ante_climaxIndia is developing the BARAK II SAM with israel. I cannot see why we will not co-develop future AAMs to equip our F 16s and other aircrafs.
So the Radar of the NG will be ready in a year, while the MRCA evaluation is undergoing this year ! The F 16 IN already has a radar the APG 80 and it will be the real thing that will participate in the tests.
ante_climaxThe problem is that, the Rafale is too expensive and does not offer that much cost – performance advnatages over the F 16.
Also one have to wonder. how good its percieved capabilities are in reality. It has lost so many competitons, you really cannot blame it all on bias.
ante_climaxAre you seriously saying that LM could have some kind of secret prototype for F-16IN flying?
And how do you know that the step to F-16IN would be smaller than to NG, what engine would it use, how far is the AESA developed, what about the new refueling probe?
Probably. Because the field trials are to start soon. I think the engine would be the same as in use with the UAE block 60 the code one magazine article had it clear.
Block 60’s General Electric F110-GE-132 turbofan engine produces approximately 32,500 pounds of thrust in maximum afterburner. The engine is a derivative of the F110-GE-129, a 29,000-pound thrust class engine that powers the majority of F-16C fighters worldwide.
The F110-GE-132 has also been selected to power the F-16IN, the Fighting Falcon proposed for India for the Medium Multi Role Combat Aircraft program. If selected, the F-16IN will be the most advanced F-16 design to date. This aircraft will feature a refueling boom that retracts from the right conformal fuel tank. The boom allows the F-16IN to operate with India Air Force probe-and-drogue style aerial refueling systems similar to those used by the US Navy. The refueling boom is now being flight tested in Fort Worth. Even without aerial refueling, an F-16IN with conformal tanks can fly from Bangalore in the south of India to Leh in the north.
http://www.codeonemagazine.com/archives/2008/articles/jul_08/f16-evolution/index.html
The AESA will probably be the same APG 80 or if we are lucky the APG 79.
Several other systems distinguish the F-16IN from the Block 60, including an electronic warfare system and radar modes tailored for India, dragchute, datalink, satellite communication, and a helmet-mounted cueing system. The F-16IN will carry the Sniper targeting pod as well.
Radar wud prolly be the same. Do you think a re-fuelling probe will take sometime to develop ? Its already flight tested ? The article is so confident that I think LM knows they going to get selected ! The same type is used in the USN as the article states.
ante_climaxStrictly speaking, any weapon can be integrated with any airframe, given sufficient funding. Nothing special about that, particularly with standardized interfaces and databuses as supported by most modern weapons – Mica is in no way unique in that respect. So the point stands, integrating Mica with the F-16 is not easier or cheaper than making A/G-weapons available for the Typhoon. The latter is taking a long time because it is not a priority for the fighter’s current users – 3 out of the four partner nations and one of the two export customers can rely on the Tornado for strike, while Austria operates the aircraft in a pure airdefence role.
No the point does not stand because I have given you valid links to show that its already available for the Falcon which u dismissed as too old etc. India can also rely on Israeli weapons, it has excellent defense ties with Israel, So Python and Derby are there as well and these have been successfully integrated with F 16s as well. That is my point exactly with the typhoon, because the partner nations have other options the development of typhoon into an A2G platform is going to be slow and we may have to pay for it as well (I think the whole India can be a part of the EF consortium thing is to make us co-fund the thing) . This does not bode well with an aircraft that is too expensive to start with and remember India already have an air-superiority fighter in the MKI.
Strictly speaking, any weapon can be integrated with any airframe, given sufficient funding.
So can an R 77 be integrated into the Raptor ? Don’t Radar guided missile integration require source code etc. ?
ante_climaxSo thats another competiton where the venerable Rafale has bitten the dust :(.
ante_climaxF-16IN on the other hand does not even have a prototype yet
You really don’t know that do you, unless you work for LM. The F 16 IN or comparable aircraft will be participating in the field trials this year. It is not as big a step up as the Girpen NG is for Gripen.
ante_climaxThe wikipedia article doesn’t cite any source for the assertion and the FlugRevue article is more than 10 (ten!) years old. At which time integrating the Mica on the Falcon may well have been planned, but there is no indication that it ever actually happened. The third source merely points out that the UAE have purchased Mica AAMs, no relation to the F-16E/Fs is even suggested.
The MICA page says it can be integrated with any modern aircraft. Read as any modern western aircraft, the MICA is fairly old so a 10 year old page seems fair enough.
and for all Rafale lovers another instance where it has lost out to F 16 🙁
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1353504&postcount=157
ante_climaxThe basic airframe will remain the same on all, not only on Mig-29 and F-16.
I know but swerve was claiming the F-16 IN is a paper plane and lacks commonality.
Even if India would buy more F-16 than the total production of Rafales, Dassault would have Rafale as their only fighter aircraft to focus on for a long time. LM on the other hand is now developing a new fighter that is meant to be produced in numbers that will totally dwarf the numbers of aircraft India is supposed to buy. The problems would start already from the beginning, F-16IN should have an AESA but the only ones that got it is the Block 60 that UAE owns the rights to. It is also probably outdated so probably a new AESA would have to be developed and integrated, plus other features.
That is a very good point. The F 16 production line may shift to India, some sort of outsoricing type thing and HAL may license manufacture F 16 for other customers too in future under a deal with Lockheed. I have heard reports like we will have a choice to go for a Raytheon based AESA for the F 16 IN. UAE and India have excellent relations anyway and it only mean that part of the money paid to LM will go to UAE, if Block 60 components are used.
At the same time LM is in to the development of F-35 that is supposed to be ready to 2014 with about 5000 test flights of which less than 100 has been made in the last 2 years. There is obviously a lot of effort required for that and you can wonder how much priority the F-16IN would get. The result could also be that India becomes the only user of F-16 with that radar, and therefore becomes an orphan.
Like I said only the first batch will be made in Fort Worth anyway, the rest will be made by HAL in India. Chances are that it will be an existing radar like the APG 79. There is also talk about integrating some F 35 avionics into F 16 IN.
On an added note, the only paper plane that is participating in the MRCA is the Gripen NG. Gripen Demo will be participating instead,
ante_climaxSo why do you keep saying it is a problem for Typhoon?
Because Typhoon is an entirely new aircraft, the difference between F 16 IN and F 16 C/D is comparable to the diff between Typhoon Tranches.
So why the fuss about limited integration of A-G weapons (so far) onto Typhoon? Yet again, you are undermining your own arguments.
Why is it taking so long. There are countries in the Consortium which are not going for the Litening II, like Germany, so why are we not saying A2G yet at Tranche 2
As for the F-16 being a better A-G platform – do you remember (perhaps not – you strike me as far too young to remember when the F-16 was new) the mantra of the F-16 designers? “Not a pound for air to ground”. Its air-ground capabilities were added later. The platform was designed as a dogfighter. Typhoon, on the other hand, has always been intended as a multi-role aircraft.
Lets speak about what it is now, not what it was when it was first produced. I think the IAF wants a multirole aircraft now and not 30 years down its development cycle.
Oh and U.S.S Shipwreck, I am not going to reply to your comments, although I won’t ignore you.
ante_climaxIntegration into the F-16IN (different aircraft with different systems, including a totally different radar) is not made easier by Asraam having been integrated on to F-18. It has not been integrated on to F-18E, BTW – only Australias older Hornets.
Again I ask – where is your evidence for Mica being integrated on F-16E/block 60? You keep saying this, but I am not aware of any evidence to support your claim. Put up or shut up.
Yet again, you are showing your bias. You say that integration of Asraam or Mica onto US aircraft is not a big issue, but integration of air-ground weapons onto Typhoon is. Weird.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/the-uaes-f-16-block-60-desert-falcon-fleet-04538/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBDA_MICA
http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRTYPEN/FRF-16C.htm
Now stop whining read it. Block 60 has MICA. Period.
Typhoon is approaching Tranche 3 standards and yet it still suffers from A2G issues.
ante_climaxUnderstandably the U.S.A will not. It may change if we have a strategic partnership with U.S.A on the same level as we now have with Russia.
Yes understandable reasons, but the implications of this for our ATV programme will be huge. 🙁
ante_climaxAgain, total nonsense! 50% is not “most” of the Eurofighter member nations.
Gripen is the main testbed for Meteor, & Sweden is one of the Meteor partner countries. The integration of Meteor with Gripen has no relevance to any future possible integration of it with F-16 or F-18.
You are, yet again, contradicting yourself. You argue that Meteor can somehow miraculously be immediately integrated with F-16 & F-18, despite a complete lack of orders from F-16 or F-18 operators, but that despite being bought by 5 countries which want it to do A-G, the Typhoon will have “pitifuly (sic) slow at best” integration of A-G weapons. Your inconsistency is breathtaking.
Err. Since India will be a large operator of the F 16/18 if selected, it don’t actually need to have orders from other customers. India is integrating Derby with Sea Harrier now, tell me which other country has done it ? And we only have like 13-16 Harriers. Again the typhoon not being a suitable A2G platform is well documented, and both the Falcon and Hornet and even the Rafale trumps it as a strike platform.
BTW, what significance does the Rafales current lack of a laser designator (NB – it does not need anything to designate targets for non-laser PGMs, such as AASM. Didn’t you know that?) have to anything? You’re advocating that India buys aircraft which don’t yet exist, or exist only as prototypes. What capability do the F-16IN (a paper aeroplane) or the MiG-35 (which you cited as having advantages over W. European aircraft) have to drop PGMS right now? Zero, isn’t it?
Again you are totally ignoring the Gripen NG (which is a paper plan) and its Indian version the Gripen IN. This shows ur bias against the Falcon and the MIG. Like i asked many times when will you believe that the F 16 IN and to a lesser extent the MIG 35 are ‘not’ totally new aircraft. The difference is that of the different tranches of the EF and different F series of the Rafale. It is not as different as say a Rafale is from a Mirage.
If the F 16 C/D can designate laser guided PGMs I will bet anything on the F 16 IN doing so without any further delays, like the rafale is having.
ante_climaxA few avionics tweaks? Not according to Lockheed Martin. Chuck Artymovich –
“The F-16IN is a complete new aircraft and totally caters to India’s requirements and there could be no comparison with Block 50 and 60 fighters, being made for other countries”
BTW, what evidence do you have that Asraam has already been integrated? No F-16 operator has Asraam. And what evidence that Mica has been integrated? MDBA says “MICA is integrated on RAFALE and the latest versions of the MIRAGE 2000” and “MICA is also under integration on Mirage F1”. You’d think they’d make a big thing about it if it had been integrated on any version of the F-16, as it would be a good selling point.
It is already integrated into the F 18, and can be easily intergrated into the F 16. Mica has been integrated into the Block 60 F16s, and integration into western aircraft shouldn’t be a big issue according to MBDA
Lightweight and compact, MICA was originally designed as a “multi-aircraft” missile that could easily be integrated onto any modern fighter aircraft on a maximum of available store stations according to its eject or rail launching capabilities without significantly reducing aircraft performances.
I am not as much of a LM fanboy as you accuse me of being and hence i do not believe it is a totally different aircraft, there will not be any structural differences like between the F 16 and F 2. Like i said changes will be likely on Avionics, Engine, Radar etc.
But are the only aircraft which suffer from what you describe as a reason not to buy them, i.e. no commitment from the supplier. You pick & choose, presenting as a benefit of your preferred aircraft what you claim is a crippling drawback for others.
When will you realise that the basic airframe of both the fulcrum and falcon will remain the same ? And the Russians are even buying old refurbrished Fulcrums at the moment.
That accusation does not hold water. I would love to have an aircraft with a single engine, thats true. But my concerns about the Rafale are not unfounded, it has lost or pulled out of all competitons it has entered, and the only order it may get other than ours is the UAE one, probably because of courtsey than anything else. Like I said the production of Indian F 16s alone may match Rafale production world wide.
Links on the MICA :
http://www.mbda-systems.com/mbda/site/ref/scripts/siteFO_contenu.php?lang=EN&noeu_id=124&page_id=107
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/1995/05/17/25973/matra-to-decide-on-f-16-mica-bid.html
ante_climaxYeah go on Keep Pushing us and our navy…further to the atlantic, and then across…
ante_climaxI disagree, India being superpower or not, i dunt think we are retiring them by 2040. we acquired Mig-29s, Mirages, Jaguars in 1980s and are upgrading them only now. Besides IAF is highly likely to increase order to 200 or even more in future depending on what happens with LCA and its future lifecycle.
Yes we are upgrading now because we are not rich enough, like others to just go for the new planes and sell/scrap the old ones. I don’t think thats going to be the case in the 2040s. Yes they will be retired in a progressive manner the first airfrmaes that were in service will be retired first the others will go on for a bit much longer. But not like the current Fulcrums, Mirages or Fishbeds.
what all of them? the big difference between them and Euro canards is AESA. Rafale is going to get AESA for sure. Meteor is going to enter service next decade. still if we are to give so much priority to AESA then SH is a much better contendor.
Rafale may get it by the time it enters service for IAF (if selected), but at what cost ? And also the Americans have a huge lead in AESA at the moment and the Europeans have a lot of catching up to do. Meteor can probably be used witht he Falcon and SH as well, It is already okayed for the Gripen. India will probably be cleared for AIM 120D sale as well, if we push hard enough ie. There is no indication that the F 16 IN will be the same as the Block 60s, that is we may get the APG 79 instead of the APG 80 with it.
There are also other differences, the Rafale still needs the Mirage to designate its A2G targets for PGMs and the Typhoon is poor as an A2G platform at the moment, and as pointed out eslewhere, with F 35 being available as a striker for most of its memeber nations, A2G integration on the typhoon will be pitifuly slow at best.
Sign In
