Pakistan F-16 Discussions 2

[MastanKhan]

Mastan Khan Saheb,
We are talking about the flying skills and the years of flying experience. Pakistani pilots have far more experience flying F-16s than Singapore pilots. We are not talking about blocks. I have personally witnessed how a highly experienced pilot on an older block can make a blk-52 pilot look bad.

I disagree with your assesment of PAF pilots. Flying techniques that you so casually call tricks, employment of even one can sometime bring success in war theatre. You need to rethink and reevaluate your opinion on facts and not personal opinion.

Hi,.

Thanks for your reply sir. My comments were based on the BLK 52---that is what the singapore air force is using in training with the indians------.

Secondly---at times of war the older BLK with its WVR's won't be any match for the blk 52 with multiple BVR's and a superior fire control radar---which will automatically come with a superior support package.

The different flying techniques that you are talking about will only be good for a few hours of combat---possibly they won't mean much against a superior plane and superior weaponery and superior high end enemy equipment.

It seems like " I will bloody the enemy's nose " concept is still prevailing in the air force mindset. The highly trained pilot cannot be anywhere and everywhere fighting the battles---.

I remember clearly that when the pak pilots were training at Hill AFB in utah in the early 80's---out of all the pilots that trained over there, there was one pak pilot better than the best of the americans or compete with them any given day---one only---rest were good---but anyone could take out the other on a given day.

So---supposedly----PAF has 10 out of this world class pilots---with their out of this world techniques---Mr pshamim----sir----even SUPERMAN and BATMAN couldnot be every where to fight their nemesis.

Flying techniques at that level are pretty much the same---the same trainers---the similiar planes---so what is different----is the individual TRICKS UP THEIR SLEEVES---.

Sir, I don't blame you for fighting for your Alma Mater---but I also don't believe in just fighting the enemy to bloody its nose.

If the enemy has planes of technical superiority---mechanical and weapons wise---has numerical superiority as well---then it purely becomes a numbers game---the lesser of the two will lose.

I am not letting down the pak pilots---it is just what I see.

 

[hataf]

Hi,.

Thanks for your reply sir. My comments were based on the BLK 52---that is what the singapore air force is using in training with the indians------.

Secondly---at times of war the older BLK with its WVR's won't be any match for the blk 52 with multiple BVR's and a superior fire control radar---which will automatically come with a superior support package.

The different flying techniques that you are talking about will only be good for a few hours of combat---possibly they won't mean much against a superior plane and superior weaponery and superior high end enemy equipment.

It seems like " I will bloody the enemy's nose " concept is still prevailing in the air force mindset. The highly trained pilot cannot be anywhere and everywhere fighting the battles---.

I remember clearly that when the pak pilots were training at Hill AFB in utah in the early 80's---out of all the pilots that trained over there, there was one pak pilot better than the best of the americans or compete with them any given day---one only---rest were good---but anyone could take out the other on a given day.

So---supposedly----PAF has 10 out of this world class pilots---with their out of this world techniques---Mr pshamim----sir----even SUPERMAN and BATMAN couldnot be every where to fight their nemesis.

Flying techniques at that level are pretty much the same---the same trainers---the similiar planes---so what is different----is the individual TRICKS UP THEIR SLEEVES---.

Sir, I don't blame you for fighting for your Alma Mater---but I also don't believe in just fighting the enemy to bloody its nose.

If the enemy has planes of technical superiority---mechanical and weapons wise---has numerical superiority as well---then it purely becomes a numbers game---the lesser of the two will lose.

I am not letting down the pak pilots---it is just what I see.

if technology is every thing
and tactics and skills are noting than

just one question why the hell

USAF

is operating a TOP GUN training institute

i think it should be closed
and closed way before

as USAF has the most advance weapon technologies in the world

and this is how i see

 

[MastanKhan]

if technology is every thing
and tactics and skills are noting than

just one question why the hell

USAF

is operating a TOP GUN training institute

i think it should be closed
and closed way before

as USAF has the most advance weapon technologies in the world

and this is how i see

Hi,

I would like you to read what you wrote, again, and think what you wrote.

Whatever technology they have, they practise and train to get better with that technology---they take their skill level to the max with whatever technology they have---.

Topgun is a school where the threshold of quality and performance will keep changing and advancing with the available technology---just like any other school.

Training is training---you train with all your weapons systems----just because they are technologically superior to others doesnot mean that you stop training----and if they are technology inferior to other doesnot mean that you stop training either.

Looking at your analogy---and reversing it----would it suffice to say---that a lots of pakistani schools offer low grade education---so they must not offer any education at all.

 

[Donatello]

if technology is every thing
and tactics and skills are noting than

just one question why the hell

USAF

is operating a TOP GUN training institute

i think it should be closed
and closed way before

as USAF has the most advance weapon technologies in the world

and this is how i see

You can google MIg 29 vs Mig 21.

Soviet pilots who were new to Mig 29 and Pilots who were veterans on Mig21, say the Mig 21 was able to out run, out perform Mig 29 by Hit and run tactics because so early in Mig 29's service, the pilots didn't know the aircraft well.

I mean, Mig 29 was superior in every aspect yet the Mig 21 Pilots from Afghan war saw it as easy to hit and run. Dog fight, yes Mig 21 would lose. But then that's where their experience comes in and they come up with hit and run. I mean in a war it doesn't matter how you shoot the other guy. Where using a BVR missile or just your canon.

Go read about it. It is there on internet. If i have time, i will search and post it here.


A guy with 15 years in F-16 and a guy with 5 years in F-16 don't match up.
A guy with 15 years in F-16 and a guy with 5 years in a Typhoon also don't match up.


It's not just the tactics, nor the technology, but the fact as how one can master their piece of equipment.


For simple example, you can walk into any sports store and buy the equipment that Tiger Woods uses (Yes the exact same one with the exact same dimensions). You can buy the same exact equipment as Rafael Nadal or Roger, but you won't become sporting legends just because you have better equipment. You must know how to use it.

 

[anathema]

Please understand that this is a "FEEL GOOD" story for Indian consumption . The F-16 used by Singapor Air Force have been used in excercises between Singapore and India before. So nothing new.

Fortunately, Pakistan has never shown or shared its flying tactics with Singapore.

My Humble respects to a professional Air force fighter pilot. Rarely do we get a chance to converse with the cream of the society.

However my thoughts on this -- (I am cross posting this from my own post in Indian defence section)

True...but tactics are developed around a machine and not the other way round. There is so much a person can learn about the machine --its strengths , its weakness , etc... Its always better to know something rather than be ignorant....

A classic example -- It is only during these kind of excercises that Americans became aware of Mig 29 ability of HMS and its 45 degree sight....they developed tactics around it --On how to avoid this scenario.....You can be rest assured that Indians too will be writing their experiences and scenarios based on what they found about this machine.

So even though Indian has done excercises with RSAF before -- It really doesnt matter since everytime you go against a aircraft which is not present in your inventory then you inadvertly learn something new about the aircraft from the machine itself or from the pilots.

To further emphasize my point ---->

Pasting a Brief of DACT excercise conducted by USAF -- Its a bit old but a good read...Shows what goes on and what kind of findings the AF comes up with years and years of training....SHows you how important it is to have training with F16..


"During the first training week basic fighter maneuvering, i.e. air combat within visual range, was practiced and the dogfight intensity was gradually built up during the first five days from 1v1 to 2v1, concluding in 2v2 on 26 April. Like many MiG opponents during previous DACT exercises, the Swiss underestimated the Fulcrum's qualities at close range. Like the Hornet, the MiG-29 has great low speed maneuverability,
which allows it to move its nose around in slow-speed fights.
The aircraft's greatest advantage is the AA-11 Archer, a Russian-built infra-red guided missile, which in combination with the pilot's helmet-mounted sight makes the Fulcrum the most feared lethal weapon. This helmet-mounted sight consists of a monocle over the left eye and sensors on helmet and in the cockpit to detect the pilot's head position. Just by looking at the target the pilot can activate a firing solution and the thrust-vectored Archer can be launched up to 45° off the MiG's nose. This superiority is only effective if the enemy is seen as soon as possible.

One of the Fulcrum's disadvantages is the visibility from the cockpit. The Hornet drivers soon realized that the MiG-29 pilots had difficulties 'checking six'. Since an Archer launch includes illuminating the target until impact, the pilot has to keep his head turning towards the target, a very tiresome procedure when performed in heavy G dogfights.

Thirdly, the Fulcrum's cockpit avionics entail considerable workload with a lot of hands-off switches and limited HUD information. When looking inside his cockpit, the MiG-29 pilot is not able to continuously monitor his tactical situation. These elements gave the Hornet drivers the means to tackle the MiG-29's splendid close-range superior performance and partly overcome the Archer off-boresight launch authority.

The Fulcrum's greatest disadvantage was unveiled during the second week, when 4v4 BVR (beyond visual range) 'hops' were performed. Although the MiG-29's radar has a 120° detection capability, only a 50° cone can be used for target detection and tracking. Clearly, this does not give the pilot a good overview of the tactical situation. Since the radar has to be manually steered towards the target's direction,
the pilot greatly depends on GCI information to locate the bogey. During lock-on all other contacts are lost and no target altitude, range or speed information is provided.

The Hornet's low maintenance needs - one flight hour equals about 25 man hours of maintenance work - added to the high operational status throughout the exercise. In this field the German counterparts were in for a challenge, since one MiG-29 flight hour requires no less than 80 man hours of servicing. (!!!!)

Daily many DACT 'hops' were scheduled, averaging to about fourteen MiG-29 sorties per day, but these numbers have to be put into perspective. Each mission comprised a maximum of 25 minutes flying, which unveiled the MiG-29's Achilles heel.

This is a further study
Although the installation of a centerline external fuel tank (EFT) can increase the aircraft's autonomy, this configuration has numerous downsides. Since the EFT blocks the discharge route of spent ammunition casings, the tank has to be jettisoned when using the 30mm cannon. This configuration also limits the aircraft's speed to 1.5 Mach and disables the activation of speed brakes. To partly overcome these problems modifications to seven single-seaters enabled the use of two 300 gal (1150 litre) under wing pylons. This configuration however limits the Fulcrums maneuverability to 4 G turns."


Americans learned these kind of details after years and years and numerous excercises with German , polish pilots.... IAF would be looking to do something similar...I am pretty much sure IAF would be more interested in the plane rather than the tactics employed RSAF...In between based on what i have read...RSAF uses F16 in strike role where as PAF uses them in interceptor role...so tactics are bound to be different.....

 

[razgriz19]

if technology is every thing
and tactics and skills are noting than

just one question why the hell

USAF

is operating a TOP GUN training institute

i think it should be closed
and closed way before

as USAF has the most advance weapon technologies in the world

and this is how i see

LOL btw TOP GUN is a NAVY Fighter Weapons School not USAF!
USAF has a USAF Weapons School and Red Flag exercises in addition to that...
btw dog fighting skills are very important. if a pilot misses its target at BVR range then he has to engage the target at close range..
and so this is why USAF arrange Red Flag exercises so they can practice their skills

 

[razgriz19]

 

[Donatello]

My Humble respects to a professional Air force fighter pilot. Rarely do we get a chance to converse with the cream of the society.

However my thoughts on this -- (I am cross posting this from my own post in Indian defence section)

True...but tactics are developed around a machine and not the other way round. There is so much a person can learn about the machine --its strengths , its weakness , etc... Its always better to know something rather than be ignorant....

A classic example -- It is only during these kind of excercises that Americans became aware of Mig 29 ability of HMS and its 45 degree sight....they developed tactics around it --On how to avoid this scenario.....You can be rest assured that Indians too will be writing their experiences and scenarios based on what they found about this machine.

So even though Indian has done excercises with RSAF before -- It really doesnt matter since everytime you go against a aircraft which is not present in your inventory then you inadvertly learn something new about the aircraft from the machine itself or from the pilots.

To further emphasize my point ---->

Pasting a Brief of DACT excercise conducted by USAF -- Its a bit old but a good read...Shows what goes on and what kind of findings the AF comes up with years and years of training....SHows you how important it is to have training with F16..


"During the first training week basic fighter maneuvering, i.e. air combat within visual range, was practiced and the dogfight intensity was gradually built up during the first five days from 1v1 to 2v1, concluding in 2v2 on 26 April. Like many MiG opponents during previous DACT exercises, the Swiss underestimated the Fulcrum's qualities at close range. Like the Hornet, the MiG-29 has great low speed maneuverability,
which allows it to move its nose around in slow-speed fights.
The aircraft's greatest advantage is the AA-11 Archer, a Russian-built infra-red guided missile, which in combination with the pilot's helmet-mounted sight makes the Fulcrum the most feared lethal weapon. This helmet-mounted sight consists of a monocle over the left eye and sensors on helmet and in the cockpit to detect the pilot's head position. Just by looking at the target the pilot can activate a firing solution and the thrust-vectored Archer can be launched up to 45° off the MiG's nose. This superiority is only effective if the enemy is seen as soon as possible.

One of the Fulcrum's disadvantages is the visibility from the cockpit. The Hornet drivers soon realized that the MiG-29 pilots had difficulties 'checking six'. Since an Archer launch includes illuminating the target until impact, the pilot has to keep his head turning towards the target, a very tiresome procedure when performed in heavy G dogfights.

Thirdly, the Fulcrum's cockpit avionics entail considerable workload with a lot of hands-off switches and limited HUD information. When looking inside his cockpit, the MiG-29 pilot is not able to continuously monitor his tactical situation. These elements gave the Hornet drivers the means to tackle the MiG-29's splendid close-range superior performance and partly overcome the Archer off-boresight launch authority.

The Fulcrum's greatest disadvantage was unveiled during the second week, when 4v4 BVR (beyond visual range) 'hops' were performed. Although the MiG-29's radar has a 120° detection capability, only a 50° cone can be used for target detection and tracking. Clearly, this does not give the pilot a good overview of the tactical situation. Since the radar has to be manually steered towards the target's direction,
the pilot greatly depends on GCI information to locate the bogey. During lock-on all other contacts are lost and no target altitude, range or speed information is provided.

The Hornet's low maintenance needs - one flight hour equals about 25 man hours of maintenance work - added to the high operational status throughout the exercise. In this field the German counterparts were in for a challenge, since one MiG-29 flight hour requires no less than 80 man hours of servicing. (!!!!)

Daily many DACT 'hops' were scheduled, averaging to about fourteen MiG-29 sorties per day, but these numbers have to be put into perspective. Each mission comprised a maximum of 25 minutes flying, which unveiled the MiG-29's Achilles heel.

This is a further study
Although the installation of a centerline external fuel tank (EFT) can increase the aircraft's autonomy, this configuration has numerous downsides. Since the EFT blocks the discharge route of spent ammunition casings, the tank has to be jettisoned when using the 30mm cannon. This configuration also limits the aircraft's speed to 1.5 Mach and disables the activation of speed brakes. To partly overcome these problems modifications to seven single-seaters enabled the use of two 300 gal (1150 litre) under wing pylons. This configuration however limits the Fulcrums maneuverability to 4 G turns."


Americans learned these kind of details after years and years and numerous excercises with German , polish pilots.... IAF would be looking to do something similar...I am pretty much sure IAF would be more interested in the plane rather than the tactics employed RSAF...In between based on what i have read...RSAF uses F16 in strike role where as PAF uses them in interceptor role...so tactics are bound to be different.....

Well, i guess there is a reason why F-16 became a legendary Multi-role aircraft.


Secondly, is it true that 1 hour of flying on MIG 29 needs 80 hours of service? I mean , man that is too much. What does IAF do in this regard?

 

[anathema]

Well, i guess there is a reason why F-16 became a legendary Multi-role aircraft.


Secondly, is it true that 1 hour of flying on MIG 29 needs 80 hours of service? I mean , man that is too much. What does IAF do in this regard?

The article was way back from 1990's era...Mig 29 has since then improved by leaps and bounds !!! All the current Mig 29's are being upgraded (as we speak) to the Mig 29 SMT standard.

 

[anathema]

Plane looks cool with no conformal tanks ....but it loooks real ugly with the conformal tanks on them.....looks bloated and obese!!

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

There is a misconception about 4th 4.5 and 5th generation war birds. The misconeption is due to a lack of understanding or simply not wanting to learn---just being head strong.

These plane are not in-animate objects like golf cubs---when you turn them on---they are living, breathing, vibrating, throbbing, actively scanning their enemies kind of war birds.

These machines are designed not only to kill but also find different ways to kill---look and see the enemy long before the human eye can---recognize the level of threat---the type of threat---the direction of threat---and give a choice of weapons to use against the opponent---it doesnot end there---after the human being pushes the button---these machines then guide or direct the weapon towards the threat----Tiger Woods and Nadal would sign a pact with the DEVIL if their was any chance of their equioment to be active like that.

Can you imagine Tiger Woods golf bag telling Tiger which club to use----plan the strength factor in the shot and during flight of te ball----the ball may change direction to focus on the target----it won't happen----clubs and rackets are life less pieces of metal / guts---like th F 86----but even the F 86 had a computerized gun control---.

Now as to the age of training----if given the same equipment----a 15 years trained pilot will have some advantage over the 5 years trained on same equipment----but then give one of the equipment better brains, better eyesight, and a longer punch---the 15 years olf training ill bite the dust most of the times.

The example given about the Mig 29 and Mig 21 is not really workable here in our scenario---.

Our scenario is different---the monster we are facing has 8 arms that reach beyond the range of any that we own---it has eyesight and vision far beyond what ours can see---it can stay in air hours longer than ours---it has a support package bigger, better and higher in technology than ours---it has more room to play and maneavouer than us.

It has a different strategy than ours---ours is that of engage and destroy at closer ranges---theirs is that of shoot and scoot from a distance---.

The pilot can only do so much in todays combat with a 2nds and 3rd generation machine when facing a higher gen fighter---even though pilot skills are neccessary---the better weapons system will act as an APHRODISIAC for its pilot---give it a euphoria of power and strength and extra courage and confidence over his skills.

Whereas Tiger Woods and Nadal will have to shake of the jitters in their nerves and thinks of thing other than what is happening in their personal lives----similiarly the pilots with less capable machines will be riding into the combat with uncertainity.

During the first gulf war---the U S downed some iraqi planes with the phoenix BVR missiles----the iraqi pilots in question---THEY NEVER EVEN KNEW WHEN THEY DIED----forget about knowing about the missile launch and tracking the incoming bvr---.

Pleas donot forget the MULTIPLIER EFFECT of force and intelligent decision making from one generation to the next.

 

[Luftwaffe]

Ah reminds me of Combat Commanders School (an impressive name and work)

 

[dbc]

Thanks. Comparing the RSAF with Pakistan is a joke.

Interesting comment, care to elaborate?

 

[SBD-3]

The article was way back from 1990's era...Mig 29 has since then improved by leaps and bounds !!! All the current Mig 29's are being upgraded (as we speak) to the Mig 29 SMT standard.

?????????????? I didn't know much about it....cuz as per my perspective if it were to be able to keep pace with the challenges. Most of AF would not be thinking about replacing their fulcrums

 

[anathema]

?????????????? I didn't know much about it....cuz as per my perspective if it were to be able to keep pace with the challenges. Most of AF would not be thinking about replacing their fulcrums

Can you be more specific. Which Airforce are you talking about ?