Number of blk 52 originally available with pakistan was 18. Soon all of their F16s will be upgraded to this standard. So by 2015-17, they will have over 60 F16 Blk 52. J10 deal is in dire straits, due to budget constraints, possibly J10s will be not brought at all and pakistan will wait for J21
why the comparison between two diff. class fighters,
one costs probably around 60 mil in flyaway condition, the other around half of that.
and both probably will never see any action against each other, ever.
The upgraded pak F16 A/B will match the new block 52? F16.net quotes that after mlu these aircraft would be closer to block 40 standard. And they have the best info as far as f16 is concerned. But anyway, my understanding was that Pak had the option of ordering another 18 b52s in addition to the ones purchased.
But as far as the J10 is concerned, you could be right. They have barely enough money to continue inducting the JF17s, and at the same time repair and/or replace the damaged SAAB AWAECs.
US Ambassador to Pakistan Richard Olson met Pakistan Air Force Chief Air Chief Marshal Tahir Rafique Butt at Air Headquarters in Islamabad to discuss the country's F-16 programme.
According to a statement by the PAF, "various areas of further cooperation" were also discussed. After the meeting, the US Ambassador accompanied the PAF Chief on a visit to Shahbaz airbase where he was given an on-site briefing of the F-16 programme.
Sources in the PAF said that the US Ambassador discussed the refurbishing of 45 F-16 jets by Turkish Aerospace Industries, under a deal that was signed in 2010. In 2012, 3 upgraded F-16 jets were already delivered to Pakistan.
Besides the F-16s, Ambassador Olson also discussed a mid-life upgrade of older combat jets in the Pakistan Air Force fleet.
A statement by the US Embassy in Islamabad read: "Both sides affirmed their mutual commitment to a strong defence relationship which they agreed should focus on achieving common objectives".
This discussion was held under the pretext of the US Foreign Military Assistance programme.
ADA chief has said that in interview to AJAI SHUKLA(thin source according to your exalted self) that TEJAS mk-2 will have interfaces to carry METEOR. And as far as I know makers of METEOR are have not black listed HAL from their buyers list.Since every european defence majors are salivating at the prospect of Indian defence market they will sell meteor to HAl if asked is my my humble estimation.
lol...I know that it is not being developed for China or Pak...they wont accept it even it is offered to them but thats a different story....I just said that even Mk1 is not yet ready for the induction and we are talking about Mk2 taking on Block 60??? thats laughable...even both blocks whatever being offered to air force that is just to save face and nothing else...if it can take on block 60 type fighters then we wont go burning 20 billion plus dollors on Rafales....we would have simply inducted Tejas and waited for PAK-FAs...and don't tell us what ADA chief says about its RCS and what kind weapons, radars it will have...as per him LCA will even hit the targets on MARS with pin point accuracy but fact is we are not yet able to induct MK1....so comparing such a non existent fighter with F-16 is an insult to F-16 who has 4500+ fighters flying around the globe serving to 25+ air forces, 100+ kills on the account, combat proven and carries AIM-120, AIM-9X, JDAM, JSOWs which are the world's most potent weapon systems even today....
and yeah seriously if you think that avionics, EW suits on LCA is any way comparable with those on F-16 even block 52s then you seriously need to visit doctor....if LCA can successfully defend our skies from Thunders, Mirage 3 or 5 then I will say its a good start for the nation who has made its first ever fighter jet....for strikes behind enemy lines and to deal with the likes of Vipers inside enemy air space we will need bigger boys which we have and will have in the form of FLANKER-RAFALE combo for that....
Last edited by vishwaprasad; 01-03-13 at 10:09 AM.
Mirage-2000 upgrade will raise it from late 3rd gen levels to early 4th gen levels. As of today, the Mig-21 Bison is superior to the IAF Mirage-2000 and Mig-29. After the upgrade, both will beat the Mig-21 Bison in tech specs. It will be equivalent to the F-16 Block 50/52 and not the more advanced F-16 Block 60.
The Singapore upgrade package is actually an all American fleet wide upgrade plan (minimum 350 F-16 Block 50s) with AESA and some other 5th gen technologies. It is being done due to delays in the F-35 program. It is certainly a more advanced upgrade to the F-16 B60 if we consider the timeline, but once the B60 comes up for MLUs (if it ever does since UAE likes junking their aircraft early), the tables will turn again.
LCA Mk2 is not planned to be a B60 equivalent, that's more in the league of aircraft like J-10B and Gripen NG. LCA Mk2's first and foremost priority is to meet IAF's current gen requirements with some extra goodies like AESA radar. Until last year even AESA radar wasn't part of the project. Specs-wise, the Mk2 is still at the level of a F-16 B52 or Mirage-2000-5 Mk2, inferior in load carrying capacity, possibly with similar range, but better sensors.
LCA Mk2 isn't something like a Gripen C with AESA, neither is it at the level of a F-16 B60. It is something in between, and it is primarily meant for roles that are not completely in tune with what Gripen and F-16 B60 were made for. Meaning we are inducting superior aircraft (MKI and Rafale) compared to Gripen NG and F-16 B60 for 4.5th gen requirements. At the same time the LCA Mk2 will be expected to protect our current 4th gen strike fleet during sorties.
Statements like,"LCA mk-2 is not equivalent to F-16 block 60 or anything else",
"LCA Mk2 isn't something like a Gripen C with AESA, neither is it at the level of a F-16 B60. It is something in between, and it is primarily meant for roles that are not completely in tune with what Gripen and F-16 B60 were made for"
are purely subjective with no relation to RCS, TWR, wingloading , ITR and long range bvrs.
Anything that has the capability to carry METEOR or other missiles of the same caliber,and most modern ASEA radar and with superior TWR and RCS can take on any 4.5h fighter in defensive role, even without the support of AWACS and other stealth surveilance assets. Especially the numbers will surely favor the TEJAS mk-2 as it has complete composite outer skin with open architecture for avionics , ew suit and bvrs and will be upgradable in tranches with all the goodies from AMCA program through out it's life time.
If these assets are taken into account there is no way you can say Teajs is inferior to any modern 4.5th gen within it's unrefuelled range.
Every fighter has a role and the range and weapon load is dependent on the role. The role of LCA Tejas is to defend the forward airspace and provide close air support to troops with potent flight specs.
It's role is not to fly for hours and penetrate deep into enemy space with high weapon load. But it can prevent any other 4 plus gen fighter from carrying out the "deep penetration into enemy space with high weapon load" types missions even with it's shorter range and lower weapon load as all typical air to air missions don't involve carrying tons of weapons like bomb trucks.
To it's advantage MK-2 has comparable signatures on all spectrum of detection devices compared to any 4 plus gen fighter , with good asea radar and long range BVRs with high TWr and good ITR.
SO it can very well do the job of any Russian or US or french 4 plus gen super stars with in it's range .Given it's lower cost there will be more number of fighters on the air compensating fro the lesser weapon load.
Opposing super stars have more in number ASEA radars and EW suits of Teajs squadron to contend with ,along with equivalent bvrs in cost wise comparision. So to jam all more in number the asea radars and shoot down all more in number Tejas fighters just because they are Russain or american superstars is just fantasy.
F-16 is finishing it's service life at the end of it's product life cycle and Tejas is at the beginning of the product life cycle just beginning it's service life.