PAF F-16 blk52 Strike Package

[Bilal Khan 777]

Nice and thanks indeed but I am REALLY a summer creature.


View attachment 358031

Fruit wars.

 

[Naif al Hilali]

Very interesting and significant point Sir!

Over the web I have found references to the RCS of Block-50/52s as being much less than that of the Block-15s. To the extent of being 1.2 m² for the Block-50/52 vs 3 m² for the Block-15 ... i.e. head-on with clean configuration.

Which of these two RCS is JF-17's RCS lower than? Or is it lower than both?

Your response would be greatly appreciated.

Bismillah ir Rahman ar Raheem

The F-16 was not specifically designed to be low-RCS [Radar Cross Section] but the intake positioning effectively hides the turbine fan blades which are the biggest radiators/reflectors of Electromagnetic waves.

F-16 Intake (turbine only visible from straight head-on, also not many sharp edges)

Both the F-16A and F-16C, according to my information, have a RCS of 1.2 square meters clean (wingtip rails are always required for reducing flutter) and 2.2 square meters with an air-combat payload. F-5Es have RCSs of around the 2-3 square meters mark with light payloads, the F-15 and Su-27 families 10-15 square meters (Su-35 supposedly brought down to 5 square meters when clean through airframe re-design and Radar Absorbent Material [RAM] application).

The F-16Cs in USAF/NATO service, specially SEAD (Suppression of Enemy Air Defense) models, have gold-paper tinted canopies (to reduce radiation/reflection from inside the cockpit plus safeguarding the pilot from radiation generated by their own jammers) and RAM applied to air intake lips, wing leading edges, and some other areas plus some classified electronics. These are supposed to reduce their RCS to Rafale levels, though with most external payloads it would rise to the 1-2 square meters range and beyond (as with the Rafale).

F-16 with gold canopy

The Diverterless Supersonic Intakes [DSIs] of the JF-17 hide the turbine blades from more angles, the JF-17 airframe has a lower cross-section also, and the wing-fuselage are very clean when viewed from head-on.

JF-17 DSI

I don't know how good the implementation of the DSI technology is; the bump seems right but the lip angles and the angles back from it to the fuselage (as seen on the DSI development photo below) are also important.

F-16 DSI Testing Platform

My own estimate would be that the JF-17 RCS would be in the 0.8 square meters range clean and 1.5 square meters in air-to-air loadout. But your guess is as good as mine here. Maybe enough to get it a few more kilometers closer to the enemy than the PAF's F-16s without being detected and the KLJ-7 can supposedly detect the enemy a few kilometers farther away when compared to the F-16's APG-68 (the KLJ-7A Active Electronically Scanned Radar should be even more capable).

Please note that no matter what you do, unless you move your fuel and missiles inside the fuselage, you cannot really reduce RCS below the 1-2 square meters range. So, it is nice that we have fighters with good RCS figures (the Mirage and F-7 also are in the 3 square meters class) but as @Oscar has said previously, composites and RAM are not going to do much more for us with the dirty (heavily-loaded) configurations we have to fly with anyway.

F-16 nominal (not very dirty yet) air-to-ground loadout

Reducing the F-16's RCS above from maybe 3+ square meters to 2+ won't really help here. Electronic Jammers, Fighter Escort, AWACS, good performance above the target, accurate and reliable long-range weapons would be much greater priorities.

Thank you kindly for your question.

 

[Naif al Hilali]

Bismillah ir Rahman ar Raheem

Theoretical ranges and inaccurate estimates of RCS aside, as @Oscar will surely wish to re-remind me, the F-16 and Rafale (even the MidLifeUpdated F-16As and original block Rafales) are far superior platforms to the current JF-17 by dint of their superior radar modes and electronics.

Paramount is the actual ability to develop, refine, and employ tactics to fully utilize the strengths of your platforms and to minimize the effects of their weaknesses (as done by the US, Israeli, and Pakistan Air Forces). These we, the general public, are not likely to hear about or see discussed in open literature or on the web.

P.S. Please note that the estimates I posted are just what I have found to be credible; actual data are classified. Also, the radar detection range, all else being equal, is related to RCS by the fourth power such that an aircraft with an RCS of 16 square meters will be detectable at 100 kilometers versus 50 kilometers for a 1 square meter RCS fighter (all other factors being considered equal, which they really are not in real life).

 

[mqur1963]

keeping f16 will keep India away from Pakistani space they r afraid of f16

 

[aliyusuf]

Bismillah ir Rahman ar Raheem

The F-16 was not specifically designed to be low-RCS [Radar Cross Section] but the intake positioning effectively hides the turbine fan blades which are the biggest radiators/reflectors of Electromagnetic waves.

View attachment 358836
F-16 Intake (turbine only visible from straight head-on, also not many sharp edges)

Both the F-16A and F-16C, according to my information, have a RCS of 1.2 square meters clean (wingtip rails are always required for reducing flutter) and 2.2 square meters with an air-combat payload. F-5Es have RCSs of around the 2-3 square meters mark with light payloads, the F-15 and Su-27 families 10-15 square meters (Su-35 supposedly brought down to 5 square meters when clean through airframe re-design and Radar Absorbent Material [RAM] application).

The F-16Cs in USAF/NATO service, specially SEAD (Suppression of Enemy Air Defense) models, have gold-paper tinted canopies (to reduce radiation/reflection from inside the cockpit plus safeguarding the pilot from radiation generated by their own jammers) and RAM applied to air intake lips, wing leading edges, and some other areas plus some classified electronics. These are supposed to reduce their RCS to Rafale levels, though with most external payloads it would rise to the 1-2 square meters range and beyond (as with the Rafale).

View attachment 358837
F-16 with gold canopy

The Diverterless Supersonic Intakes [DSIs] of the JF-17 hide the turbine blades from more angles, the JF-17 airframe has a lower cross-section also, and the wing-fuselage are very clean when viewed from head-on.

View attachment 358838
JF-17 DSI

I don't know how good the implementation of the DSI technology is; the bump seems right but the lip angles and the angles back from it to the fuselage (as seen on the DSI development photo below) are also important.

View attachment 358840
F-16 DSI Testing Platform

My own estimate would be that the JF-17 RCS would be in the 0.8 square meters range clean and 1.5 square meters in air-to-air loadout. But your guess is as good as mine here. Maybe enough to get it a few more kilometers closer to the enemy than the PAF's F-16s without being detected and the KLJ-7 can supposedly detect the enemy a few kilometers farther away when compared to the F-16's APG-68 (the KLJ-7A Active Electronically Scanned Radar should be even more capable).

Please note that no matter what you do, unless you move your fuel and missiles inside the fuselage, you cannot really reduce RCS below the 1-2 square meters range. So, it is nice that we have fighters with good RCS figures (the Mirage and F-7 also are in the 3 square meters class) but as @Oscar has said previously, composites and RAM are not going to do much more for us with the dirty (heavily-loaded) configurations we have to fly with anyway.

View attachment 358841
F-16 nominal (not very dirty yet) air-to-ground loadout

Reducing the F-16's RCS above from maybe 3+ square meters to 2+ won't really help here. Electronic Jammers, Fighter Escort, AWACS, good performance above the target, accurate and reliable long-range weapons would be much greater priorities.

Thank you kindly for your question.

Bismillah ir Rahman ar Raheem

Theoretical ranges and inaccurate estimates of RCS aside, as @Oscar will surely wish to re-remind me, the F-16 and Rafale (even the MidLifeUpdated F-16As and original block Rafales) are far superior platforms to the current JF-17 by dint of their superior radar modes and electronics.

Paramount is the actual ability to develop, refine, and employ tactics to fully utilize the strengths of your platforms and to minimize the effects of their weaknesses (as done by the US, Israeli, and Pakistan Air Forces). These we, the general public, are not likely to hear about or see discussed in open literature or on the web.

P.S. Please note that the estimates I posted are just what I have found to be credible; actual data are classified. Also, the radar detection range, all else being equal, is related to RCS by the fourth power such that an aircraft with an RCS of 16 square meters will be detectable at 100 kilometers versus 50 kilometers for a 1 square meter RCS fighter (all other factors being considered equal, which they really are not in real life).

Sir, thank you kindly for your detailed response. A truly informative post.

 

[Hassan Guy]

And we arent in a hurry mode,there is no stealth threat in the region right now, if you are thinking about FGFA it is 9 year away from now, your all posts are illogical

J-31 may not even enter service, its a prototype.

Fighter jet deals aren't made over a few days.

 

[SQ8]

Bismillah ir Rahman ar Raheem

Theoretical ranges and inaccurate estimates of RCS aside, as @Oscar will surely wish to re-remind me, the F-16 and Rafale (even the MidLifeUpdated F-16As and original block Rafales) are far superior platforms to the current JF-17 by dint of their superior radar modes and electronics.

Paramount is the actual ability to develop, refine, and employ tactics to fully utilize the strengths of your platforms and to minimize the effects of their weaknesses (as done by the US, Israeli, and Pakistan Air Forces). These we, the general public, are not likely to hear about or see discussed in open literature or on the web.

P.S. Please note that the estimates I posted are just what I have found to be credible; actual data are classified. Also, the radar detection range, all else being equal, is related to RCS by the fourth power such that an aircraft with an RCS of 16 square meters will be detectable at 100 kilometers versus 50 kilometers for a 1 square meter RCS fighter (all other factors being considered equal, which they really are not in real life).

They are really are not. RCS is at the end a sum of the radar return of everything on the aircraft. Which is why when people discuss ridiculous RCS measures for the JF-17; they forget that at some point it wont matter at all.

 

[PK_Patriot]

PAF should try to convinced new establishment in Washington their contributin in WOT and get more F-16 for them. But what will happen if LM relocate their production line n India, getting any spare will be problematic.

There production line is also present in Turkey

 

[Centurion2016]

keeping f16 will keep India away from Pakistani space they r afraid of f16

The SU30MKI which next two years will represent 50% of india,s entire fighter fleet was actually designed to take on and defeat both USA F16 and the F15 Eagle,

The SU30MKI was designed POST the lessons learned in both gulf wars where USA military power was on full view.

The Indians have a permanent base of F16/CD in India from Singpore.

Currently for every single F16 THE Indians can field 3 of these

The F16s are worthy opponents and I am sure the PAF will use their experience and fight tooth and nail to defend their air space.

BUT make no mistake the Indians are not scared of the F16 in any way.

An experienced MKI pilot will fancy his chances in a dog fight with any F16 pilot in the world .

The F16 will have lower RCS and a great amraam missle

But The MKI has the TVC engines , twice as many missles and far greater range and loiter time & the superior radars and ew suites AND the HMD/HMS

As I said the MKI was built to take and destroy the USA legacy fighters both the F16 & F15

boys this is snipet from F16net a USA forum on the F16 used by many x serviceman in USA

They refer to the F16 V SU30mki recent exrcises AND the exprioence of singpore F16 pilots who have trained with IAF for nearly decade

For the record the singpore airforce use their F16 in india to learn tactics to take on indoneasian & Malaysian SU30MKM

This is the copy and paste ( you may find it interesting )



Again - dont mix up events. The F-15s that came did have JMHCS- which is what I referred to. And the RSAF Vipers that came to India had HMDs as well.

You are right that IAF does not have MICA. They do have Matra Supr530Ds though.


Which is as limited, in fact more so than the Sparrow!

The MKI did take part in some of the DACT missions. This was stated by the USAF F-16 pilot who actually went to CI05. Mods here know that his posts were later on removed due to obvious reasons.


Again, I was referring to Cope 1 and not Cope 2! And in Cope 2, the MKI DACT was window dressing to be honest, it was only WVR, with limited TVC.

But the USAF got a better deal than the Brits did, recently - they got to see almost nothing!! In India though, it was a better exercise- with MKIs in WVR and BVR, though with restricted modes vs Tornado F3s + AWACs.

And the RSAF got the most thorough workover - good experience to learn from about the MKMs- no doubt played a serious role in their decision to go for heavy fighters and not more F-16s with the F-15SG.

Ten engagements vs the MKIs BVR & WVR - the Vipers lost each one. But to the RSAFs credit, they ran even with the MiG-29s (though the MiGs in IAF service are non upgraded vs the latest available & only now has an upgrade deal been signed) and they did quite well against the Bisons, in fact winning the bulk of the duels.

While the IAF was justifiably happy about the MKI performance, they were perplexed about why the Bisons- which did well in CI-1 & CI-2 against F-15s and Vipers, didnt do equally well vs the RSAF.
Top

avon1944

Senior member

• Posts: 404
• Joined: 24 Nov 2004, 02:03

20 Apr 2009, 03:54

Concerning the comments about the InAF wanted mainly WVR engagements, I recently read that the InAF wanted the 12:4/3:1 odds in air combat because they felt these are the sort of numbers they would see in a conflict with Pakistan!

 

[Windjammer]

The SU30MKI which next two years will represent 50% of india,s entire fighter fleet was actually designed to take on and defeat both USA F16 and the F15 Eagle,

The SU30MKI was designed POST the lessons learned in both gulf wars where USA military power was on full view.

The Indians have a permanent base of F16/CD in India from Singpore.

Currently for every single F16 THE Indians can field 3 of these

View attachment 359005

The F16s are worthy opponents and I am sure the PAF will use their experience and fight tooth and nail to defend their air space.

BUT make no mistake the Indians are not scared of the F16 in any way.

An experienced MKI pilot will fancy his chances in a dog fight with any F16 pilot in the world .

The F16 will have lower RCS and a great amraam missle

But The MKI has the TVC engines , twice as many missles and far greater range and loiter time & the superior radars and ew suites AND the HMD/HMS

As I said the MKI was built to take and destroy the USA legacy fighters both the F16 & F15

boys this is snipet from F16net a USA forum on the F16 used by many x serviceman in USA

They refer to the F16 V SU30mki recent exrcises AND the exprioence of singpore F16 pilots who have trained with IAF for nearly decade

For the record the singpore airforce use their F16 in india to learn tactics to take on indoneasian & Malaysian SU30MKM

This is the copy and paste ( you may find it interesting )



Again - dont mix up events. The F-15s that came did have JMHCS- which is what I referred to. And the RSAF Vipers that came to India had HMDs as well.

You are right that IAF does not have MICA. They do have Matra Supr530Ds though.


Which is as limited, in fact more so than the Sparrow!

The MKI did take part in some of the DACT missions. This was stated by the USAF F-16 pilot who actually went to CI05. Mods here know that his posts were later on removed due to obvious reasons.


Again, I was referring to Cope 1 and not Cope 2! And in Cope 2, the MKI DACT was window dressing to be honest, it was only WVR, with limited TVC.

But the USAF got a better deal than the Brits did, recently - they got to see almost nothing!! In India though, it was a better exercise- with MKIs in WVR and BVR, though with restricted modes vs Tornado F3s + AWACs.

And the RSAF got the most thorough workover - good experience to learn from about the MKMs- no doubt played a serious role in their decision to go for heavy fighters and not more F-16s with the F-15SG.

Ten engagements vs the MKIs BVR & WVR - the Vipers lost each one. But to the RSAFs credit, they ran even with the MiG-29s (though the MiGs in IAF service are non upgraded vs the latest available & only now has an upgrade deal been signed) and they did quite well against the Bisons, in fact winning the bulk of the duels.

While the IAF was justifiably happy about the MKI performance, they were perplexed about why the Bisons- which did well in CI-1 & CI-2 against F-15s and Vipers, didnt do equally well vs the RSAF.
Top

avon1944

Senior member

• Posts: 404
• Joined: 24 Nov 2004, 02:03

20 Apr 2009, 03:54

Concerning the comments about the InAF wanted mainly WVR engagements, I recently read that the InAF wanted the 12:4/3:1 odds in air combat because they felt these are the sort of numbers they would see in a conflict with Pakistan!

Despite being busted so many times, being a typical fan boy you keep returning with same nonsensical argument.
So let me simply put your mind to rest once again.

'British Typhoons whacked India's Sukhois in joint exercises'

http://twocircles.net/2011jul24/bri...ias_sukhois_joint_exercises.html#.WEstIOCLTnA


PAF F-16 repeatedly beat Italian Typhoons and Saudi F-15 Eagles and Typhoons.

Alan Warnes ��@warnesyworld 24 Jun

Reliable sources tell me the Pak AF's new F-16 MLUs consistently beat Saudi Eagles and Typhoons during manoeuvres in Taif, RSA in May.

Alan Warnes ��@warnesyworld 25 Jun

According to my sources, PAF were asked to fly Red and Blue Air. The Saudi Typhoon CO was allegedly so hacked off he didn't go to debrief..

Here ends the lesson. !!!

 

[Centurion2016]

Windjammer

The Chat I posted is not an indian source its a F16 net Source

As For Typhoon v F16........... my money is on the Typhoon every time

Any way I salute your F16 great war plane

 

[Windjammer]

Windjammer

The Chat I posted is not an indian source its a F16 net Source

As For Typhoon v F16........... my money is on the Typhoon every time

Any way I salute your F16 great war plane

I also forgot to mention, PAF is also getting plenty of experience on the SU-30 series of aircraft.

 

[TOPGUN]

Guys stick to the topic this thread is for PAF f-16 blk 52 strike package and this goes for both sides not just the Indians let us enjoy the thread thank you.

 

[Mughal-Prince]

Guys stick to the topic this thread is for PAF f-16 blk 52 strike package and this goes for both sides not just the Indians let us enjoy the thread thank you.

Unfortunately the DIarrhea from across the border is derailing this thread :/

 

[Mo12]

Unfortunately the DIarrhea from across the border is derailing this thread :/

f16 is a classic good fighter plane