RAFALE VS F-16 BLOCK52+

[guest11]

the rafale is a niche toy, the EF is underdeveloped and the europeans hope the indians will buy it to finance tranche 3 which is going to be what the plane was always supposed to be.
The F-18 is a fantastic package as is the Grippen

but :
The F-16 is and will be for sometime the top dog .

it is the do it all plane, an air force with F-16s has a capable air defence as well as strike force

is it fast check
is it agile check
is it a good interceptor/dogfighter check
is it a good bomber / check check
is it reliable / check check check
does it carry lots of available weapons readily ? / check check

is it small enough to support/carry/ fit in current bases and shelters / check

does it have good avionics / check
good radar / check

easy to fly / check

good support by LM / check check



i think the list is too long to carry on .. when you have to build an airforce these are the kind of things you may want to look at, not which plane offers more on paper..

the rafale is a lot younger than the F16 and in the article it clearly showed that it was marginally better (or none at all if you count the fact that shots were counted differently) .. and it costs 3-4 times as much if you count maintanance & infastructure as well...
would you really want to invest that much ???

I don't understand the fuss about the Rafale vs Blk 60, both are good fighters. But FYI, overall F-16 would have been a "not so good option". You are right when you mentioned the above points but what about the following.

1) Infrastructure and maintenance for Mirage already exists so not much change will be required for Rafale.

2) Mirage is arguably is the most capable strike fighter IAF ever operated.

3) 25 years of experience (including combat) on Mirage 2000, which at the time of it's induction was as capable as F-16.

4) Probability of partnership with Dassault on upcoming projects.

For F-16

1) New Infrastructure required.

2) Extra training as IAF never operated any American fighter.

3) Reluctance in sharing technology.

4) Clauses like CISMOA.

5) Prone to sanctions.

Now take your time and decide whether Rafale is a better option or not.

 

[PoKeMon]

says who?

every army carries the sword that suits it.. not arbirtrary "best weapons"

That very much end the purpose of the thread.
But what if I could afford only mig21 but a F 22 would suit me well??
Does that make mig comparable to F 22?
All the fighters discussed were on the table for India and MOD simply goes for the best one.
Rafale and Ef is a choice not a compromise.

 

[amalakas]

That very much end the purpose of the thread.
But what if I could afford only mig21 but a F 22 would suit me well??
Does that make mig comparable to F 22?
All the fighters discussed were on the table for India and MOD simply goes for the best one.
Rafale and Ef is a choice not a compromise.

if you can only afford MiG 21s perhaps you can afford fewer better planes. or you can upgrade them to do the job that suits your "army"

ofcourse rafale and ef are choices and ofcourse noone forced iaf to make that choice.

I was merely pointing out that the F16 (or any other plane for that matter) is not washed out simply because a new kid is on the block.

 

[PoKeMon]

ofcourse rafale and ef are choices and ofcourse noone forced iaf to make that choice.

I was merely pointing out that the F16 (or any other plane for that matter) is not washed out simply because a new kid is on the block.

I agrees.

 

[500]

unfortunately, due to disputes with the manufacturers of the system, the self protection suit of the haf F-16s has not been officially accepted.

I think hence not used.

Thanks.

F -16 IN >>>>>>> F- 16 Block 52+
F -18 >>>>>>>>> F -16 IN
And India rejected both on the left side and choose Rafale, hence Rafale > F 18 >>F 16 Block 52+
Was that so tough to understand????

Rafale with AESA (which India will get if selected) >>>>>>> Rafale with PESA

 

[deckingraj]

Ok so you are looking for some detailed analysis which we have already gone through in hundreds of pages in MMRCA thread.
Let us revise again--------
1. India has no constraint on cost and was looking for best in business fighter.
2. No political pressure, otherwise U.S would have win hands down but thats not the case.
3. Extensive test of performance.

What make you think that MOD will go for any lesser capable air craft? It it has choosen Rafale its surely beats rest of the others.
Technical aspects has been discussed to death.

What i mean is that the rejection of F-16 and F-18 don't make them lesser planes...The biggest reason for their rejection was the baggage they carry with them....Not once did i say they are better than Rafael or vice versa....

 

[SpArK]

Rafale's HUD cam footage of locking up the F-16s @ Nellis

 

[sancho]

the rafale is a lot younger than the F16 and in the article it clearly showed that it was marginally better (or none at all if you count the fact that shots were counted differently) .. and it costs 3-4 times as much if you count maintanance & infastructure as well...
would you really want to invest that much ???

But the article was talking about Rafale F1, only A2A capable, with limited radar and avionic modes. The results from the dogfights in the US, before Red Flag were Rafale F2, with full FSO and SPECTRA capabilities as well multi role capable. In the Cruzex V in Brazil this year, French forces send latest Rafale F3, where it was fielded against US and Chilean F16s as well:

This media expectation is perfectly understandable", says the head of 1/91" Gascogne". Cruzex allowed the Rafale to demonstrate the range of its capabilities. With 100% missions acomplished ,refuelling done , ground targets destroyed and no aircraft lost, its record was impressive.The versatility and performances of the omnirole aircraft commanded admiration from everyone. "I've been able to notice that while I was flying on the backseat of one of our F-16s", told the General MacNamara, chief of the Chilean detachment. "We have been beaten during a simulated air combat, while this is the strongpoint of our aircraft. It was impressive."

The Rafale offers pretty much what the F16 offers as well, true medium class muti role capabilities, but like you said it is more modern and therfor also more advanced. Btw, the Eurocanards in general are said to have very good results against F16s in air combats.

 

[deckingraj]

the highlighted part say it all In one thread you people are suggesting Pakistan should not treat India as enemy number 1. By doing so it is just destroying itself and in other you people suggest that we should counter each and every move India makes. Always going anti-parallel is not a strategy or a plan that can run your country. We are inducting JF17, Block 52's, AWACS, refuellers to modernize our Air force so that it can deal with all the threats not just ENEMY NO 1 India

i doubt EF or Rafeal coming in 5 years. No need to be panic. J-10B is maturing. Lets us see what it can offer. If not up to the mark then go for something else

Dude no matter how peaceful times look one don't want to compromise on defense....So yes Pakistan do need to improve her economy and cannot match India weapon by weapon but will always have to keep responding to the emerging threats in the best possible manner

 

[Army Strong]

How's this a comparison?, someone please explain to me.

 

[Army Strong]

if that would have been the case Rafale would have been in use of many countries but countries still prefer F-16

Zarvan comment, if you know what you're talking about. Marketing an aircraft is very different than it's combat capabalities. Rafale is not better still against EF in air supremacy missions. Rafale was introduced much later, after the F-16 was sold to several countries. Countries that prefer F-16's are countries that relatively prefer, simple, user-friendly, and at an affordable price. Please...this thread must be closed, it's pointless.

 

[Laughing_soldier]

India rejected F-16IN in favour of Rafale so why compare with block 52? The Rafale in the comparison is different from MRCA Rafale.

AESA RBE2
SPECTRA

 

[Manticore]

this thread isnt intended to become an ugly vs thread-- rather ive translated what the article has said and the rest of the 3 posts in the beginning are not by me, rather the pilots of the 2 airforces-- qouted from the sites of the 2 airforces.

another aspect is the model of rafale in these exercises, Rafale M(marine) F1(T1) ------ one has to consider the indian version before jumping to conclusion-and the lack of RWR in greek blk52s- ofcourse the amraams and awacs would also have to be factored in the equation.

 

[Manticore]

In US exercise over 10000 sq km Rafale beat F 16 blk 52 6-2 without the use of active jamming.

Rafale F2 vs F-16 Blk52 , 6-2 on the 1st day

A little bit of reality checking to dispel Bluewings' usual fiction:

The F-16 unit in question is the 309th FS from Luke AFB. They fly the F-16C/D Block 25, not the Block 52. These are not even CCIP aircraft, much less Block 52 level. They are the oldest F-16s in US service with the weakest thrust to weight ratio and the oldest systems. The only units that still fly the 25 are ANG and training units.

The fighting is entirely WVR, so things like Spectra and radars don't really come into play. There is no comparison of radars and all the nonsense about "discret" airplanes and inferior PESA radars is irrelevant.

The pilots in the article clearly explain how the exercise works. The two aircraft fly out together, separate but remain in visual range, and then go for the merge. It's strictly classic dogfighting. Note that the air to air component is just one part of this exercise. The goal of the Rafales is to learn to work with the USAF in preparation for Red Flag here, so the Rafales will also be taking part in joint air to ground missions and the like.

To be honest I would have expected an aircraft like the Rafale with its vaunted dogfighting capabilities to suffer zero losses. Considering we're talking about geriatric F-16s built in 1984 against airframes that are 20 years newer, I'm not impressed.

The 309th Fighter Squadron flies F-16 C/D Block 25. Here are the specific aircraft it operates. Some units at Luke do fly the Block 42, but the 309th does not. The aircraft and pilots involved are all from the 309th.

The Block 25 is a far cry from the current standard in USAF combat-coded F-16s. As I said earlier, only the ANG and the AETC (Air Education and Training Command, of which the 309th is a part) use the Block 25 -- it is not in frontline units. The Block 25 has an early version of the APG-68, no signature reduction measures, a weak engine compared to later blocks but just as much weight, and no JHMCS or any other CCIP features. It would be interesting to see WVR between a Block 50, which does have AIM-9X and JHMCS, with a Rafale, but this did not take place. Those Rafales were fighting 1984-standard F-16Cs.

The exercise in question is most definitely a preamble to Red Flag, it is the only reason for it. From the the AdA press release:

C'est parti pour un mois d'exercice aux Etats-Unis ! En préambule à l'exercice «Red Flag» qui se déroulera sur la base aérienne de Nellis (Nevada) du 11 au 22 août 2008, l'escadron 1/7 «Provence» est actuellement en échange sur la base de Luke (Arizona), auprès du 309th Fighter Squadron, escadron de chasse équipé de F16.

...
Cette phase initiale correspond à un «warm up» ou préparation à «Red Flag». Elle a pour objectif de confronter les compétences opérationnelles et tactiques de nos équipages au savoir-faire des pilotes américains et d'éprouver leurs méthodes d'entraînement dans un environnement dense, représentatif des théâtres d'opérations actuels.

My translation:

And off we go for a month of exercises in the U.S! As a preamble to the "Red Flag" exercises which will take place of Nellis (Nevada) from 11 to 22 August 2008, 1/7 Squadron "Provence" is currently in deployed to Luke Air Force Base (Arizona), hosted by the 309th Fighter Squadron, a squadron equipped with the F-16.

This initial phase represents a "warm up" or preparation for "Red Flag". Its objective is to pit the operational and tactical competencies of our pilots to against the know-how of the Americans, and to experience their training methods in a dense environment representative of current tactical theaters of operation.

This has nothing to do with the USAF wanting to "evaluate" the Rafale for anything beyond making sure the unit, its planes and crews are ready for Red Flag. It is "special" to the extent that Rafales have never operated (intentionally) from a U.S. base before, so getting them used to the environment is a basic requirement so that they can be productive in the actual Red Flag exercise. That's all there is to it.

So, once again, congratulations to the Rafale crews for achieving a reasonably good kill ratio against geriatric opponents. As I said, personally I would be concerned that the results were not more one-sided.

some correction on that very page--

 

[MastanKhan]

if that would have been the case Rafale would have been in use of many countries but countries still prefer F-16

Sir,

That is not the reason---rafael is an extremely superior aircraft----the problem with the french is that they don't have the american car salesman mentality as the american defence industry has----.

First---the french are arrogant in their deal making----they don't have the mental capacity to make a deal----they lack the power of negotiation----they don't understand the concept of ' getting your foot in the door ' type of business dealing----. Right from the gitgo---they want to start high---with a complete package deal of maximum equipment----.

It shows ---that they were not able to sell their biggest user of mirage aircraft---pakistan---their aircraft---. A rafael would have been an excellent choice for pak air force if the french were willing to talk.