Used F16's - EDA 50 ~ 100 Available

[ghazi768]

indeed india is due to get the first batch by 2019 the earliest the jf-17 blk 3 would be entering serve by then and the dual seated already inducted.
i heard the dual seater is already made and has/is undergoing tests. i have a strange feeling we will see at the paris airshow later this year along with fc-31 pt-3. with 6 internal hard points.
with the way the fgfa it going it wont see indian service post 2025 and the amca post 2030.

Yes, I concur with you. Comparisons between jets is fine but I think that one point that had not yet been mentioned in here much is that the main reason for IAF to quickly acquire a small batch of Rafales may not be air-superiority or defence. There M2K based strike capability may be quite degraded now for various reasons, and Su-30 based super-sonic ALCMs , once inducted, may provide numbers but certainly not surprise. Rafales with SCALPs allow them to match what we have (in terms of tactical strikes) and is a grave risk in terms of ability to make surprise strikes while remaining inside their own territory, mostly. It will force PAF/Army to divert a sizeable fund to acquiring more point defence systems probably cannon based as well.

 

[el nino]

indeed india is due to get the first batch by 2019 the earliest the jf-17 blk 3 would be entering serve by then and the dual seated already inducted.
i heard the dual seater is already made and has/is undergoing tests. i have a strange feeling we will see at the paris airshow later this year along with fc-31 pt-3. with 6 internal hard points.
with the way the fgfa it going it wont see indian service post 2025 and the amca post 2030.

The is a simple reason why Rafale F3 costs $100m each without weapons
The plane is absolutely world class
Be it the RBE2 Aesa Radar which is the best radar in the world outside of USA Aesa systems
The spectra electroinicwarefare suite which jams everything in the air and the ground within 50km
The mica & meteore BVR missles
Or the new generation crystal blade twin engines
SIMPLY adding a working Aesa and stretched BVR on a single engine smallfighter like thunders..... if that actualky happens in 3 years is not going to the bridge the gap of either the rafale or a Typhoon class fighter.

These euro canards are bigger more powerful birds with late fouth generation technology from A TO Z,

You correct about IAF not getting FGFA for decade,

But the simple reason is all of india,s effort are being challenged into
rafale purchase @ $8 billion
Super MKI upgrade costing@ over $10 billion lasting a decade
Finallly induction of 123 Tejas mk1/1 @ $5 billion

They have no other funds left .........

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Thanks but we'll go our way.. and prefer carrying an SD-10 than an RVV-AE..

One could try buying the MiG-29M/M2/35 with just the airframes and engines, and then have their own selection of radar, avionics, EW/ECM and weapons.

 

[ghazi768]

One could try buying the MiG-29M/M2/35 with just the airframes and engines, and then have their own selection of radar, avionics, EW/ECM and weapons.

I am afraid that the issue is with the air-frame actually, it is very draggy. To be honest, I do not have any exact numbers but I heard that it was most probably thrice the F-16s. US guys got a chance to fly it right along side their F-15s while testing decrease of speed with AOA, it was said to be slightly better than F-15 while on dry thrust. But F-15s have monsters of engines once you hit those after-burners.

If we ever really need to induct a twin engined one, Su-35 is a far better option.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

I am afraid that the issue is with the air-frame actually, it is very draggy. To be honest, I do not have any exact numbers but I heard that it was most probably thrice the F-16s. US guys got a chance to fly it right along side their F-15s while testing decrease of speed with AOA, it was said to be slightly better than F-15 while on dry thrust. But F-15s have monsters of engines once you hit those after-burners.

The MiG-29M/M2 id actually a different variant
It incorporates structural changes to the legacy MiG-29s the US flew/flew against, e.g. increased payload, increased fuel capacity, FBW, lower RCS, etc. Paired with the RD-33MK, the M/M2/35 are also cheaper to fly compared to the legacy MiG-29s.

 

[Blue Marlin]

Yes, I concur with you. Comparisons between jets is fine but I think that one point that had not yet been mentioned in here much is that the main reason for IAF to quickly acquire a small batch of Rafales may not be air-superiority or defence. There M2K based strike capability may be quite degraded now for various reasons, and Su-30 based super-sonic ALCMs , once inducted, may provide numbers but certainly not surprise. Rafales with SCALPs allow them to match what we have (in terms of tactical strikes) and is a grave risk in terms of ability to make surprise strikes while remaining inside their own territory, mostly. It will force PAF/Army to divert a sizeable fund to acquiring more point defence systems probably cannon based as well.

id image the scapl having the 300km max range due to the mtcr regulations.

as for supersonic alcm. the brahmos is still to heavy for ordinary mki's to hold, and thus mki's have to have some strengthening done to them for them to hold the brahmos. i suspect they wont convert all of the mki's to hold the brahmos as the "upgrade" adds weight to the fighter.

the mk2 are still potent especially with the mica missile.
now how will pakistan respond? typhoons, su-35's, more f16's...

as for the scalp missile why doesnt pakistan ask the uae fora few missiles and work on countermeasures such as working out its behaviour, turning rate, radar signature etc....... ask @Khafee to bring some over when he stops over, make sure he bring it on a mk2 so you can have a nosie at that as well

as for base defence, i guess your right.
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/paki...air-defense-system.487259/page-4#post-9353812
now i think caam would be a good replacement for the spada

pakistan can easily have 5th gen fighters before india, i say 2023-2025 at most.

 

[SQ8]

I am afraid that the issue is with the air-frame actually, it is very draggy. To be honest, I do not have any exact numbers but I heard that it was most probably thrice the F-16s. US guys got a chance to fly it right along side their F-15s while testing decrease of speed with AOA, it was said to be slightly better than F-15 while on dry thrust. But F-15s have monsters of engines once you hit those after-burners.

If we ever really need to induct a twin engined one, Su-35 is a far better option.

I would disagree on the Mig-29 assessment. It is a very capable dogfighter and in many cases better than the su-27 series in its envelope performance. However, it is still fairly short legged and the addition of the "fat back" fuel tanks as with the UPG makes it more of a heavier fighter close in.

The bigget issues with it which were avionics and ergonomics have probably been solved with the Mig-35 but the aircraft in itself is not cost effective vis a vis its range vs fuel, payload vs fuel and loaded flight characteristics.

It is still a fine fighter, lets not understate that; but as the requirements of the PAF strike asset go it is not well suited. Especially since its not a particularly stable platform at low level.

The Mirage 2000 was just favored by the PAF because it was a fighter, but because it is a great bombing platform which is very stable and jutter free at low levels.

 

[ghazi768]

The MiG-29M/M2 id actually a different variant
It incorporates structural changes to the legacy MiG-29s the US flew/flew against, e.g. increased payload, increased fuel capacity, FBW, lower RCS, etc. Paired with the RD-33MK, the M/M2/35 are also cheaper to fly compared to the legacy MiG-29s.

Other than changes to control surfaces and a bigger wing what other radical modifications they have made? structurally it is still the same Mig.
FBW is not radical, JF-B will have a full three Axis FBW.
Low RCS, I refuse to except. Engine are still almost fully exposed, it is still using splitters and variable inlets. Only US had been able to fully hide variable inlets in terms of RCS, Chinese after a few tries were forced to head the DSI way (for all their current or future programs) and there is no evidence that Russians were able to solve this in even Sus.

I would disagree on the Mig-29 assessment. It is a very capable dogfighter and in many cases better than the su-27 series in its envelope performance. However, it is still fairly short legged and the addition of the "fat back" fuel tanks as with the UPG makes it more of a heavier fighter close in.

The bigget issues with it which were avionics and ergonomics have probably been solved with the Mig-35 but the aircraft in itself is not cost effective vis a vis its range vs fuel, payload vs fuel and loaded flight characteristics.

It is still a fine fighter, lets not understate that; but as the requirements of the PAF strike asset go it is not well suited. Especially since its not a particularly stable platform at low level.

The Mirage 2000 was just favored by the PAF because it was a fighter, but because it is a great bombing platform which is very stable and jutter free at low levels.

I fully respect your opinion and never said it was not a good dog fighter. But it is not as good as F-16 or even JF-17. Also to induct it, we have to completely modify our tactical doctrine to train for a slow speed, high breaks BFM rather than energy-maneouver combat, which by the way Indians are more experienced in than we.

 

[Lord Of Gondor]

Other than changes to control surfaces and a bigger wing what other radical modifications they have made? structurally it is still the same Mig.
FBW is not radical, JF-B will have a full three Axis FBW.
Low RCS, I refuse to except.

Quoting from my earlier post:

The MiG-29K features a strengthened airframe and undercarriage suitable for landing on aircraft carriers. The airframe is made of about 15% composite materials. The aircraft is fitted with folding wings, arrestor hook and a catapult for carrier operations. The radar signature of the aircraft is reduced by four to five times over the basic MiG-29.

The changes are significant.
The newer MiGs carry more fuel, have more efficient engines in addition to the above.
The MiG29UPG in the WVR arena are a more potent threat as they now have the improved OLS, TopOwl F Helmet Display cueing the Archer.
The BVR potency has also improved multi fold with the new Radar and AESA based EW system.
PAF will be in a better position wrt to the FADEC Sea Wasp upgrade for the JF17 if they go with the MiG35.
Also Egypt has ordered new airframes so production will be alive for some more years.

 

[MastanKhan]

id image the scapl having the 300km max range due to the mtcr regulations.

as for supersonic alcm. the brahmos is still to heavy for ordinary mki's to hold, and thus mki's have to have some strengthening done to them for them to hold the brahmos. i suspect they wont convert all of the mki's to hold the brahmos as the "upgrade" adds weight to the fighter.

the mk2 are still potent especially with the mica missile.
now how will pakistan respond? typhoons, su-35's, more f16's...

as for the scalp missile why doesnt pakistan ask the uae fora few missiles and work on countermeasures such as working out its behaviour, turning rate, radar signature etc....... ask @Khafee to bring some over when he stops over, make sure he bring it on a mk2 so you can have a nosie at that as well

as for base defence, i guess your right.
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/paki...air-defense-system.487259/page-4#post-9353812
now i think caam would be a good replacement for the spada

pakistan can easily have 5th gen fighters before india, i say 2023-2025 at most.

Hi,

Just Like in the Flakland wars---like the Exocet---won't this missile---scalp---also be prone to "sanctions"---.

Secondly---with Ra'ad ALCM---why would we need scalp---. Does it bring anything extra to the table?

 

[Blue Marlin]

Hi,

Just Like in the Flakland wars---like the Exocet---won't this missile---scalp---also be prone to "sanctions"---.

Secondly---with Ra'ad ALCM---why would we need scalp---. Does it bring anything extra to the table?

i never said pakistan should buy the missile but "look" at it.

 

[SQ8]

Other than changes to control surfaces and a bigger wing what other radical modifications they have made? structurally it is still the same Mig.
FBW is not radical, JF-B will have a full three Axis FBW.
Low RCS, I refuse to except. Engine are still almost fully exposed, it is still using splitters and variable inlets. Only US had been able to fully hide variable inlets in terms of RCS, Chinese after a few tries were forced to head the DSI way (for all their current or future programs) and there is no evidence that Russians were able to solve this in even Sus.



I fully respect your opinion and never said it was not a good dog fighter. But it is not as good as F-16 or even JF-17. Also to induct it, we have to completely modify our tactical doctrine to train for a slow speed, high breaks BFM rather than energy-maneouver combat, which by the way Indians are more experienced in than we.

The Mig-29 is a pretty good energy fighter as well in its own right. The issue with doctrine may not be with the sort of envelope it operates in but simply the capability overlap it has with what the JF-17 provides to our needs.

It is the same question on why the Shaheen-3 is 2750 and not 5000nm.
Our need is 2750 and that is that.

We have limited funds which we we divide to outpace our requirements by a decent amount but not excessively.

For a large percentage of the F-22s operational life from its FOC, its overkill in terms of capability to what threats are faced by the USAF.

They can afford such excess, we can't.

The Gripen was never considered by thr PAf because the JF-17 is already taking care of whatever the Gripen would bring to the table quite well.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

The Mig-29 is a pretty good energy fighter as well in its own right. The issue with doctrine may not be with the sort of envelope it operates in but simply the capability overlap it has with what the JF-17 provides to our needs.

It is the same question on why the Shaheen-3 is 2750 and not 5000nm.
Our need is 2750 and that is that.

We have limited funds which we we divide to outpace our requirements by a decent amount but not excessively.

For a large percentage of the F-22s operational life from its FOC, its overkill in terms of capability to what threats are faced by the USAF.

They can afford such excess, we can't.

The Gripen was never considered by thr PAf because the JF-17 is already taking care of whatever the Gripen would bring to the table quite well.

Gripen was considered by Pres Musharaff when he visited Sweden 2004.
He said that Pakistan was looking for a high technology fighter and Gripen was one
of the alternatives.
He was told that SAAB would not be getting an export permit for Pakistan
so the interest quickly died off.

https://www.svd.se/pakistan-intresserat-av-jas-gripen

 

[SQ8]

Gripen was considered by Pres Musharaff when he visited Sweden 2004.
He said that Pakistan was looking for a high technology fighter and Gripen was one
of the alternatives.
He was told that SAAB would not be getting an export permit for Pakistan
so the interest quickly died off.

https://www.svd.se/pakistan-intresserat-av-jas-gripen

Focal point being Musharraf and his statements to get the Swedish markets interested in Pakistan , the PAF was never interested. They wanted a bomber, not another multirole interceptor.

 

[MastanKhan]

Gripen was considered by Pres Musharaff when he visited Sweden 2004.
He said that Pakistan was looking for a high technology fighter and Gripen was one
of the alternatives.
He was told that SAAB would not be getting an export permit for Pakistan
so the interest quickly died off.

https://www.svd.se/pakistan-intresserat-av-jas-gripen

Hi,

If Paf was not interested---then one would wonder---why for two years they kept looking at the Grippen.