fighters or su35's effectively till then.
PAF policy makers are just thinking one dimensional
Probably because of the cash crunch .
 
Sorry Sir, But the M2k is NOT on the same level as the Blk52.

Pakistan Blk-52 and Indian Upgraded Mirages if we compare their armories,overall avionics, Can you point out how M2K is on inferior level than that of Blk-52 ? I agree Electronic Warfare systems of Blk-52 surpasses M2k But if the news coming out of India is any indication, elements of spectra EW system would be inducted in M2k
 
Last edited:

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom