Pakistan F-16 Discussions 2

[Windjammer]

Bombed up and ready to deliver.

 

[Edevelop]

A nice headshot of a PAF Block-52 F-16D.

nice pic

 

[Munir]

Bombed up and ready to deliver.

Always nice to see pictures of fighter-planes you have touched and watched for hours... 726 and 728 (top gun) were in Turkey! It is an old pic. This plane had shifted to the other squadron and then had its Falcon up upgrade removed to be MLU'ed.

 

[Tacticool]

A.o.A
Sir i have some queries. No one is answering them in forums.
How many no of f-16s have been upgraded to mlu standard till now
They said they'll upgrade one per month so it should be more than 12 by now in turkey.
Any news about new submarines?
when fourth f-22p frigate will be handed over?

 

[fatman17]

A.o.A
Sir i have some queries. No one is answering them in forums.
How many no of f-16s have been upgraded to mlu standard till now
They said they'll upgrade one per month so it should be more than 12 by now in turkey.
Any news about new submarines?
when fourth f-22p frigate will be handed over?

3 MLU pattern a/c returned from US.
6 MLU completed in TAI.
no good news on subs unfortunately its about resource constraints.
in June we should get 4th F-22 Sword class frigate.

 

[Munir]

I guess that after the 6 MLU'ed in Turkey the rest is done in Pakistan by Turkish engineers. I think I can say nothing more then that.

 

[Tacticool]

Where these f-16s are stationed? will they be sent to their respective squadrons or new squadrons will be made of mlu f-16s?
What is difference between usa upgraded and turkish upgraded f-16s?

 

[Windjammer]

An old but much clearer image of one of the first Block-52s to arrive in Pakistan.

Here you can see why the F-16 keeps it's nose up longer after touchdown as the shape of it's underside acts like an air-brake.

 

[Jango]

An old but much clearer image of one of the first Block-52s to arrive in Pakistan.

Here you can see why the F-16 keeps it's nose up longer after touchdown as the shape of it's underside acts like an air-brake.

The F-15 also uses this tactic...

 

[Windjammer]

The F-15 also uses this tactic...

I'm not sure dear since the F-15 has a giant air brake on it's spine where as the F-16 has them adjacent to it's elevators.

 

[Jango]

I'm not sure dear since the F-15 has a giant air brake on it's spine where as the F-16 has them adjacent to it's elevators.

Makes no difference...

Search for Red Flag mass recovery on google and click on a link and then watch the F-15 landings.

 

[gambit]

An old but much clearer image of one of the first Block-52s to arrive in Pakistan.

Here you can see why the F-16 keeps it's nose up longer after touchdown as the shape of it's underside acts like an air-brake.

The F-15 also uses this tactic...

I'm not sure dear since the F-15 has a giant air brake on it's spine where as the F-16 has them adjacent to it's elevators.

It is called 'aerodynamic braking'...

Flight Training: Soft Field Techniques

For a soft-field takeoff, how high should a pilot hold the nose? During a soft-field landing, how much aerodynamic braking is enough? Expect your examiner to ask such questions. In your answers, remember that controllability is the overriding concern. Examiners often hear applicants recite that a nose-high attitude transfers weight to the wings as quickly as possible on takeoff, then in flight see them succumb to the "more is better" philosophy that leads to scraping the tail-tiedown ring as a sacrifice to the god of lift. These souls forget that drastically increased angles of attack create so much drag that the ground roll increases dramatically. The Airplane Flying Handbook (FAA-H-8083-3) reminds applicants, instructors, and examiners that, "As the airplane accelerates, enough back-elevator pressure should be applied to establish a positive angle of attack and to reduce the weight supported by the nosewheel." The idea is to reduce, not eliminate, weight on the nosewheel.

To sum it up, aerodynamic braking during landing is to use as much of the body to create as much drag as possible. On the other hand, as the above section stated, if pitch up attitude is too high but there is not enough engine thrust for take-off, then no matter how much pitch up to create drag, there is just enough lift to spin the wheels but not to slow down the aircraft, resulting in a longer landing roll. There must be a balance between aerodynamic drag and actual physical drag between tire rubber and runway.

It is a balance initially difficult for a student pilot to achieve and in trying to find that balance, there would be a few hard hits on the nose gear. I know it took me a few landings to learn to find that balance. Maintainers hate it when the nose strut leaks because of those hard landings.

 

[Jango]

It is a balance initially difficult for a student pilot to achieve and in trying to find that balance, there would be a few hard hits on the nose gear. I know it took me a few landings to learn to find that balance. Maintainers hate it when the nose strut leaks because of those hard landings.

That was gonna be my next question, you answered it before I even asked...thanks.

 

[gambit]

That was gonna be my next question, you answered it before I even asked...thanks.

Some aircrafts, civilian and military, will allow you to have high enough landing AoA, to actually have enough of the aircraft's weight on the main gear to give you both aerodynamic and tire drag. The trick lies in knowing your aircraft, how to 'play' the throttle, and how much nose-up (flare) to make upon weight-on-wheels (WoW) on the main gear. Of course, landing weight is a factor, if a -16 came back still with ordnance because of no targets, like how often that happened during Desert Storm, then that would affect his landing speed, weight, and how much nose-up AoA he can produce without stalling. THAT would be absolutely embarrassing.

 

[fatman17]

Is There Anything An F-16 Cannot Do?


April 21, 2013:

The U.S. Air Force prefers to use its F-16 fighters for everything. While the F-16 is a capable and versatile aircraft, the main reason for using it so much is because it is so cheap to operate. It costs the air force $23,000 per hour to operate an F-16C. Other fighters are much more expensive. An F-22 costs $68,000 an hour, while an F-15C costs $42,000, and an F-15E $36,000.

The only aircraft that beats the F-16C is the A-10C, which costs $18,000 an hour. But the A-10 is not a fighter and is optimized for ground support. The F-16 can also do that but not as well. The other ground support aircraft, the AC-130U costs $46,000 an hour. That’s why these are being replaced by C-130 transports ($18,000 an hour), with special cargo containers consisting of sensors and weapons similar to those on the AC-130.

The F-16, like the A-10 can also drop smart bombs. Both aircraft are much cheaper at this than the bombers. The B-52H costs $70,000 an hour, the B-1B $58,000, and the B-2 $169,000. The problem with the bombers is that with smart bombs you don’t need a lot of bombs. So what the F-16 can carry (a dozen or more, depending on weight) is usually adequate in places like Afghanistan. For an attack on, say, North Korea, the bombers would come into their own, at least for the initial assault when there are a lot of targets to hit.

With the right sensors, missiles, and electronic weapons, plus well-trained pilots, the F-16 can beat just about any other fighter out there. For stealth fighters that would have to include sensors that can handle stealth. But stealth fighters often have the best sensors and electronics as well. Thus against most foes a well tricked out F-16 can do it all.


i'm wondering what the PAF costs are. one cannot make a straight conversion based on FX rate but a realistic estimate would be 50% of the USAF cost. that is $ 10-12,000 per hour or is that still too high?