Pakistan's New F-16 Block 52 vs SU 30 MKI.

[Jigs]

I don't think you understood my post. I am not saying the Pakistani pilots are better equip the SU-30 MKI is a better aircraft. I am saying they are better trained and skilled. Even TuAF pilots have said the Pakistani pilots were very good at our Anatolian eagle.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

That is grossly incorrect. PAF pilots are undertaking active sorties in FATA region for war against terror. I guess you have not seen videos. For whatever is worth PAF has fired more shots in anger than IAF in the millenium. And also please dont make statements such as these -- you loose credibility , put forward some logical points if you need to debate.

Just to mention... PAF also shot down up to 10 soviet/afgan aircrafts in 80s and in 2002 one IAF UAV was also shot down.

 

[xMustiiej70]

F16's can carry b61 nuclear bombs.
and carry SLAM-ER!
how 'bout that.

 

[satishkumarcsc]

F16's can carry b61 nuclear bombs.
and carry SLAM-ER!
how 'bout that.

Nope, Not the Pakistani F 16s.

 

[Trichy]

F16's can carry b61 nuclear bombs.
and carry SLAM-ER!
how 'bout that.

who give them the B61 NB???? Even CT they got with the new ones only

 

[Creder]

I think he is talking about they Turkish F16s and yes the turkish ones have B61 TNB

About PAF F16s they might have a chineese variant, i'll pass this one onto taimikhan

And slam-er again turkish F16s have em

 

[Trichy]

I think he is talking about they Turkish F16s and yes the turkish ones have B61 TNB

About PAF F16s they might have a chineese variant, i'll pass this one onto taimikhan

And slam-er again turkish F16s have em

ya they have 40 B61 TNB under weapon Sharing program.

B61 aren't missiles, they're free-fall bombs to be strapped under F-16 or Tornados.

NATO nuclear sharing
Main article: Nuclear sharing
As of 2009, Turkey is one of five NATO member states which are part of the nuclear sharing policy of the alliance, together with Belgium, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands. A total of 90 B61 nuclear bombs are hosted at the Incirlik Air Base, 40 of which are allocated for use by the Turkish Air Force

The partners can not use the weapons unilaterally, got to get the arming codes from the USA first every time. The weapons themselves are also guarded by both sides, with an inner ring of US guards protecting and maintaining the bombs themselves, and the host nation (Turkey, Germany etc) providing an outer ring of further security guards.

The respective host nation airforces train the dropping of these tactical nukes with dummies (at least the German Airforce does).

The bombs continue to be owned by the USA, the host nations only maintain the "carriers".

The codes are pretty much only given out when the ICBMs have already started flying. And the US personnel will arm the missiles themselves. Pretty much the only thing the host nation does is, once the bomb is loaded onto the aircraft, to fly it to its target and drop it.

 

[TOPGUN]

Iam sure PAF f-16's have been modifed when needed to carry nukes it has been talked about alot in the past the west etc.. please do read up on it people.

 

[satishkumarcsc]

Iam sure PAF f-16's have been modifed when needed to carry nukes it has been talked about alot in the past the west etc.. please do read up on it people.

No, the EUMA prevents it. The PAF uses Mirage to carry their N bomb.

 

[TaimiKhan]

No, the EUMA prevents it. The PAF uses Mirage to carry their N bomb.

At the time, opposition to the sale of F-16s centered on Islamabad’s possible use of the aircraft as a primary means to deliver nuclear weapons.

Initially, the George H.W. Bush Administration argued that the aircraft, as delivered, were not “nuclear capable” and that Pakistan could not modify its F-16s to deliver nuclear weapons. In 1989, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Arthur Hughes testified:

In order to deliver a nuclear device with any reasonable degree of accuracy and safety, it first would be necessary to replace the entire wiring package in the aircraft. In addition to building a weapons carriage mount, one would also have to re-do the fire control computer, the stores management system, and mission computer software to allow the weapon to be dropped accurately and to redistribute weight and balance after release. We believe this capability far exceeds the state of the art in Pakistan and could only be accomplished with a major release of data and industrial equipment from the U.S.

Press reports, including articles in Der Spiegel and U.S. News & World Report, however, suggested that Pakistan was busily doing precisely what Hughes said it could not—reconfiguring its F-16s to carry nuclear weapons. Senator Glenn asked DCI Robert Gates about these press reports in 1992:

SEN. GLENN: How about delivery systems? Is there any evidence that Pakistan converted F-16s for possible nuclear delivery use?

MR. GATES: We know that they are—or we have information that suggests that they’re clearly interested in enhancing the ability of the F-16 to deliver weapons safely. But we don’t really have—they don’t require those changes, I don’t think, to deliver a weapon. We could perhaps provide some additional detail in a classified manner.

Asked the same question, Gates’ successor, R. James Woolsey, also deferred to closed session.

Now—thanks to the wonders of FOIA—we know the White House told Congress that US intelligence believed Pakistan had reconfigured its F-16 fleet to deliver nuclear weapons.

The National Security Council submitted a Report to Congress on Status of China, India and Pakistan Nuclear and Ballistic Missile Programs to the House Foreign Affairs Committee on or before July 28, 1993. Obtained by the Federation of American Scientists, the NSC report concludes that “Pakistan probably would rely on its F-16 fighters” to deliver its small nuclear arsenal.

(The New York Times obtained Woolsey’s replies to questions by the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, which also affirm “Our best judgment right now would be [that Pakistan would use] the F-16’s” to deliver nuclear weapons.)

http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/index.php?id=499


We can deliver nukes with the F-16s, Mirages and A-5s.

 

[satishkumarcsc]

At the time, opposition to the sale of F-16s centered on Islamabad’s possible use of the aircraft as a primary means to deliver nuclear weapons.

Initially, the George H.W. Bush Administration argued that the aircraft, as delivered, were not “nuclear capable” and that Pakistan could not modify its F-16s to deliver nuclear weapons. In 1989, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Arthur Hughes testified:

In order to deliver a nuclear device with any reasonable degree of accuracy and safety, it first would be necessary to replace the entire wiring package in the aircraft. In addition to building a weapons carriage mount, one would also have to re-do the fire control computer, the stores management system, and mission computer software to allow the weapon to be dropped accurately and to redistribute weight and balance after release. We believe this capability far exceeds the state of the art in Pakistan and could only be accomplished with a major release of data and industrial equipment from the U.S.

Press reports, including articles in Der Spiegel and U.S. News & World Report, however, suggested that Pakistan was busily doing precisely what Hughes said it could not—reconfiguring its F-16s to carry nuclear weapons. Senator Glenn asked DCI Robert Gates about these press reports in 1992:

SEN. GLENN: How about delivery systems? Is there any evidence that Pakistan converted F-16s for possible nuclear delivery use?

MR. GATES: We know that they are—or we have information that suggests that they’re clearly interested in enhancing the ability of the F-16 to deliver weapons safely. But we don’t really have—they don’t require those changes, I don’t think, to deliver a weapon. We could perhaps provide some additional detail in a classified manner.

Asked the same question, Gates’ successor, R. James Woolsey, also deferred to closed session.

Now—thanks to the wonders of FOIA—we know the White House told Congress that US intelligence believed Pakistan had reconfigured its F-16 fleet to deliver nuclear weapons.

The National Security Council submitted a Report to Congress on Status of China, India and Pakistan Nuclear and Ballistic Missile Programs to the House Foreign Affairs Committee on or before July 28, 1993. Obtained by the Federation of American Scientists, the NSC report concludes that “Pakistan probably would rely on its F-16 fighters” to deliver its small nuclear arsenal.

(The New York Times obtained Woolsey’s replies to questions by the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, which also affirm “Our best judgment right now would be [that Pakistan would use] the F-16’s” to deliver nuclear weapons.)

ArmsControlWonk: F-16s to Pakistan


We can deliver nukes with the F-16s, Mirages and A-5s.

It is still not proven as of yet that PAF has rewired the F 16s for Nuclear launch capability. The PAF will rely heavily ofn Mirage and JF 17 for these strikes.

 

[TaimiKhan]

It is still not proven as of yet that PAF has rewired the F 16s for Nuclear launch capability. The PAF will rely heavily ofn Mirage and JF 17 for these strikes.

What else you and other out there don't know about PAF & its capabilities ??

Why it has to be proven ??

Do remember, the guys who have been mentioned above know more then us, that is why they are giving such statements, as they have info, that was the reason the CIA guy asked for a close door session to give a proper ans.

Did you or the world knew when Babur Cruise missile was gonna come up ?? Or Ra'ad ALCM ?? Or even other missile systems ??

Does the world or you know we have Plutonium based nukes, is a nuke test compulsory to prove it to you or others ??

Same used to be said that Pakistan was bluffing on having nukes, but we did the bang and it was proven.

Sometimes such things are deliberately kept secret for many reasons.

PAF and its engineers have very good capacity and capability if it comes to that.

But if you guys wish to be in denial, that is good.

 

[hataf]

It is still not proven as of yet that PAF has rewired the F 16s for Nuclear launch capability. The PAF will rely heavily ofn Mirage and JF 17 for these strikes.

is it that hard to do the wiring.
we have f-16 for more than 2 decades and you think that we still not yet mastered it.

but as per your media

now my question is if we are capable of modifying the harpoon

does this means that we have modified the f-16's?????

now its not me its your media

 

[SBD-3]

I think he is talking about they Turkish F16s and yes the turkish ones have B61 TNB

About PAF F16s they might have a chineese variant, i'll pass this one onto taimikhan

And slam-er again turkish F16s have em

PAF will have slammers.....and PAF F-16s don't need to carry "bombs" now. Raa'd is Nuke capable ALCM. PAF mirages are already compatible with Raa'd. and PAF will get slam'ers as a weapons package with BL-52.

 

[satishkumarcsc]

is it that hard to do the wiring.
we have f-16 for more than 2 decades and you think that we still not yet mastered it.

but as per your media

YouTube - Pak misusing US aid, weapons for Indian targets


now my question is if we are capable of modifying the harpoon

now you think that we have not yet modified the f-16's

I never denied you mastering it. But have you done it in an F 16 is the question. If you can do it on a Mirage or A5 why cant you do it in an F 16?