Pakistan F-16 Discussions 2

[syed_yusuf]

Any chance F-16 can carry more than 6 AAM's?

As far as i know, PAF doesnt have any aircraft that can carry more than 6 AAM's in air, and i find this alarming.

Why is this alarming??

 

[Signalian]

Why is this alarming??

A single SU 30 can carry upto 8-10 AAM.
A single Rafale can carry upto 8-10 AAM.

4 X SU30 can carry 32-40 AAM. 4 X Rafale can carry 32-40 AAM. Total missiles carried by 8 aircrafts = 64-80.
VS
4 X F-16 can carry 24 AAM. 4 X JF-17 can carry 24 AAM. Total missiles carried by 8 aircrafts = 48.

In order to match this scenario, PAF will need to put more aircraft in air unless JF-17 uses MER (Multiple ejector Rack) which supports AAM. Is MER for JF-17 in use?

Now my confusion was F-16 Load out.This is a diagram from F-16.net

It shows F-16 carrying 8 AAM , the extra 2 AAM on stations 7A and 3A.

But stations 3A/7A vs. 3/7 are confusing.

Stations 3 and 7 are the air to ground station electrical/mechanical interface where the wing weapons pylon mounts.

Stations 3A and 7A have an electrical interface at a different location (under the flap seal) for air to air missiles, with a second set of mechanical interface for the under wing adaptor, which supports the LAU-129 or 16S210 (AIM-9) launcher.

This takes us to the LAU-127, LAU-128 and LAU-129 launchers. All these launchers support AIM-9 and Aim-120.
http://www.marvingroup.com/images/uploads/documents/MRL_Flyer_-_Final_Draft.pdf

Correct me if im wrong, my understanding is, either station 3 and 7 OR station 3A and 7A can be utilised at a single time. I have not seen PAF F-16's carrying 8 AAM.
.

 

[Shabi1]

A single SU 30 can carry upto 8-10 AAM.
A single Rafale can carry upto 8-10 AAM.

4 X SU30 can carry 32-40 AAM. 4 X Rafale can carry 32-40 AAM. Total missiles carried by 8 aircrafts = 64-80.
VS
4 X F-16 can carry 24 AAM. 4 X JF-17 can carry 24 AAM. Total missiles carried by 8 aircrafts = 48.

In order to match this scenario, PAF will need to put more aircraft in air unless JF-17 uses MER (Multiple ejector Rack) which supports AAM. Is MER for JF-17 in use?

Now my confusion was F-16 Load out.This is a diagram from F-16.net

View attachment 357467

It shows F-16 carrying 8 AAM , the extra 2 AAM on stations 7A and 3A.

But stations 3A/7A vs. 3/7 are confusing.

Stations 3 and 7 are the air to ground station electrical/mechanical interface where the wing weapons pylon mounts.

Stations 3A and 7A have an electrical interface at a different location (under the flap seal) for air to air missiles, with a second set of mechanical interface for the under wing adaptor, which supports the LAU-129 or 16S210 (AIM-9) launcher.

This takes us to the LAU-127, LAU-128 and LAU-129 launchers. All these launchers support AIM-9 and Aim-120.
http://www.marvingroup.com/images/uploads/documents/MRL_Flyer_-_Final_Draft.pdf

Correct me if im wrong, my understanding is, either station 3 and 7 OR station 3A and 7A can be utilised at a single time. I have not seen PAF F-16's carrying 8 AAM.
.

Air combat strategy is not like video games. If it were the case all air forces needed were cargo planes modified for missile delivery truck role. Aircraft don't carry full loads in air superiority roles, those are marketing photo shoots. They lose maneuverability and range.

Russian military strategy has been to fire multiple missiles at single targets from a very long range thats why they were built to carry more missiles. Greater the distance, lower the hit probability. For western aircraft it has been more single shot at a time at medium range. However another factor in a Pak vs India scenario is since both airforces have aircrafts with updated electronics they will be jamming each other, putting a question mark on BVR engagement reliability. My own personal opinion is since both sides will be fielding jamming capability, the effective missiles will be IR WVR.

If going by missile truck logic, the most innovative solution would be modifying K-8 AWACs to carry/guide China's MACH6 300km AA missile.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

The missile carrige capability will self resolve over years with greater induction of Newer blocks and higher numbers for JF17 thunder

The present technology onboard is sufficient to take out those 8 Intruding jets easily with minimal effort

 

[Signalian]

Air combat strategy is not like video games. If it were the case all air forces needed were cargo planes modified for missile delivery truck role. Aircraft don't carry full loads in air superiority roles, those are marketing photo shoots. They lose maneuverability and range.

Russian military strategy has been to fire multiple missiles at single targets from a very long range thats why they were built to carry more missiles. Greater the distance, lower the hit probability. For western aircraft it has been more single shot at a time at medium range. However another factor in a Pak vs India scenario is since both airforces have aircrafts with updated electronics they will be jamming each other, putting a question mark on BVR engagement reliability. My own personal opinion is since both sides will be fielding jamming capability, the effective missiles will be IR WVR.

If going by missile truck logic, the most innovative solution would be modifying K-8 AWACs to carry/guide China's MACH6 300km AA missile.

Thanks for your post but still doesnt help, no advantage for PAF.

 

[araz]

Thanks for your post but still doesnt help, no advantage for PAF.

There will never be an advantage in numbers or even technology for PAF. The adversary has more buying power and will continue to field better hardware. However war is not JUST about better hardware. It is multi faceted and involves training and discipline of personnel. What we have continues to provide us a critical deterrent value which makes an incursion so expensive that the victory at the end would not be worth the effort.
We cannot and must not engage with India on numbers game. However we can only improve the quality of our personnel and armaments as they become available to us.
A

 

[Raider 21]

 

[Imran Khan]

View attachment 357655

any details of this pic sir? as i know 84710 is MLUed

 

[Raider 21]

any details of this pic sir? as i know 84710 is MLUed

This was at Highmark 2010

 

[Swordfish]

Wanted to know what is the percentage of availabilities of pak fighter aircrafts at any given point of time. Hope it's not a silly question.

 

[Storm Force]

My own personal opinion is since both sides will be fielding jamming capability, the effective missiles will be IR WVR.

I 100% agree that BVR kill probability is too low to be useful . I was reading beyond 50km kill probability drops to 10% which will require ten missles to down one plane.

IF WVR and medium range up to say 40km remains the key for IAF/PAF then the Indians have a hugh advantage.

In this type of warefare HMD/HMS and TVC engines are absolutely crucial.

The Indians have HMD/HMS on all 4 front line fighters ie SU30MKI /MIG29/MIRAHE2000/5 even LCA

In contrast the only HMS/HMD in PAF is on the new BLOCK 52 F16 ie nothing on Thunder or BLOCK 15 falcons.

Furthermore TVC engines means su30mki angle of engagement is double that of any plane.

IN A WVR CAMPAIGN IAF will beat PAF easily with bigger fleet , more HMS/HMD equipped planes and TVC engines

 

[TOPGUN]

I 100% agree that BVR kill probability is too low to be useful . I was reading beyond 50km kill probability drops to 10% which will require ten missles to down one plane.

IF WVR and medium range up to say 40km remains the key for IAF/PAF then the Indians have a hugh advantage.

In this type of warefare HMD/HMS and TVC engines are absolutely crucial.

The Indians have HMD/HMS on all 4 front line fighters ie SU30MKI /MIG29/MIRAHE2000/5 even LCA

In contrast the only HMS/HMD in PAF is on the new BLOCK 52 F16 ie nothing on Thunder or BLOCK 15 falcons.

Furthermore TVC engines means su30mki angle of engagement is double that of any plane.

IN A WVR CAMPAIGN IAF will beat PAF easily with bigger fleet , more HMS/HMD equipped planes and TVC engines

Once again all mighty storm force holds the crystal ball and knows all the out comes of war please inform top brass of IAF and PAF !!

 

[Shabi1]

Seem pictures of PAF F-16 AM/BM with pilot wearing HMDs similar to Block-52. So that is a capability they now have too.

 

[Dazzler]

I 100% agree that BVR kill probability is too low to be useful . I was reading beyond 50km kill probability drops to 10% which will require ten missles to down one plane.

IF WVR and medium range up to say 40km remains the key for IAF/PAF then the Indians have a hugh advantage.

In this type of warefare HMD/HMS and TVC engines are absolutely crucial.

The Indians have HMD/HMS on all 4 front line fighters ie SU30MKI /MIG29/MIRAHE2000/5 even LCA

In contrast the only HMS/HMD in PAF is on the new BLOCK 52 F16 ie nothing on Thunder or BLOCK 15 falcons.

Furthermore TVC engines means su30mki angle of engagement is double that of any plane.

IN A WVR CAMPAIGN IAF will beat PAF easily with bigger fleet , more HMS/HMD equipped planes and TVC engines

keep the trash out of this thread. You have been warned multiple times so take heed of things to come while you can.

 

[airmarshal]

any details of this pic sir? as i know 84710 is MLUed

If you dont see IFF antenna, the four short stubs in front of canopy glass, its not MLUed. They are also called 'bird cutter' antenna.