What's new

F-16

Belgium has about 41 F-16s in storage, of those at least 31 are A models(blk 10/15) .

Buying them would allow the PAF to form a new F-16 squadorn seeing as the PAF currently has 21 F-16As ,it will boost the PAF's current F16 Fleet. :PakistanFlag: :
Belguim F-16s also have internal ECM called RAPPORT III.(Rapid Alert Programmed Power Management and Radar) internal electronic countermeasures suite. which is better than ECM pod used by PAF F16s.

Those F-16s are up for sale would not be MLU.
The Netherlands also has 36 F-16A/B Block 15s up for sale, means PAF can also contact them! : :w00t:
 
Originally posted by viper`in`style+Nov 28 2005, 05:02 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(viper`in`style &#064; Nov 28 2005, 05:02 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>well this is a point about i wana talk here tell me how much AMRRAM AIM-120 or AIM-120 C or 9X is important for PAF with 26 F-16s deal with holland and belgium,and any other option we have ?? like MICA,or SD-10 on F-16?because if we cant get these BVRAAMs and AMRAAMs then we must we AIM-PL or magic R.550 or else and we know there is no match between AIM-120 and PL and with other so the improtance of new weaponery is very high from paf view. so what do u think?
[post=3973]Quoted post[/post]​
[/b]


Create another thread regarding this. Dont go off topic.


<!--QuoteBegin-Pyongyang
@Nov 28 2005, 06:11 PM
The US isn&#39;t upgrading the F-16s, PAC is going to do that. I heard some LM officials are going to supervise the first few then leave b/c by then PAC will know how to do the MLU upgrade.
[post=3976]Quoted post[/post]​
[/quote]

Thats a great news, so in the future. PAC shouldn&#39;t have any trouble upgrading the aircrafts by its own, i think we should get enough tech that would be equivalent to transfer of technology, not necessarily an ability to create more F-16s, but ability to fix, and renew the aircrafts at the highest extent.
 
Two F-16 fighter jets will be flown to Pakistan this week

Washington D.C. 28 Nov. (AKI/DAWN) - Two F-16 fighter jets will be flown to Pakistan this week as part of a deal between Washington and Islamabad while a P-3C Orion aircraft has already been delivered to the Pakistan Navy, US sources told the Pakistani daily Dawn. A senior staffer at the US Congressional Arms Committee said the US Congress has already finalised the deal and the planes are ready to be flown to Pakistan.

In July, the US agreed to deliver at least two F-16s to Pakistan by November while the rest of the planes were to be delivered in small batches.

Pakistan was expected to buy 75 F-16s from the US at a cost of 3-4 billion US dollars. Of these, 50 were new F-16C/D Falcon while 25 were old but upgraded versions of the aircraft. The deal included upgrading of the 30 F-16s Pakistan received in the 1980s.

But earlier this month, Pakistan and the United States reached an understanding, allowing Islamabad to temporarily delay the deal at least until April next year. The Bush Administration also delayed an earlier decision to seek Congressional approval for the proposed deal till at least the next session.

The two planes, now being flown to Islamabad, are upgraded versions of the old aircraft that Pakistan had originally received in the 1980s and will be added to the existing fleet of more than 30 F-16s.

The decision to delay the larger F-16 deal was finalized at a meeting between Ambassador Jehangir Karamat and US Assistant Secretary of State Christina Rocca in Washington on Nov 7.

Karamat later told Dawn the deal was going to cost Pakistan as much as 4 billion dollars and “we felt that at this stage we need that money for the earthquake victims”.

The US also has delivered the first of eight P-3C Orion aircraft to the Pakistan Navy, ahead of its scheduled 2006 delivery date. The jets will improve command-and-control capabilities of the Pakistani Navy.

Source: http://www.adnki.com/index_2Level.php?cat=...233726234&par=0
 
Originally posted by Pyongyang@Nov 28 2005, 12:17 AM
The day the EU constitution doesn&#39;t get passed again and Europe falls into war, just over a constitution&#33; Belgium and Holland will team up and lead a surprise attack on the other nations. Maybe France too.  :evil:
[post=3915]Quoted post[/post]​

#########&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;~~ Do you know what happened when the Arab&#39;s nations attacked Israel??? ~~&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;###############

Also my question was regarding PAF as I understood that PAF wants refuellers to reach upto the EU.

Thanks,

Miro
 
Kasuri denies making Iran attack remark
Web posted at: 12/20/2005 2:3:32
Source ::: Internews
Khurshid Mahmood Kasuri

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan yesterday welcomed the forthcoming visits of UN Secretary-General’s Special Envoy and former US president George Bush and US Vice-President Dick Cheney to Pakistan.

Foreign Minister Khurshid Mahmood Kasuri told daily The News in an interview that a news item attributed to him about a possible US attack on Iran was shocking.

“No responsible person will ever make such a remark. I did not make this statement. In fact when I was asked about the prevailing tensions between the US and Iran over the latter’s nuclear policy, my response was very clear.

“I stated that Pakistan wants a peaceful resolution of this issue, which could be solved within the IAEA framework. We also greatly support the Iran-EU dialogue to help solve this issue and hope that these talks would resume soon,” said Kasuri.

Welcoming the visits of Bush senior and Cheney, Kasuri said Pakistan appreciates the support the United States and the United Nations lent over the earthquake tragedy.

“This shows their continued support which will certainly go down well with the common Pakistani and the earthquake survivors. Especially, the visit of Bush will attract attention of the world community to the continuing plight of survivors.

“As media interest tends to lessen, these visits would highlight a problem that needs international attention and support,” said the minister.

Commenting on Cheney’s visit, Kasuri said US-Pakistan relations are excellent as is obvious by these high profile visits.

When asked if the issue of F-16 and 115, 155-mm self-propelled Howitzer artillery pieces as well as related gear and services valued up to &#036;56 million would come up during the Cheney-Musharraf meeting, Kasuri replied, “For the moment our highest priority is focused on the reconstruction and rehabilitation of the earthquake survivors”.

Kasuri said Pakistan wants to live in peace with India.

“Pakistan also wants mutual reduction in military expenditure but we cannot do so unilaterally. India is aware of our proposal. You have to understand that peace never comes from a position of weakness,” he underlined.

The minister said that Pakistan wanted minimum credible defence.

“These F-16s are high-performance aircraft and we have signed an agreement with the US, but the purchase has been delayed because of the earthquake. I cannot go into specific numbers at the moment because these are not mere showpieces.

“It is for the Pakistan Air Force together with the Ministry of Defence to decide but they will be much less than the earlier number for whom an order was placed,” he added.


http://www.thepeninsulaqatar.com/Display_n...00512202332.xml
 
The article says that F-16 number will be dropped down with a delay. Interesting.
 
Reason For The Mid-Life Update

When the F-16 entered service in 1979, it was expected that the aircraft would be replaced by a successor in 1999. In 1985, Secretary of Defense Van Houwelingen supported the idea of replacing the F-16 between 1995 and 2000 by the French Rafale. The Royal Netherlands Air Force, however, preferred development of an avionics upgrade for the F-16, since the Rafale would not be the technological step forward needed for the next generation of fighters -- comparable with replacing the F-104 with the Mirage F-1 instead of the F-16. At that time the RNLAF was convinced the USAF would have an F-16 successor ready by 2005 and that this successor would have features the Rafale would not have.

The first ideas for a major avionics upgrade for the RNLAF were launched in 1985 and were supported by the other three European Participating Air Forces (European F-16 users) in 1986. The project became known as the F-16 Mid-Life Update, or MLU for short.

General Dynamics was not in favor of retrofitting old F-16A/Bs and instead suggested the new Agile Falcon, with enlarged wings and stronger engines. This, however, was rejected by the Royal Netherlands Air Force since the costs involved would be too high. The Air Force philosophy was to keep the F-16 with new avionics at the same weight, in order to avoid purchasing new 29,000 lbs engines as used in the F-16C/D. This would both save money and would give enough time to wait for a real new generation of fighter aircraft.

Early Development

Development of the Mid-Life Update started in 1989 with a two year study to the possibilities for an upgrade of the F-16. On May 3, 1991, the MLU development phase was authorized (signature of final partner). Development continued until 1997. On June 15, 1991, General Dynamics was awarded the contract for delivery of the modification kits.

Due to a different political and military situation after the disappearance of the Iron Curtain in 1989, the USAF planned on phasing out their F-16A/Bs in 2000. Therefore, the requirement to upgrade their F-16A/B fleet became irrelevant. In November 1992 the USAF announced their withdrawal from the production phase of the project. European share re-negotiations resulted on 28 January 1993 in a lower number of aircraft to be submitted to the Mid-Life Update (301 vs. the 533 originally planned: Netherlands 172, Belgium 110, Denmark 63, Norway 58, USAF 130).

The letters of acceptance were signed on June 30, 1993. Lockheed Martin was awarded the contract for delivery of the MLU modification kits for European air forces on August 17, 1993. Kit deliveries started in October 1996 and were completed in 1999.

After the MLU the F-16 will not be decommissioned until 2010, although in 1998 the RNLAF was talking about an End-Life Update, indicating the F-16 would not be decommissioned until 2015 or even beyond (&#33;).

Aircraft Structural Integrity Program
The F-16&#39;s airframe has been subject to its design loads at a higher number of occurrences at a higher rate than predicted in 1979. This particularly concerned the wing root loads. It also resulted in several unpredicted hair cracks in some of the airframe&#39;s bulkheads. Before an aircraft could be offered for MLU modification, its current state of the airframe was examined in an extensive Aircraft Structural Integrity Program, of which of one the most important parts was the Aircraft Structural Life Improvement Program (PACER SLIP).

Note that (hair) cracks are not uncommon in aircraft design. To predict the acceptable number and type of cracks, the aircraft manufacturer used information that reflected the exact capabilities of the aircraft. The F-16 was designed as a light and highly maneuverable aircraft that could withstand 9g and that could last for a minimum of 8,000 flight hours. All data is recorded into a load spectrum that specifies the use of the aircraft -- i.e. type of missions -- aircraft load and predicted number of landings.

Pacer SLIP

The PACER SLIP program included applying Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) 1910, which included the design and production of doublers for bulkhead reinforcement as well as examining and cold working of pipe-hole connections through the bulkheads if necessary.

In PACER SLIP, approximately ten aircraft a year were modified. The modification was performed by the Royal Netherlands Air Force, in cooperation with Fokker Services B.V. (former Fokker Aircraft Services B.V.), both at Woensdrecht Air Base. After PACER SLIP, the aircraft should be able to last at least until its 5,000th flight hour and can complete its life expectancy of 30 years.

The first aircraft to be examined were the Leeuwarden based Block-10 aircraft, since these were the oldest ones of the RNLAF. The experience gained from this modification was used by Lockheed Martin when composing the modification kits.

Some of the first aircraft subjected to PACER SLIP went through the PACER UP modification in a later stage, in order to replace a bulkhead that was replaced in a later stage of PACER SLIP.

Each aircraft submitted to the extensive MLU modification was also equipped with the Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-220E engine as a replacement for the F100-PW-200 engine. Engine replacement was estimated at DFL 179 million.

Participating Nations
Several countries participated in the Mid-Life Update; the four EPAF (European Participating Air Forces) countries: The Netherlands (136 aircraft, apart from the LTF and TVI aircraft), Belgium (90 aircraft), Norway (56 aircraft) and Denmark (61 aircraft), the United States (223), as well as Taiwan (150 aircraft). Each of the EPAF nations sent one F-16 to Lockheed Martin in Fort Worth, Texas, as a trial aircraft for the modification. The Royal Netherlands Air Force sent a Block-15 F-16B, aircraft 80-3650.

Due to a different political and military situation after the disappearance of the Iron Curtain in 1989, the USAF planned on phasing out their F-16A/Bs in 2000. Therefore, the requirement to upgrade their F-16A/B fleet became irrelevant. Due to budget restrictions, the US Air Force was forced out of the MLU production phase. However, it remained an equal partner in the development phase. Some modifications were used for their F-16C/Ds.

Taiwan also showed interest in the Mid-Life Update for their F-16s. In 1992 Taiwan forged an agreement with the US to purchase 130 F-16A and 20 F-16B fighters as part of its military modernization efforts. However, the 150 Taiwanese Block-20 F-16A/Bs to be built, were not brought to exactly the same standard as the EPAF post-MLU F-16A/Bs. The Block-20 designation was reserved in the 80s when the manufacturer switched from Block-15 (F-16A) to Block-25 (F-16C). After the Mid-Life Update, the EPAF F-16s will probably be designated as Block-15MLU. The official RNLAF designation for the F-16 is said to be F-16AM and F-16BM, although these designations are not recognised by LMTAS.

In total, 343 EPAF (and 223 USAF) aircraft will be submitted to MLU, of which 136 (exluding the two aircraft modified in an early stage) of the RNLAF (one of the most essential F-16A/B users worldwide, outside the US), of 18 EPAF squadrons in total.

SABCA (supported by Fabrisys and Sonaca) and Fokker Services Woensdrecht set up a joint venture company called CDR (Cooperative Delivery of Retro-kits) that is responsible for the cockpit kits.

In The Netherlands, also Holland Signaal Apparaten, Fokker Papendrecht, and the NLR laboratory are involved in the Mid-Life Update program.

Each aircraft will typically take up to 2,500 man hours, which roughly equals 5 months of labor, but in some cases this may take up to 3,000 man hours. During modification of the production aircraft, approximately 35 aircraft a year will be modified.

Several other current and potential F-16 customers are considering the Mid-Life Update features as well. New production F-16A/Bs with MLU systems are being manufactured and offered as Block-20 aircraft. These aircraft have a Block-50/52 aft fuselage and wing and several other refinements.

Trial, Verification And Installation Aircraft
All five Trial, Verification and Installation (TVI) aircraft of the four EPAF countries and the US were the first ones to be modified by Lockheed Martin Tactical Aircraft Systems (LMTAS), Fort Worth, Texas. The aircraft were completely de-panneled and re-assembled in a later stadium in order to perform all kinds of work, including the replacement of hundreds of wiring harnesses (according to LMTAS, the cockpit alone incorporated one hundred new wiring harnesses).

The lead time from receipt of an order to delivery of the kits was approximately 32 months.

Once completely re-assembled, the aircraft were transferred to Edwards Air Force Base in order to perform flight tests. After these flights, the Dutch and Norwegian aircraft were moved to Leeuwarden Air Base for further flight tests. These tests included the testing of the new fire control radar system under European weather conditions, AIM-120 integration and air-to-ground modes. In a later stadium, the Belgian TVI aircraft followed. At that time, the software tests commenced.

Lead-The-Fleet Aircraft

The EPAF/US aircraft that were modified during the Mid-Life Update can be divided into four major categories: Block-10 F-16As, Block-10 F-16Bs, Block-15 F-16As and Block-15 F-16Bs.

By means of strict configuration management, the Royal Netherlands Air Force has always kept track of which aircraft has undergone what modification. There have been identified 19 so called sub-blocks, of which 12 are applicable to the RNLAF fleet. Differences between those sub-blocks consist of minor differences in airframe structure, wiring and such like.

For each sub-block different modification kits have been developed. Most differences in configuration for the RNLAF were caused by the relatively long time span during which deliveries took place, ranging from 1979 to 1991. Each separate series of aircraft was subject to various extensive modification programs. In order to prevent surprises, the RNLAF has thoroughly selected 9 aircraft from different sub-blocks as Lead-The-Fleet (LTF) aircraft. Those LTF aircraft were the first ones to be modified by the RNLAF and Fokker.

DT&E / OT&E

Initial F-16MLU Development Test & Evaluation (DT&E) took place at Edwards AFB, USA, during which phase the avionics integrity was checked and evaluated. Imperfections have been corrected by Lockheed Martin (LMTAS) or Norhtrop Grumman (formerly Westinghouse/WEC).

The Operational Test & Evaluation (OT&E) at Leeuwarden AB and the Development Test & Evaluation at Edwards AFB were conducted simultaneously. The reason for this was that the European air forces demanded to be operational with the F-16 MLU in 1998.

At Leeuwarden AB, the OT&E team was temporarily integrated into 323/TACTESS Squadron as an additional flight.

Software Development

The first operational Operational Flight Program (OFP) for the F-16 MLU was the M1 tape, that became available around March 1998. The successor of that tape will be M2, expected to be available in 2000. Until then, all production MLU aircraft will use the 3D test tape (October 1997). The M1 software was developed in four stages, each with its own interim software tape (Flight Test Tape (FTT) 1 through 4) each concerned with different aspects.

Before MLU, F-16 computer software had been written in the Jovial standard computer language. With the MLU all software was rewritten in the ADA language which -- according to the MLU project manager for the F-16 Combined Test Force (CTF) -- will reduce future software development. Another difference is that F-16A/B software for the Fire Control Computer originated from the USAF&#39;s Ogden Logistics Center (OLC), while the new MLU software was written by Lockheed Martin.

Just like the OFP upgrades of the conventional F-16 a new Operational Flight Program upgrade is expected every three years.

With each new software tape, new capabilities will be introduced:

M2 (expected to be available in 2000):
Automatic Target Hand-off System (ATHS)
Integration of anti radiation missile capability
Integration of target designator system
Further implementation of the Digital Terrain System
M3 (expected to be available in 2003):
Integration of capability for GPS controlled weapons
Introduction of Helmet Mounted/Cueing Sight
Introduction of advanced short-range missile, as a replacement for the current Sidewinder
M4 (expected to be available in 2005)
On average, a new software version is expected every three years.

See Recent Developments: MMC Software Upgrade.

M1 Software
The first version, M1, was developed in 1995, by Lockheed Martin Aeronautocs Company. Testing took place at the F-16 Combined Test Force at Edwards Air Force Base. During 1996-1997 tests took place at Leeuwarden Air Base. The M1 software became available at squadron level at the beginning of 1998.

M2 Software
The second version, M2, was available in 2000. From June 19 2000 on, the M2 OT&E was commenced at Leeuwarden Air Base. Over 80 improvements and new features were implemented, of which some of the most important are:

Integration of the BAe Atlantic navigation pod with laser spot tracker (Netherlands).
Integration of the Raytheon AGM-88 HARM missile (Netherlands, Denmark). The Netherlands canceled plans for the AGM-88, Denmark postponed a decision.
Integration of the digital Automatic Target Hand-off System.
Introduction of a more user friendly fire control presentation for the AIM-120 (changed symbology for the Dynamic Launch Zone).
Increase of the maximum number of aircraft with which the IDM can communicate in an intra-flight datalink from four to eight.
Introduction of the feature to modify the colors of tactical symbology of the Multi-Function Displays.
Increase in accuracy of the Digital Terrain System by linking the system to other navigational systems in the F-16.
With M2 software MLU F-16s can be used in the USAF Sure Strike concept. Using a datalink between the aircraft and a Close Air Support Integrated Targeting System, data can be exchanged between the aircraft and the Forward Air Controller or Forward Observer. OIP Sensor Systems (daughter of Delft Instruments) was granted an exclusive license to sell Sure Strike technology. The FAC uses a GPS system and a computer and "illuminates" a target. Information is then sent to the aircraft, where it appears on the HUD, surrounded by a target designation box.

The drawback of the USAF Sure Strike technology -- using a "nine-liner" -- is that it can not handle the NATO standard message format. It is possible to exchange data with other IDM equipped aircraft, such as the USAF Block-40 F-16s, AH-64 helicopters, and JOINT STARS. The number of aircraft that can be part of the same intra-flight datalink, has been increased from 4 to 8.

M2 software is not expected to become available for the Unit Level Trainers until 2001.

M3 Software
The M3 software -- already completely defined -- is expected to become available in 2003. Introduction of this version will also include a hardware modification to the aircraft&#39;s airframe to facilitate installation of the Link 16 datalink hardware. With Link 16 links can be established with other American and British aircraft, ships, and ground-based stations.

The Modular Mission Computer will be extended with a new circuit board, used by the USAF in their MMC-5000. The European MMC will then be designated MMC-3051.

Other improvements with M3 include:

Integration of the Helmet-Mounted Cueing System (HMCS) -- ordered by Denmark.
Preparation for new air-to-air missile types, such as the AIM-9X, and IRIS-T.
Preparation for new American weapons, such as JDAM, JSOW, and WCMD.
Airframe modifications will be performed under the Falcon STAR program.

M3 development is expected to commence in 2000. In 2001, M3 DT&E will be conducted from Edwards Air Force Base, followed by a European DT&E in 2003. The software is expected to become available at squadron level in January 2004.

M4 Software
One and a half year after the M3 software, M4 will be expected, with software becoming available to the squadrons in 2005. The full definition of the software is expected to be completed in 2000.

Avionics Upgrade
Most of the avionics installed during the MLU, is existing off-the-shelf hardware that was modified for use in the F-16. The Modular Mission Computer, however, was designed especially for the F-16; this can be considered the most important of the computers of the F-16. The most significant changes were:

Modular Mission Computer for fire control, stores management, and HUD processing, adding Helmet-Mounted Display features.
Data Entry Cockpit Interface Set, integrating communication and navigation.
Multifunction displays, replacing existing displays.
Though the US Air Force dropped out of the MLU production segment, all along it planned to incorporate the new Modular Mission Computer (MMC) into over 200 of its Block-50/52 and 450 Block-40 aircraft and after funding was approved also the color Multi-Function Display set.

You can read more about the avionics upgrade in Upgraded Systems.

Since the same MMC will be used in USAF Block-50 aircraft and the upgraded European MLU F-16s, hardware will be common to both types. However, the USAF MMC version will be incorporated with some unique software enhancements due to a wider range of weapons that is not in the European inventory. After the MLU, it will be the first time the European F-16s will be ahead of the USAF F-16s in terms of sophistication and capability, according to Lockheed Martin.

The avionics that is common with Block-50 after the MLU relates to:

Wide-angle HUD
Up-front controller
Side stick controller
Digital Terrain System
The improvements that are unique to the MLU relate to:

Color Multi-Function Displays
Advanced IFF
Improved Data Modem
Penguin missile capability
Miniaturized GPS
Electronic Warfare Management System
APG-66(V)2 -- EPAF unique
MLU Schedule
The Leeuwarden based 322 squadron was the first squadron to switch to the MLU F-16. The upgraded aircraft was officialy presented on June 11, 1998. Next, the Twenthe based 315 Squadron went through the process of conversion with work being completed at the end of 1998. After that, the other squadrons will follow.


RNLAF MLU conversion
Unit Conversion IOC
322 Sqn Leeuwarden AB Dec 1997 Jul 1998
315 Sqn Twenthe AB Jul 1998 Feb 1999
323 Sqn Leeuwarden AB Mar 1999 Sep 1999
313 Sqn Twenthe AB Jul 1999 Apr 2000
311 Sqn Volkel AB Apr 2000 Dec 2000 (?)
312 Sqn Volkel AB
306 Sqn Volkel AB

Operational Consequences

Pilot Training

The Mid-Life Update changed pilot training. Originally, the F-16 served in the CWI (Clear Weather Intercept) role for visual interceptions and ground attacks under daylight conditions. With the basic F-16A night flying was done mainly for navigation training. However, after the Mid-Life Update and the introduction of Forward Looking Infrared and Night Vision Goggles around 1999 this became a significant part of pilot training. Rather than an increase in low level flying training in Goose Bay for example, flight time shifted to cover more night operations.

All F-16 squadrons currently operate in the so called swing role concept, which means that each squadron is capable of at least two tasks (Clear Weather Intercept, Air-to-Ground, or Reconnaissance). The MLU and new weapons are so versatile however, that the pilot will be unable to keep up with all tasks. Therefore, task specialization will be introduced within the squadron -- i.e. a squadron will be more capable of one task than of another. This concept was first introduced on a small scale by the RNLAF detachment in Villafranca (Italy) during operations over former Yugoslavia. A limited number of AGM-65D missiles were leased from the USAF pending delivery of the AGM-65G in 1998. Only a small number of pilots in Villafranca were qualified for this missile.

Furthermore, the original Operational Flight Trainers ("flight simulators") at the Main Operating Bases were phased out between 1997 and 2000. The MLU training concept is based on Unit Level Trainers. A ULT is a modular training unit suited for basic and safety of flight procedures. Each of the squadrons has one ULT at its disposal.

SEAD Capability

It is likely that after the Mid-Life Update the RNLAF F-16s will receive limited capabilities for Suppression of Enemy Air Defense (SEAD) operations. There were serious plans for purchasing a new anti-radiation missile in 1998. The decision was unclear as a choice was to be made between the Matra BAe Dynamics ALARM and the Raytheon/Texas Instruments AGM-88 HARM. Usage of the ARM missile on the post-MLU F-16 would require a change in the software. This change is being implemented in the current software in negotiation with all other MLU partners.

Acquisition of a SEAD capability by the RNLAF is a result of the NATO planning process. In 1998 about 30 squadrons were being offered to NATO&#39;s Reaction Force (RF). Of these, 13 operated the F-16 and only two had the disposal of SEAD capabilities: the United States and Germany. In total, 9 countries have been asked to acquire a SEAD capability.


MLU: Worth All Effort And Money?
Because of the F-16&#39;s unpredicted heavier airframe load in the Royal Netherlands Air Force the aircraft&#39;s airframe needed to be overhauled regardless of the Mid-Life Update to allow the airframe to complete 3,500 flight hours. Keeping the aircraft operational until its 5,000th flight hour made the costs involved in the airframe repair / overhaul affordable and acceptable, making expensive airframe "re-inspections" unnecessary. The costs of the airframe repair / overhaul only formed a quarter of the costs involved in the Mid-Life Update.


Total modification cost per aircraft (1998)
HFL × million
MLU (development/production) * 1,946
Engine upgrade 220E 179
ALQ-131 modification fase 1 88
ALQ-131 modification fase 2 38
Missile Warning / Approach System 52
Protection radar guided systems 105
Total for 138 aircraft 2,408
Total per aircraft 17.4

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* This includes night vision and targetting equipment, FACE, expanded chaff/flare capacity, Electronic Warfare Management System,and Helmet Mounted Display. Not included are procurement of a new recce system, AIM-120, or AGM-65.

The cost of the Aircraft Structural Improvement Program (ASIP) resulted in increased operational capabilities as well as an increased life expectancy for the F-16 aircraft. This cost was lower than the price of a new aircraft. After the F-16 Mid-Life Update modernization program the F-16 can again compete with the most advanced fighters of today&#39;s world.

An increase of both technical and economical life expectancy justified the cost for the Mid-Life Update program.

F-16 Successor

In 1997, studies were conducted regarding a possible successor for the F-16. In April 1997, The Netherlands signed the Joint Strike Fighter Requirements Validation Memorandum of Agreement with the United States, offering the RNLAF the status of "limited cooperative partner". The American Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) is the most likely successor, with a possible order for 150 aircraft.

Norway and Denmark have the status of limited cooperative partner too, and Israel, Canada and Australia showed interest in the progam. With an investment of US&#036;250 million the United Kingdom is more than that.

Regards

Tiger :welcome:
 
Originally posted by Tiger Shark@Jan 16 2006, 08:49 AM
What you guys Suggest?

Please Post Factfull Post

Regards
Tiger
[post=5400]Quoted post[/post]​

MIRAGE 2000 MULTI-ROLE COMBAT FIGHTER, FRANCE
Mirage 2000 is a multi-role combat fighter from Dassault Aviation of France. It has been operational with the French Air Force since 1984, and has been selected by Abu Dhabi, Egypt, Greece, India, Peru, Qatar, Taiwan and the United Arab Emirates.

Mirage 2000 fighters in operation with the French Air Force are: Mirage 2000C/B single seater and two seater for air defence; Mirage 2000N, two seater, designed for all weather nuclear penetration at low altitude and very high speed; Mirage 2000D, an upgraded version of the Mirage 2000N, for automated bombing using conventional and laser guided munitions; and Mirage 2000-5, incorporating advanced avionics, new multiple target air-to-ground and air-to-air firing procedures using the RDY radar and new sensor and control systems.

Orders for 110 Mirage 2000-5 have been placed by the air forces of France (37, with 20 delivered), Taiwan (60 aircraft), Qatar (12) and Greece. Greece is acquiring 15 Mirage 2000-5 Mk 2 and upgrading ten of its Mirage 2000 to the same standard. The first entered service in September 2004. The United Arab Emirates have ordered 32 2000-9 aircraft, a customised version of the 2000-5. First deliveries were in June 2003. India has ordered ten Mirage 2000D and is also to purchase the 12 2000-5 fighters of Qatar.

In July 2005, the Government of Brazil agreed to purchase 12 ex-French Air Force Mirage 2000C aircraft.

Dassault has received a contract to upgrade the French Air Force&#39;s Mirage 2000N to K3 standard. The K3 upgrade includes the operation of the MBDA ASMPA nuclear standoff missile and a new Thales Optronics Reco NG reconnaissance pod.

COCKPIT

Mirage 2000-5 is available as a single-seater or two-seater multi-role fighter. The aircraft has hands-on throttle and stick (HOTAS) control. Mirage 2000-5 incorporates the Thales VEH 3020 head-up display and five cathode ray tube multifunction advanced pilot systems interface (APSI) displays. The combined head-up/head-level display is collimated at infinity, and presents data relating to flight control, navigation, target engagement and weapon firing. Sensor and system management data is presented on two coloured lateral displays.

WEAPONS

Mirage 2000 has nine hardpoints for carrying weapon system payloads: five on the fuselage and two on each wing. The single-seat version is also armed with two internally mounted, high-firing-rate 30mm guns.

Air-to-air weapons include the MICA multi-target air-to-air intercept and combat missiles, and the Magic 2 combat missiles, both from MBDA (formed out of a merger between Matra BAe Dynamics, EADS Aerospatiale and Alenia Marconi Systems). The aircraft can carry four MICA missiles, two Magic missiles and three drop tanks simultaneously. The Mirage 2000-5 can fire the MBDA Super 530D missile or the MBDA Sky Flash air-to-air missile as an alternative to the MICA missile.

Mirage 2000 is also equipped to carry a range of air-to-surface missiles and weapons including laser-guided bombs. These include the MBDA BGL 1000 laser-guided bomb, MBDA AS30L, MBDA Armat anti-radar missile, MBDA AM39 Exocet anti-ship missile, MBDA rocket launchers, MBDA Apache stand-off weapon, and the stealthy cruise missile, SCALP. The Mirage 2000-9 aircraft ordered by the United Arab Emirates carries the Black Shahine missile being developed by MBDA. The MBDA Storm Shadow/Scalp EG stand-off cruise missile will arm French AF Mirage 2000D, Greek Mirage 2000-5 and UAE Mirage 2000-9 aircraft. Storm Shadow was first deployed on UK RAF Tornado aircraft during Operation Iraqi Freedom in March 2003. Scalp EG entered service on French AF Mirage 2000D in December 2003.

MBDA has been awarded a contract in October 2003 to integrate the ASMPA medium-range air-to-ground missile on the French Air Force&#39;s new Mirage 2000NK3 aircraft. ASMPA has a tactical nuclear warhead and will replace the ASMP missile in service on the Mirage 2000N since 1988.

TARGETING

Mirage 2000 has an upgraded digital Weapon Delivery and Navigation System, WDNS. The aircraft can be fitted with a TV/CT CLDP laser designation pod from Thales Optronique, which provides the capability to fire laser-guided weapons by day and night. The 2000-5 Mk 2 will have the Damocles laser designation pod with thermal imaging camera, also from Thales Optronique.

Mirage 2000-5 is equipped with a multi-mode Thales RDY doppler radar which provides multi-targeting capability in the air defence role and the radar also has look down/shoot down mode of operation. The radar can simultaneously detect up to 24 targets and carry out track while scan on the eight highest priority threats.

COUNTERMEASURES

The aircraft is equipped with a self-protection suite installed internally. Mirage 2000-5 carries the ICMS Mark 2 automated integrated countermeasures system from Thales. ICMS Mark 2 incorporates a receiver and associated signal processing system in the nose section for the detection of missile command data links. The system can be interfaced to a new programmable mission planning and a post-mission analysis ground system.

ENGINES

Mirage 2000 is equipped with an SNECMA M53-P2 turbofan engine, which provides 64kN thrust and 98kN with afterburn. The air intakes are fitted with an adjustable half-cone-shaped centre body, which provides an inclined shock of air pressure for highly efficient air input.



Regards

Tiger :welcome:
 
Originally posted by Tiger Shark@Jan 16 2006, 08:49 AM
What you guys Suggest?

Please Post Factfull Post

Regards
Tiger
[post=5400]Quoted post[/post]​


The mirage 2000 is a very slick (and beautiful, to me) fighter, primarily designed for scramble interception against MiG-25s, and it is true that a Mirage 2000 can (logically) fly faster and higher than a Viper.

Nevertheless, the Mirage 2000 is fairly less powerful than the Viper, so that this advantage in speed and acceleration is negated as soon as you try to fit a decent bomb load on the Mirage 2000.

It is also true that the instantaneous turn rate of the Mirage 2000 is slightly better, but the sustained turn rate of the Viper is better, which is probably better in a dogfight, all in all. Dassault doesn&#39;t seem to talk about that too much...

Then, the consumption grid is nearly a lie: the Mirage 2000 really burns less fuel than a Viper, but the Viper can carry more fuel and its engine produces greater thrust (its thrust/consumption ratio is better), so that the Viper actually has a better range and a better combat time than the Mirage 2000.

The air-to-ground mission grid is even worse: with eight Mk-82 bombs and two tanks, a Mirage 2000 can only carry two short-range IR missiles to protect itself, whereas a Viper with eight bombs and one tank can carry four AMRAAMs. If you want the Mirage 2000 to be loaded with four MICAs as well, only four Mk-82 bombs can be loaded then... and, as it is explained under the grid, if you try to load bigger bombs than Mk-82s on the Mirage 2000, it can no longer carry the two big wing tanks, and its range becomes pretty shorter than the range of a similarly-equipped Viper.

To conclude, the Mirage 2000 is slicker than the Viper but less powerful. With good pilots on both sides, they are probably equal in dogfight. However, in air-to-ground missions the Viper is clearly better, as it can carry a much heavier load on a longer range. I really love the Mirage 2000, but it was designed as a small interceptor, not a multirole fighter.


Regards


Tiger
 
Originally posted by Tiger Shark@Jan 16 2006, 08:49 AM
What you guys Suggest?

Please Post Factfull Post

Regards
Tiger
[post=5400]Quoted post[/post]​

Here is Something Interesting Information

However, the main reason why French fighters are bought is that we have never refused to sell long-range AA missiles and state-of-the-art armament (I prefer not commenting this kind of politics...).

Examples:
Taiwan bought Mirage 2000-5s because we sold MICAs when Americans refused to sell AMRAAMs to them.

Egypt bought Mirage 2000s in the 80s to get Super 530 missiles (quite similar in capacity to Sparrows). Notice that Egyptians only bought a small number of Mirage 2000s, and it appears that they bought Mirage 2000s mainly to force the United States to sell Vipers to them.

UAE did not hide that they chose to buy further Mirage 2000s and modernize their old ones to 2000-9 standard in order to be sure they would always get active-radar long-range missiles (i.e. MICAs in case they would not have been able to get AMRAAMs), and because Mirage 2000s were sold with Storm Shadow cruise missiles.
Maybe armament is not as much an argument about Greece, but when they ordered Mirage 2000s they had just been accepted in the European Union. I think buying Mirage 2000s was a way to get closer to France at the time. (Exocet missiles may have been part of the explanation too, though)

I stop the list there but if you look at the names of countries that bought the Mirage 2000, you will see that, except Greece maybe, they all bought Mirage 2000s because they could not get Vipers at all or wanted to force the United States to sell modern armament later on.


Regards


Tiger Shark :welcome:
 
As far as India Pakistan Scenerio is concern

SCALP EGs and APACHEs are rather expensive per shot but are important for taking out runways from a safe distance and hitting C3 sites for a long distance. I don&#39;t know how many India will buy if any. Yet Qatar had 48 or so APACHEs in service so it would be silly not to pick at least those up and put them into service. They would be sure to get the MICA EM and it seems fit the Python Mk.4 onto the planes. The AASM is not in service yet with the ADA but will be in the next few years giving a customer the option of a GPS/IR guided bomb.

The Mirage 2000-5 Mk.2s ICMS Mk.III ECM system is touted as being able to jam the SA-10/SA-11/SA-15/SA-20 as well as the AIM-120 (we&#39;ll have to find out one day ;) ). Even the ICMS Mk.II on the Mirage 2000-5EDA/DDAs should be more then able to handle most Pakistan ground and most airbased radars. The Mirage 2000EH/DHs don&#39;t have the same ECM systems. If they shell out more money they could fit the IMEWS which offers a SEAD capability of sorts. If India throws out money the M-53 PX3 is around which boosts thrust by 15 percent, just needs some funding.

Pakistan could be put over the hump as it is rather doubtful they would ever be cleared for the JDAM, JASSM or any of the new "J" weapons. I could see them getting AIM-120s, GBUs, LDPs and such but nothing overly offensive like the AGM-88. I don&#39;t know if they would get cleared for the AIM-9X either. No idea on the ECM suite they will be cleared for either.

India would have a fleet numbers edge with 45 Mirage 2000EH/DHs (RDM-4/7), 12 Mirage 2000-5EDA/DDA (RDY-1) and 126 Mirage 2000-5 Mk.2 (RDY-2). If all are brought to the Mirage 2000-5 Mk.2 (173ish) model that would give them the most powerful M2K fleet around. Pakistan should get up to 60-70 (number being thrown around but could be less) F-16C/D Block 52s and still have the 28 F-16A/B B-15s (which couldbe brought up to MLU). That&#39;s a sizeable edge in the numbers. Those numbers give them an edge in deployment.

The Mirage 2000-5 Mk.2 costs a lot more and Pakistan will more then likely get their F-16s for free. Niether nation has the pilot market cornered. And the planes have differences that each side would try and exploit. But being the attcker would be both good and bad, good because they know when they are to attack and bad because some would more then likely have bombs. Granted with 5-6 MICA EM/IRs a Mirage 2000-5 Mk.2 could quickly turn and engage the enemy. Fighting would be rather close.

Granted I could not see Indian pilots wanting to fly low due to the fact Pakistan lacks decent high alt SAMs but has scores of MANPADs. The bigger investment in guided weapons shows they do want to stay out of range of MANPADs and "trashfire". The HQ-2 (SA-2) would be easily jammed by the ICMS Mk.II much less the Mk.III hell moving around with limited ECM is actually good enough for those.
 
Originally posted by Tiger Shark@Jan 16 2006, 08:49 AM
What you guys Suggest?

Please Post Factfull Post

Regards
Tiger
[post=5400]Quoted post[/post]​

Here is Some Interesting Point About F-16 Vs M2

They were born both with the medium from the Seventies. It is into 1973 that the development of the Mirage 2000 started and programs it, to him, was launched the 18/12/1975. The YF16 developed then by General Dynamics on February 2, 1974, their respective entry in service goes back just 15 years for the Mirage 2000C and 22 years for F-16 Fighting Falcon.

The most significant aspect of the performances, the thrust report/ratio, is generally in favour of F-16 in the principal field of the aerial combat, C-with-D the transonic one. The various engines of F-16 all are designed to release a potato max into transonic, while M53-p2 is optimized for the supersonic top (let us recall that the 2000 are in the beginning an interceptor and F-16 a hunter of close combat). Moreover, the limit of incidence is about identical at 2 counters, but with high incidence the 2000 product more trainée because of the configuration delta, even if the rate of instantaneous turn is better. The two factors make that the 2000 lose its energy more quickly than F-16 in a turn installed. In light, it transfers a little better, but it cannot hold the turn also a long time without pricking of the nose.
The 2 planes have almost the same rate of roll, but the 2000 have a better acceleration in rolling, which wants to say for example that it spends less time to reverse a turn.
In term of acceleration on the level F-16 is better into subsonic, but starting from Mach 1.4 the 2000 leave it far behind (PC full load at Mach 0.9 with the tropopause, configuration 2 missiles IR, at the end of 3 "the 2000 is at Mach 2.1, F-16 with 1.. Idem for the rate of rise, favorable to the 2000. It can as fly more slowly as F-16, with 95 kt if it is out of stringer with almost not fuel, but always at the price of one trainée increased because of the incidence. One 2000 smooth can curl Mach 2.3 on the level (limited to Mach 2.2, or 1.4 on 2000D and N), very right Mach 2.0 for F-16. Evidemment, not of combat at this speed. The 2 hunters can reach approximately 800 kt on the sea level, but the 2000 are restricts to 750.
The 2 apparatuses have a limit of +9G (G negative are not used in combat) in smooth configuration (air-to-air missiles + can of fuselage empties for the 2000). On the 2000 pilot has the "obstinate help" which makes it possible to draw 2 G additional while forcing on the handle and thus to go up to 11 G In heavy configuration (cans of aerofoil for example, configuration known as "grosses testicles" over the 2000) it is limited to 6 G (8 with the thrust help) and F-16 with 5.5/6.5 according to the versions and the configuration.
Concerning the radar, in air-to-air mode the RDI is higher than Apg-66 basic of F-1ã, and less powerful than Apg-68 of F-16c. The RDY of the 2000-5 is equivalent to Apg-68, moreover its modes were pumped dessus.Le RDI of the 2000C is very discrete in mode of discontinuous continuation (PSID, "Track-While-Scan) and generally does not appear on the American RWR in this mode, the opposite not being true:

At the time of meetings standard "green flag" the mirage 2000 with somewhat destabilized the pilots of F-16, destabilized by qualities of this apparatus to the pace less gracious than F-16 by gaining some small victories and consecutive for some... Pilots of Mirage 2000-5F (F for France) confirm the discretion of the tracking of the radar which always works in continuation on continuous information with the difference of the American radars APG "whose threat remains locatable because they slow down the scanning rate on their detected tracks".

The 2 planes have modes of close combat with automatic acquisition very similar. The missiles IR can be automatically rejoined on a fixing radar. On the 2000 pilot also the possibility has of making the opposite, C-with-D to point the radar on a target hung by Magic 2 in autonomous mode. Magic 2 has performances equivalent to Aim-9m, on paper all at least since it was never drawn with the combat. Idem for Super the 530D which carries a little less far Aim-7m but has a better capacity of made uneven (longer combustion of the engine).
The guns of the 2000 are less powerful than M61 (volume of less significant fire) but its shells make more dégats and a better penetration.
Another significant consideration, the cockpit. The 2000 have a narrow cockpit, like all the French hunters except the Rafale. The visibility of the canopy is definitely worse, except with regard to the side vision to the bottom (thanks to). There is greater dead angle in the back. The VTH of the 2000 is narrower than on F-16c, and the general ergonomics of the cockpit is lower (tensiometric mini-handle on F-16, button "dogfight", etc). Ergonomics over 2000-5 has the air equivalent. F-16 has a tilted seat (better resistance to G).
One should not neglect the equipment of the pilot either, and there it should be said that the French do not make extremely. The equipment of complete flight it is rather cumbersome, especially the Guéneau helmet and the oxygen mask. Yankees have new helmet Hgu-55, very light and which moreover can be made to measure after moulding of cranium of the pilot (but there, it must to pay it its pocket and fighter pilots US, which is not rolling in money as opposed to what one can think, balk a little). The mask is equipped with the system Combat Edge I/II which surpressurise oxygen according to the load factor and makes it possible to break down the pilot even to 9 G, which delays the black veil.
Comfortable superiority of the 2000 as regards integrated CME. If there is a field well where one is really strong, they are the CME. All the 2000 have a jammer (standard detector-responder) integrated, different according to the models and the standard but as a whole very powerful and higher than the apparatuses Yankees. The configuration of carrying of lures varies from one plane to another, but the base is of 112 cartridges of spangles (4 tubes of shooting) and 16 lures IR under fuselage. One can go up to 4 additional chargers (each one 8 lures or 18 spangles) in the place of the parachute-brake. F-16 does not have an internal jammer, the conf. of the lance-lures is very variable but in general it is 4*30.
To note however that a jammer is useless in close combat.
Lastly, F-16 has a better autonomy than the 2000, and a more significant air-to-air load and more flexible device that on the majority of the versions of the 2000.


Regards

Tiger :welcome:
 
Mirage-2000, both of them are interesting aircrafts. F-16 MLU with the standard of Block 50 can be a beast against Mirage-2000, and it will be matter of seconds before Mirage will get shot down.

During the Kargil War?? Indian Mirage-2000-5 locked on F-16 Block 15. So you must get an idea between the difference of just Mirage-2000 and F-16 MLU. The mid life upgrade is not a minor upgrade, it is a major upgrade which totally changes the aircraft from design to avionics, everything.

Even though both aircrafts are multirole, but F-16 has better payload, better in dog fight, even more better if with APG-60.

Can anyone tell me what kind of radar does F-16 get in the process of MLU? Does the radar remains same or does it get upgraded as well?
 
Originally posted by mysterious@Jan 19 2006, 03:28 AM
Mirage-2000, both of them are interesting aircrafts. F-16 MLU with the standard of Block 50 can be a beast against Mirage-2000, and it will be matter of seconds before Mirage will get shot down.

During the Kargil War?? Indian Mirage-2000-5 locked on F-16 Block 15. So you must get an idea between the difference of just Mirage-2000 and F-16 MLU. The mid life upgrade is not a minor upgrade, it is a major upgrade which totally changes the aircraft from design to avionics, everything.

Even though both aircrafts are multirole, but F-16 has better payload, better in dog fight, even more better if with APG-60.

Can anyone tell me what kind of radar does F-16 get in the process of MLU? Does the radar remains same or does it get upgraded as well?
[post=5510]Quoted post[/post]​

Both aircraft are nice...PAF was very interested in M2K-5 which means that PAF does feel that the Mirage provide a capability similar to the F-16s (blk 40, 50/52) and better than blk 15. The deal with F-16 is that its a better multirole aircraft than the Mirage2k-5. So from a PAF standpoint the F-16 makes better sense. For another aircraft which intends to use the Mirage-2K in a dedicated role then it may make more sense (IAF being the case since they have many other types in use).

No M2K locked on to the PAF F-16s and whatever reports there are point to Mig-29s locking onto PAF F-16s..but in either case, there were never any hostile manuevers by either side during the Kargil war as CAPs were maintained on both sides of the IB.
 

Back
Top Bottom