Pakistan F-16 Discussions 2

[Viper0011.]

Pardon my ignorance but shouldnt those be underneath the wings somewhere?

This is a USAF/ ANG standard to carry AMRAAMS on the wingtips. PA and PAF are adopting those standards also. You can even see the new uniforms, hats, the way the soldiers put their gear on, etc. They are adopting to the American / NATO standards

 

[SBD-3]

Pardon my ignorance but shouldnt those be underneath the wings somewhere?

Depends upon need, ofcourse most of the times AMRAAM inventory is being carried out on inner playloans with WVRAAM on wingtips. But I dont think PAF would be preferring AMRAAMs on wingtips while WARAAMs (which are almost 30-50% lighter) on inner playloans. This may be for pictures,not necessarily for ADA or combat.

 

[IceCold]

This is a USAF/ ANG standard to carry AMRAAMS on the wingtips. PA and PAF are adopting those standards also. You can even see the new uniforms, hats, the way the soldiers put their gear on, etc. They are adopting to the American / NATO standards

Ahan i see. Wasn't aware of this. If i can bother you with one more question?

Is this just a standard protocol or has some significance too?

 

[S.U.R.B.]

Ahan i see. Wasn't aware of this. If i can bother you with one more question?

Is this just a standard protocol or has some significance too?

During BVR interception role,AMRAAMs are the first ones to go.

So the pylon gets empty pretty soon before the need for some high G maneuvering arises in a WVR combat.

While if you have a sidewinder on the wingtip.It will stay there during close on combat as well,till the pilot uses it.

It also varies from platform to platform.Also if you see F-16 & it's role in PAF.It'll suggest you a lot of things.

 

[Viper0011.]

Ahan i see. Wasn't aware of this. If i can bother you with one more question?
Is this just a standard protocol or has some significance too?

There's some sense behind it too. AMRAAM produces more flames, heated smoke and particles. On wingtips, you fire it and the impact happens in the air. But if it's underneath the wings and its fired a lot, you might have some impact to the rear part of the wing or pylon. However, the sidewinder is a smaller missile with much less intensity and coverage when firing, so if it's put under the wing, it has almost no impact and it leaves quicker. AMRAAM leaves the aircraft a bit slower than sidewinder. The difference is seamless to an open eye but it does matter a little.

 

[TaimiKhan]

Ahan i see. Wasn't aware of this. If i can bother you with one more question?

Is this just a standard protocol or has some significance too?

The placement of missiles on the F-16s wingtip has everything to do with the wing fluttering & drag. This is what i can give you, rest you can research

But from what i have read so far, the placement of AIM-120 has good effects on the wing fluttering & drag ratios, that is why its preferred to be placed on the wingtip stations.

Sorry could not be of much help.

 

[TaimiKhan]

There's some sense behind it too. AMRAAM produces more flames, heated smoke and particles. On wingtips, you fire it and the impact happens in the air. But if it's underneath the wings and its fired a lot, you might have some impact to the rear part of the wing or pylon. However, the sidewinder is a smaller missile with much less intensity and coverage when firing, so if it's put under the wing, it has almost no impact and it leaves quicker. AMRAAM leaves the aircraft a bit slower than sidewinder. The difference is seamless to an open eye but it does matter a little.

I do believe there is an option of the rocket motor ignition being delayed after ejection from the launcher, thus the thing you mentioned above should not be much of a problem.

F-22 & F-35s and other fighter jets use the same kind of system, missile is ejected first and then the rocket motor is ignited.

 

[araz]

This is a USAF/ ANG standard to carry AMRAAMS on the wingtips. PA and PAF are adopting those standards also. You can even see the new uniforms, hats, the way the soldiers put their gear on, etc. They are adopting to the American / NATO standards

Is there any provision of dual launcher rails for WVR missiles and would there be advantage in using the WVRs on inner pylons.
Araz

 

[Dazzler]

Unfortunately there is none, but the Falcons can carry six of them with three drop tanks, thanks to two extra hardpoints available. Dual missile rails were deemed a must for JF-17 when the need arises due to less hardpoints.

 

[Viper0011.]

I do believe there is an option of the rocket motor ignition being delayed after ejection from the launcher, thus the thing you mentioned above should not be much of a problem.

F-22 & F-35s and other fighter jets use the same kind of system, missile is ejected first and then the rocket motor is ignited.

I never said there wasn't. However, protocols are made considering plane's and pilot's security. Once a missile's armed and then fired and if the plane is upside down....how'd you release it and expect it to go many meters below due to the gravity before ignition?? If you are upside down, it can't be released like like that as you'll be underneath the missile. It would ignite from it's current position or may be a couple of feet from the jet. Meaning the jet will be hit with the smoke and degree (that could happen easily if the missile is so close).
Under this situation, you are firing like this due to the angle of attack and being in combat....you may not have the time to straighten the aircraft to 'properly fire' the missile.

Jets with weapon's bay (Stealth jets) are a different story. They don't show up on the radar so the chances are that no one is seeing them clearly when they open up their weapons bay and make it rain with AMRAAM or whatever else. Plus, for other planes, during test firing and training, they always fire from a straight normal position. In combat, that position could be anything but straight and simple.

 

[airmarshal]

Pardon my ignorance but shouldnt those be underneath the wings somewhere?

Wow!!!! Good to see MLUed F-16A for the first time! Great

This is a USAF/ ANG standard to carry AMRAAMS on the wingtips. PA and PAF are adopting those standards also. You can even see the new uniforms, hats, the way the soldiers put their gear on, etc. They are adopting to the American / NATO standards

Another point is with newer F-16s, new pylons have been adopted which can carry both AIM-120 and AIM-9 missiles. Older pylons could only carry AIM-9s.

 

[gambit]

I never said there wasn't. However, protocols are made considering plane's and pilot's security. Once a missile's armed and then fired and if the plane is upside down....how'd you release it and expect it to go many meters below due to the gravity before ignition?? If you are upside down, it can't be released like like that as you'll be underneath the missile. It would ignite from it's current position or may be a couple of feet from the jet. Meaning the jet will be hit with the smoke and degree (that could happen easily if the missile is so close).
Under this situation, you are firing like this due to the angle of attack and being in combat....you may not have the time to straighten the aircraft to 'properly fire' the missile.

Jets with weapon's bay (Stealth jets) are a different story. They don't show up on the radar so the chances are that no one is seeing them clearly when they open up their weapons bay and make it rain with AMRAAM or whatever else. Plus, for other planes, during test firing and training, they always fire from a straight normal position. In combat, that position could be anything but straight and simple.

The missile's rocket motor ignite via timing mechanism. It does not matter if you are 'upside' or 'upside down'. The ejector cartridges can 'kick' a weight of over 300 lbs out at about 30ft/sec. Pilots know that if they launch from positions other than 'upside' they will have to slightly maneuver away from the missile's gravity driven arc.

 

[Nishan_101]

Yeah! Much better if we had negotiated with US in 2002 to get all the 28 from them along with the upgrade kits to Turkey to upgrade these 59 in Turkey in 5 years time starting from 2003-2007 and also we could have tried for 24 Venuezvellan F-16s with US permission.

Although we don't need in good numbers but instead of 18 we should have ordered 35-55 F-16s Block-52(15Cs/20Ds OR 20Cs/35Ds)
With an Agreement that they will not halt any supply of spares will develop an over haul facility at PAC.

 

[REHAN NIAZI FALCON]

Yeah! Much better if we had negotiated with US in 2002 to get all the 28 from them along with the upgrade kits to Turkey to upgrade these 59 in Turkey in 5 years time starting from 2003-2007 and also we could have tried for 24 Venuezvellan F-16s with US permission.

Although we don't need in good numbers but instead of 18 we should have ordered 35-55 F-16s Block-52(15Cs/20Ds OR 20Cs/35Ds)
With an Agreement that they will not halt any supply of spares will develop an over haul facility at PAC.

it would have been better ,
but brother we are slaves , so we need to be happy with what ever our master provides to us

 

[Imran Khan]