PAF's Exercises from around the World.

[S.Y.A]

so if we induct more numbers of f-16s, we may still have a chance against IAF?

Even their air force is holy -no jibes please -- perhaps all their pilots are prophets - well we won't know until we first get all the facts

everyone knows how lazy the sauds are, they were bound to fail, i would really like to see PAF F-16s against UK, Germany, or US

 

[fjavaid]

so if we induct more numbers of f-16s, we may still have a chance against IAF?



everyone knows how lazy the sauds are, they were bound to fail, i would really like to see PAF F-16s against UK, Germany, or US

.we may have some ideal if results of RED Flag & Anatolian Eagle are a bit brought into light ...uptill now we havnt heard much abt that ...

 

[muse]

so if we induct more numbers of f-16s, we may still have a chance against IAF?
everyone knows how lazy the sauds are, they were bound to fail, i would really like to see PAF F-16s against UK, Germany, or US

No more F16's it's the pilot that's the weapon

 

[Thorough Pro]

Normally in such setups one side will have support of AWACS, I wonder what was the setup where PAF came out as victorious? If anyone in the know can share more details.

No air force would put their rookies in their top range fighters in an international exercise, it would mostly be the senior pilots who would later pass on their experience to others.

Actually now I remember reading about it, they were Italian typhoons.

Actually that was misreporting, the Typhoons in question belonged to the Italian Air Force, I had the privelege of speaking to some one who was assigned to the team under a NATO set up, out of three packages, PAF bagged all the kills.

Hahaha, I think PAF will benefit if they can do such exercises with German, French, and British Air forces.

On a side note, Boeing and European Consortium must be cursing both the Italians and Saudis and Lockheed Martin must be having a do and toasting the PAF pilots.

 

[Windjammer]

You see, in an article on the PAF, Alan Warnes reported that in the exercise, PAF fleeced the EF Typhoons, without disclosing their nationality, someone assumed them to be RAF aircraft and thus how it began to be reported, however it took some persuading for Alan to tell me the actual nationality also later confirmed by the Pakistan military attaches in Istanbul.

@gambit'

Sir, what are your thoughts on F-16s taking out the Typhoon and the F-15s. !!

 

[gambit]

You see, in an article on the PAF, Alan Warnes reported that in the exercise, PAF fleeced the EF Typhoons, without disclosing their nationality, someone assumed them to be RAF aircraft and thus how it began to be reported, however it took some persuading for Alan to tell me the actual nationality also later confirmed by the Pakistan military attaches in Istanbul.

@gambit'

Sir, what are your thoughts on F-16s taking out the Typhoon and the F-15s. !!

Very possible.

If the fight is within visual range, F-15 pilots do not like to engage F-16s. If anything, other than the Harrier crowd, NO ONE wants to tangle with the -16. It would help the debate if we know the exact ROE of the exercise, but this ignorance still does not diminish the fact that if the training is high and professional enough, the -16s of any air force will give the opposition air force of any country a difficult time in the air.

 

[RAMPAGE]

@Windjammer sir, can u tell me which missile do we use with our aspide 2000 ! aster 15 or 30 ?

 

[SQ8]

@Windjammer sir, can u tell me which missile do we use with our aspide 2000 ! aster 15 or 30 ?

Its the Aspide missile.. The aster series is entirely different missile that has replaced the ASPIDE in service with European countries.

 

[RAMPAGE]

Its the Aspide missile.. The aster series is entirely different missile that has replaced the ASPIDE in service with European countries.

sir , pray tell me it's specifications

 

[Armstrong]

Very possible.

If the fight is within visual range, F-15 pilots do not like to engage F-16s. If anything, other than the Harrier crowd, NO ONE wants to tangle with the -16. It would help the debate if we know the exact ROE of the exercise, but this ignorance still does not diminish the fact that if the training is high and professional enough, the -16s of any air force will give the opposition air force of any country a difficult time in the air.

Sir how would you rate the Jf-17 in that regard ?

Comparable to the F-16 or still a low-end, low-cost marginal improvement on the Cold War Era Mirages & F-7s ?

 

[SQ8]

sir , pray tell me it's specifications

http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakistan-strategic-forces/200284-pafs-mbda-spada-2000-surface-air-missile-system.html

 

[Pak47]

Reminds me of this video on YouTube. F-16 vs F-15 look at the muneverability on the f-16!

 

[razgriz19]

Reminds me of this video on YouTube. F-16 vs F-15 look at the muneverability on the f-16!

That's from a RED FLAG exercise. The whole documentary is on youtube

 

[gambit]

Sir how would you rate the Jf-17 in that regard ?

Comparable to the F-16 or still a low-end, low-cost marginal improvement on the Cold War Era Mirages & F-7s ?

Small size is an advantage only if there are agility and maneuverability to exploit the inherent visual difficulties the small size would give the opponent. Ever try to swat a fly? So we cannot go by the size difference alone in assessing how one fighter would fare against another.

In avionics alone, I would say the JF-17 is over the halfway point on the scale to the F-16 than towards the Mirages and F-7s. Not just marginally better. I would not go so far as to say the JF-17 is the F-16's equal. Today, avionics is a major influence on how an aircraft is designed. Modern avionics allows a considerable amount of 'overbuilt' on how a THEORETICAL aircraft may perform, then can be tuned to fit the actual planforming and construction. Look at the USAF F-117 for example where its flight control avionics came from the F-16. Lockheed made software and hardware adjustments to compensate for the -117's aerodynamic uniqueness. The F-15's avionics was designed to work with mechanical components so it has a less flexible set of flight controls laws built in. The F-16's avionics was designed for a pure FBW/FLCS with theoretical no limits.

 

[RAMPAGE]

Small size is an advantage only if there are agility and maneuverability to exploit the inherent visual difficulties the small size would give the opponent. Ever try to swat a fly? So we cannot go by the size difference alone in assessing how one fighter would fare against another.

In avionics alone, I would say the JF-17 is over the halfway point on the scale to the F-16 than towards the Mirages and F-7s. Not just marginally better. I would not go so far as to say the JF-17 is the F-16's equal. Today, avionics is a major influence on how an aircraft is designed. Modern avionics allows a considerable amount of 'overbuilt' on how a THEORETICAL aircraft may perform, then can be tuned to fit the actual planforming and construction. Look at the USAF F-117 for example where its flight control avionics came from the F-16. Lockheed made software and hardware adjustments to compensate for the -117's aerodynamic uniqueness. The F-15's avionics was designed to work with mechanical components so it has a less flexible set of flight controls laws built in. The F-16's avionics was designed for a pure FBW/FLCS with theoretical no limits.

what about it's airframe ? i think its crap and and outdated , but what do i know also tell me what airframe changes can we expect from blk 2 ?