Comparing India's modernised Mirage 2000 with F 16 block 52 and J 10

Discussion in 'Indian Air Force' started by ashdoc, Dec 16, 2011.

  1. ashdoc

    ashdoc Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2010
    Messages:
    1,768
    Likes Received:
    965
    How does India's modernised Mirage 2000 compare with Pakistan's F 16 block 52 ??

    For example , the range of its radar( after modernisation ) is about 70 nautical miles , that is about 120 km . This is less than that of the F 16 block 52 which has a radar range of 200 km .

    And how will modernised Mirage 2000 compare with J 10 ?
     
  2.  
  3. hitesh

    hitesh New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2011
    Messages:
    941
    Likes Received:
    513
    a general view of F16 & mirage 2000



    Mirage 2000, generally regarded as "better" in higher and mid altitudes, F-16 better at lower.

    Mirage 2000 known for good operational rates, maintenance and fuel consumption.

    F-16, unit price much cheaper than M2k

    Mirage 2000, with a delta wing..still able to do tight turns but loses energy after the first few turns.. F-16 can still hang with it.

    F-16 combat experiences include Kosovo, Lebanon, Gulf War, Yugoslavia, etc'

    M2k includes Kosovo, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, etc..
     
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2011
  4. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,896
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    F-16s radar range isn't 200Km. It is less than 150Km for fighter sized targets, same for Mirage-2000 and J-10.

    Aerodynamics of the F-16 and J-10 is superior to the Mirage-2000. But Mirage-2000 has some pretty good tricks up it's sleeves. The thrust on F-16 and J-10 is superior to the Mirage-2000 as well.

    Most other aspects depends on what these aircraft are carrying. There is not much to say here since they are all of a similar class.

    Overall block 52 F-16 and J-10A are aerodynamically slightly superior to the Mirage-2000 owing to greater thrust. But nothing to be worried about. The Mirage-2000 can match the J-10A but cannot exceed the Block 50/52. J-10B is a dark horse.
     
  5. asianobserve

    asianobserve Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2011
    Messages:
    7,308
    Likes Received:
    2,976
    I have always maintained that in modern air war dogfighting abilities only take a back set to sensors and sensors fusion. The party who is able to first see, lock and lunch wins the day. It's very hard to out turn and out run modern thrust vectored AAMs with lock on after lunch capabilities.
     
  6. hitesh

    hitesh New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2011
    Messages:
    941
    Likes Received:
    513
    F16 blck52 is still cheaper than mirage2000c/h upgrade .
     
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2011
    charlyondfi likes this.
  7. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,305
    Likes Received:
    8,270
    Location:
    011
    Being a delta wing craft and due to inherent instability in the structure, it is more aerodynamic at high altitudes. Though at low altitudes and as an air support craft it isn't very good.
     
  8. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,305
    Likes Received:
    8,270
    Location:
    011
    When you are at the fag end of their range then its very easy to outrun. for eg even if you spot an enemy craft at 120km, you cannot take him out with your loal aams in most cases.
     
  9. asianobserve

    asianobserve Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2011
    Messages:
    7,308
    Likes Received:
    2,976

    Add the dimension of quickest to decide.
     
  10. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,896
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    All 3 are Delta wings Paaji. All 3 are unstable or have "relaxed" stability.

    Thing is they are all in the same class. The better pilot wins.

    The delta design's superiority at higher altitudes depends on the size of the wing area too. In that terms you can say the LCA may perform better than all 3 aircraft at high altitude. That's what the LCA is made for anyway. The LCA Mk2 delivers equivalent thrust as the Mirage-2000 and is 1.5-2 tons lighter with a larger wing area, at least on paper.
     
  11. hitesh

    hitesh New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2011
    Messages:
    941
    Likes Received:
    513
    [​IMG][​IMG] MIRAGE 4000
     
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2011
  12. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,305
    Likes Received:
    8,270
    Location:
    011
    Yes all three are delta wing but wingarea of m2k is largest and its optimized for high altitude.

    LCA mk2 seriously ? :rolleyes:
     
  13. hitesh

    hitesh New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2011
    Messages:
    941
    Likes Received:
    513
    here is comparison bw mig29SMT & Mirage 4000 although MIG29ovt<f16 blk52 & Mirage4000>mirage2000H so i guess F16 blk50+ is better than modified IAF mirage2000H

    [​IMG]
    So how does the Mirage 4000 compare to the Mig-29OVT as an air-air fighter?

    Performance
    Although the two aircraft are of similar size, the M4000 is far heavier and more powerful, generally being considered analogous to the F-15 Eagle whereas the Mig is generally regarded as more akin to theF-18 Hornet; a middleweight fighter. However, the Mig has a significantly better thrust to weight ratio (at combat weight), giving it better acceleration. But the Mirage’s compound-delta configuration gives it lower high-speed drag which coupled with its substantially more powerful engines allows it to match the Mig’s impressive maximum speed and actually out climb the lighter Mig. Where the M4000 is weakest, and the Mig strongest, is in low speed maneuvering. Although the compound delta (the small fixed canard in front of the wing) is likely to give the M4000 better slow speed characteristics than conventional delta aircraft, there is no way it could outperform the Mig with its conventional wing layout, positive thrust-weight ratio and thrust vectoring control. The Mig’s agility advantage would be massive.

    Beyond visual range combat
    The Mig is likely to carry four AA-12 Adder medium range missiles under the wings. It could conceivably carry six, but this would adversely affect performance and is generally less likely. The Mirage had 11 stores stations, but in a revised layout akin to the more recent Mirage 2000-5, it is likely to carry 4 MICA-EM missiles under the fuselage. This allows up to three drop tanks (extra fuel) to be carried for extended CAP.
    [​IMG]
    If we assume that the Mirage would be fitted with the Thales RDC-2 radar set, consistent with the latest Mirage 2000-5 (rather than the more advanced system carried by the Rafale), and that the Mig carries the Zhuk-M/ME, we can attempt a basic comparison.

    The Mirage’s RDC-2 set can detect fighter sized targets at a range of about 140km, noticeably better than the Zhuk’M’s estimated 120km (i.e in a head on engagement where both aircraft are traveling at 1000mph and at the same altitude, that equates to a 22.5 second advantage). Where the Zhuk-M outperforms the RDC-2 is in it’s ability to simultaneously track 10 targets, engaging four, whilst the RDC-2 can only track 8, again engaging 4. Which is superior in terms of target discretion, jamming resistance etc is hard to say, but the reputation of the French unit makes it the better bet.

    There is no way of conducting an accurate comparison of the AA-12 Adder and MICA-EM in the public setting. But we can make some educated guesses; the MICA is likely to be marginally shorter ranged, but more agile with a slightly superior seeker. But that does not detract from the AA-12’s own impressive agility and range. In practical terms the two systems are probably about equal, with the scales tipping in the MICA’s favour when fire control systems are considered.

    Within visual range combat
    This is definitely the arena of the Mig. With super-agility and integrated radar and IR targeting sensors, it has a distinct edge over the comparatively straight-line Mirage.

    The Mig’s AA-11 Archer short range missile is also significantly better than the Mirage’s Magic2 missiles, although its MICA-EMs are also capable a comparatively short ranges. This deficiency could further be reduced by employing a later generation SRAAM, such as the MICA-IR or Israeli Python 4/5.

    Conclusion
    In terms of air-air combat the BVR advantage lies with the Mirage although by how much is hard to say (i.e. probably not by a lot), but closer in the Mig would outperform the Mirage by a massive margin.

    Would a reborn Mirage-4000 match the latest Mig fighters?, page 1
     
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2011
    Vishwarupa and maomao like this.
  14. p2prada

    p2prada Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,233
    Likes Received:
    3,896
    Location:
    Holy Hell
    It is better at high altitude, but it's thrust is not good. The J-10 is not mature as of today. Once it gets a new engine or uprated engine and better avionics, then it would beat both M-2000 and F-16 at medium and high altitude. The F-16s strength is unique though, especially at low altitude, subsonic regime. There it will remain the King among the three.

    Only on paper. 2018 we will know if the paper design is right. It wasn't the case with Mk1.
     

Share This Page