Posted on 01/16/2008 4:04:01 AM PST by sukhoi-30mki
F-16 gets super cruise capability
Agencies
Posted online: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 at 1000 hrs IST
Fort Worth, (Texas), January 16:
As the deadline for India's biggest ever defence deal for purchase of 126 new fighter planes nears, US aviation giant Lockheed Martin on Wednesday unveiled a new upgraded version of its F-16 fighter planes with 'super cruise' capability and Active Electronic Scanned Array (AESA) radars.
So far, the 'super cruise' capability is only seen in 5th generation fighters F-22 Raptors and it’s just unrolling F-35 joint strike fighters.
This capability would impart the fighter with extended range, as it can zoom from take-off to breaking the sound barrier without the use of fuel guzzling after-burners.
The export version of the fighters, for the first time, has also been equipped with AESA radars, as reportedly specified in the Indian Air Force's USD 10-billion tender for the acquisition of 126 fighters.
Top company official Chuck Artymovich told a group of Indian newsmen that the AESA radar, which gives the capability to simultaneously track and destroy ground and air threats, has been cleared by the US government for installation in 80 F-16s ordered by the United Arab Emirates.
"We are confident that similar green signal would be given for installation of such radars in the case of export to India also," he said.
Speaking while unveiling an India-specific Fighting Falcons (F-16 IN), the Lockheed Martin executive said that the proposed fighter planes would also be armed with infra-red search and track pods as well as, counter-electronic warfare pods.
"The F-16 IN 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," he said.
The US company officials said that there were fair chances of India increasing its fighter intake by 50 more planes. Artymovich's comment assumes significance, as the international tenders for the deal are expected to be opened on March 2.
Besides the F-16, other major contenders for the contract include Boeing's F-18, Eurofighter, Gripen of Sweden, Rafale of France and Russia's MIG 35.
At the ceremony, Lockheed Martin executives said they had met all requirements proposed in the Indian Request For Proposals (RFP) without giving out any details of the contents, citing confidentiality.
They said that the company was prepared to meet the RFP requirements of offsets, and would do so in the field of aeronautics or for co-development of an Indian Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV).
Fighting Falcons have proved to be the world's largest selling fighters with sales touching a figure of 4,300. It also holds a record of 400,000 hours of combat flying and being the safest multi-role fighter in the US history.
Asked why the company did not offer its 5th generation fighter F-35, Lockheed officials said that the deal time-frame ruled out the possibility for the same. On the occasion, Indian newsmen, were for the first time, shown the futuristic joint strike fighter.
Wow. What is the possibility that the new version may be used to replace the aging F-15s?
Anyways, I'd pay to know where the various options stack in the minds of the Indian MoD. What are the current front-runners? Does the Super-MiG (the 'MiG-35') still have a chance, or have the Indians written it off as simply another Fulcrum with thrust-vectoring, some semblance of an AESA and better software? Is the Super-Hornet still the prime US contender or has this new 'super-Viper' (hate all those 'supers' ahead of the names) eclipsed it? Does the Gripen (even in its 'Supe....erm, I mean Gripen-N, format) have a chance, even though as a 'lo-fighter' it would be one of the better choices all things being equal? I am assuming the Typhoon and the Rafale are out, or does the MoD still consider having a 'hi-hi' mix of Su-30MKIs with Rafales or Typhoons?
So many questions, and apparently no answers. And what might be the top contender (whatever it currently is) may in 9 months simply be yesterday's news (in much the same way the Mirage 2000 went from being the top contender to not even being on offer). So, what say you? Any comments on the above questions, even if it is speculation, would be appreciated. Most importantly, relative standing of each fighter as far as you can tell. Thanks.
Sweeeeet!
It’s really too early to say anything about how the various options stack up given that the competition is still in a preliminary stage-the various contenders have to submit their proposals by March or so.After that you have tests/evaluations of various sorts,finetuning,negotiations on technology,price etc & finally a decision,(which may take atleast 2 years or so,if not 3-4).
Given the state of Indo-Russian defense ties,I’d have to be a very brave person to give the Russian Mig-35 a real chance(unless Indo-US/Indo-Euro relations hit a trough suddenly).My uneducated guess is that the Rafale/Super-Hornet/Eurofighter being easily the best multi-role aircraft have an upper hand.All the more given that their engines & as well as tech spin-offs could be used as an upgrade to the Indian ‘Tejas’ fighter-saves costs big time.
The USAF purchased it’s last F-16s a while ago,so don’t know it would want more.
I don’t believe this story.
Gimme one. Let me take it for a spin.
Then I’ll report back whether or not it has supercruise.
(Supercruise: wasn’t that something they had on Buicks and Pontiacs?)
Zero. We are building the F-35 to replace our aging F-16s.
We are building the F-22 to replace our aging F-15s.
However, that doesn't mean that either the F-15 or F-16 is going away. We will keep and update the newest airframes for second line use.
And you never know. Some Congresscritter puts the right piece of pork in the right appropriations bill and then, voila!, the USAF will have some new F-16s it didn’t want.
However, it is doubtful. The F-16 is a multirole fighter that is mostly ground attack with some air to air capability, while the F-15A's and C's are long range/long loiter air superiority aircraft. The F-15's original mantra was "not a pound for air-to-ground."
The F-15E is still in production, and could be purchased to offset some grounded F-15s. However, the F-15E is strictly a two seat ground pounder with some air-to-air capability, which is the same problems as the F-16. The difference is the F-15E has more range and payload than the F-16C. Also, the F-15E is heavier, slower, and can turn fewer Gs than the F-15C, so it still isn't a replacement for the Air Superiority F-15A-C.
If a congresscritter is going to throw pork at the Air Force, it will be in the form of more F-22s. That's what the Air Force originally wanted before congress cut the number, and that is where money would be best spent.
The F-15As will get retired. Their slots will be replaced by the F-15C. The F-15Cs will get replaced by F-22s.
Hand-me-downs don't just apply to shirts in a large family. We have lots of National Guard and Air Force Reserve forces to use these aircraft.
The only open question now is how many aircraft get retired earlier than orginally planned.
Bump for the Fighting Falcon!!!
I wonder why India isnt looking at JSF. It may take a few more years to join service but still its easily better than any f-16 IN .
The JSF won’t be available for India for atleast 7-10 years after entry to service with the US.It’s order books are full for the JSF’s international partners & the US may not part with joint production in India.
& Barring limited stealth,it really doesn’t offer a lot more.Which is why several nations in Europe are having second thoughts on continuing.
Thanks. By the way, do you think the new improved Viper has a chance or is it too little too late with a dob of ‘Pakistan has em too’ added on top (albeit the fact that Pakistan’s version are by far not the same)?
It’s hard to say.The Pakistan label exists on the F-16 & that’s too difficult to wish away,all the more so as they will have got most of the 36 new jets they have signed up for,by the time India gets it’s first aircraft.Besides countries would have started dumping their F-16 fleet by then & going for the JSF(afterall LM builds both aircraft).That’s one huge disadvantage it will have against the Super Hornets & the Euro-jets,irrespective of how much LM soups it up.
[I know this thread is over 10 years old, I came across it by accident]
Fact is, the F-16 in a clean condition has had super-cruise capability for decades. The F-16N (that is, the F-16s flown by the US Navy as aggressors) are very stripped-down because there’s a lot of equipment that they don’t need as aggressors. Those jets have super-cruise capability: https://www.yahoo.com/news/fly-f-16n-viper-topgun-163000300.html.
Most people don’t know that a clean F-16 is the fastest jet in world down low. It doesn’t have the low-level speed record because, during testing, the political powers-that-be didn’t want the F-16 doing anything that would compete with the F-15. Everybody makes a big deal of the F-15 having no losses in air-to-air combat. The F-16 doesn’t either EXCEPT for a few conflicts that were flown by vastly inferior foreign air forces (the F-15 is sold to few countries, the F-16 is sold to 28 foreign countries). USA has lost a VERY few F-16s to ground fire and accidents, same with Israel. No losses air-to-air. The F-16 is THE jet that you don’t want to get into a turning dogfight with, it has a rate-of-turn and other stats better than F-15. Bottom line: the F-16 has an air-to-air record that is just as good as F-15, it just doesn’t have the cheerleaders that F-15 does.
The F-16XL also had supercruise. The F-16XL was a better attack jet than the F-15 Strike Eagle but lost out because the F-15 had much better political backing in Congress.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.