Top 10 Fighter Jets (Your 2 Cents)

[Abingdonboy]

1: Typhoon and Rafale are NOT heavy weight fighters, they and F-16s are all Medium weight category.
2: F-16s offered to India, were far more advanced in technology than both Rafale and Typhoons
3: F-16s are PROVEN - Typhoons and Rafale are still paper tigers.
4: F-16s offered to India were, coming with AESA on flyway costs.
5: F-16s can perform 3 sorties in 24 hours with LOWEST turn around time,maintenance and the LOWEST launch intervals = Reduced response time.
6: F-16s had low operating costs against Rafale and Typhoons.
7: Excellent TWR
8: Excellent and PROVEN Multirole - CAS -CAP - CAC- SEAD capabilities.
9: Excellent fuel to loiter ratio.
10: F-16s have more than one supplier of spare parts which is not the case with Rafale or Typhoons.

India bought Rafales because of political reasons, F-16 Block-70 specs was by far the most potent platform available on MMRCA competition, i am glad IAF won't have hands on it now.

It has been said again and again the MMRCA was 100% free from political interference-venders even agreed.

I, don't engage in debates with people who hold preconceived notions that cant be changed.

I could say the same about you-blindly believing the F16 is better than anything else in the face of logic and facts points to preconceived notions that cant be changed."


Calling the F-16 the best offer in the MMRCA is so far off it is unreal. If it was true wouldn't the F18IN with all the same equipement and more be even better? The F-16 was down-selected as it failed to meet the IAF's criteria.


If the PAF didn't operate the F16 I have no doubt in my mind you wouldn't be calling the F16 the best plane in the MMRCA-NO ONE belives this. The F-16 only has one engine and is basically 1970s technology, even if it has been upgraded extensively.

 

[Kompromat]

It has been said again and again the MMRCA was 100% free from political interference-venders even agreed.

I could say the same about you-blindly believing the F16 is better than anything else in the face of logic and facts points to preconceived notions that cant be changed."


Calling the F-16 the best offer in the MMRCA is so far off it is unreal. If it was true wouldn't the F18IN with all the same equipement and more be even better? The F-16 was down-selected as it failed to meet the IAF's criteria.


If the PAF didn't operate the F16 I have no doubt in my mind you wouldn't be calling the F16 the best plane in the MMRCA-NO ONE belives this. The F-16 only has one engine and is basically 1970s technology, even if it has been upgraded extensively.

F/A-18 doesn't offer the versatility and low operating costs which F-16 does. AFIC - Rafale was the choice i knew IAF was going to make.

 

[Abingdonboy]

F/A-18 doesn't offer the versatility and low operating costs which F-16 does. AFIC - Rafale was the choice i knew IAF was going to make.

Because it's the best on offer? I highly doubt you'll admit it but it's worth a try!

 

[tony singh]

Light weight
Advanced AESA radar
Excellent sensor fusion and systems
integration
Cooperative targeting
New advanced weaponry
Remarkable maneuverability
(without conformal fuel tanks)
Low signatures
Moderate cost
Generous technology transfer likely
High political benefits




Lacks organic IRST
Diminished maneuverability (with
conformal fuel tanks)
Limited growth prospects
Complications related to deployment
in Pakistan



F16 IN is a a top notch fighter but why we want the same thing Pakistan flies and lacks growth potential as its a 1970's bird

 

[Kayoze]

Only advantage latest generation F16 have over Rafale is mature AESA Radar. During MMRCA trail IAF had concluded that block 60 owing to their conformal tanks were not so swift in air.
It is impossible to convince a Pakistani that ever there has been built a better plane than F16. If you ask a Pakistani to enumerate two major achievement of their nation, first would be that they own nukes and second would be that they operate F16s.

 

[tony singh]

Most countries that have the F16 are replacing them or will in the future with the F35 it's because the fighter has reached the end of the line in terms of future growth upgrades and India needs something which will be in service for the next 40 years, the Rafale has alot to offer in that regard which is why it's still in the running for the Brazil fighter tender as well as Kuwait who will replace their old F16's. India also has good experience with the Mirage that along with better tech transfer is what sealed the deal for India not to mention the Rafale was offered alot cheaper to the EF some say by more than 10% less.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

other than a Mature AESA f16 blk 60 had nothing significantly better to offer.

 

[MilSpec]

1: Typhoon and Rafale are NOT heavy weight fighters, they and F-16s are all Medium weight category.

True, but f16, including many of experts on this forum is still classified light weight especially considering the fact that max takeoff weight of f16 42000lbs compared to 54000 lbs on rafale, 66000lbs on f/a 18sh, 52500 on eft and 65500 on mig35

2: F-16s offered to India, were far more advanced in technology than both Rafale and Typhoons

Not true, rafale and typhoons both are platforms which offer better technologies, better supersonic maneuverability, better weapons loadout, lesser rcs and better range. F16 is an older platform, which even the primary users, USAF are not bothering to upgrade.

3: F-16s are PROVEN - Typhoons and Rafale are still paper tigers.

For lack of better words, the school of thought is utterly stupid, so in your opinion, fc1,fc20,f22, f35,su30,su34,rafale,eft,jas 39, saab viggen, all are paper tigers. By that standard the entir world sould onlybe flying f16, f15 and mig29'.

4: F-16s offered to India were, coming with AESA on flyway costs.

5: F-16s can perform 3 sorties in 24 hours with LOWEST turn around time,maintenance and the LOWEST launch intervals = Reduced response time.

Turn around time for actually f18sh, rafale, and ef all thre surpassed serviceability of f16's.

6: F-16s had low operating costs against Rafale and Typhoons.

true, but mig 35's has even lower costs than f16 as a complete package, but then IAF was looking for the best platform not the cheapest one.

7: Excellent TWR

sure, when compared o other legacy fighter, but not against the MMRCA competition.
TWR of f16IN fielded only could surpass the twr of f/a 18sh, and was equal to Mig35, rest of three had better TWR than the F16IN

8: Excellent and PROVEN Multirole - CAS -CAP - CAC- SEAD capabilities.

True, but it was not a magic show, everyone evaluating understood the exact capabilities brought to the table.

9: Excellent fuel to loiter ratio.

same can be said about all of the euro canards

10: F-16s have more than one supplier of spare parts which is not the case with Rafale or Typhoons.

true, but this is a 126-200 aircraft deal, not a deal of buying 15 -20 aircrafts, HAL would only deal with one single reliable entity.

India bought Rafales because of political reasons, F-16 Block-70 specs was by far the most potent platform available on MMRCA competition, i am glad IAF won't have hands on it now.

Again utter B.S, first thing four of very strong platforms were out just due to technical parameters. If there was to be a political move, then we would see a thrust vectoring aircraft called mig35MKI, on similar grounds of the tailor made su30MKI.

Because, Americans refused transfer of technology of critical components to India.......

I hope you understand what ToT means, if there was to be any issues with technology transfer, then Lockheed wouldn't have participated period.

 

[Gessler]

If political aspect plays a role in MMRCA, either f-16/fa-18 (becoz of US pressure) or
ef typhoon (4 nations lobbying, plus sonia gandhi is italian) would have won.

IAF selcted what aircraft was best for it. typhoon may have been better than rafale in some
aspects but IAF had 2 choices - 1) go for the best available fighter with restricted tech absorbtion
and usage or 2) go for the 2nd-best capability that can be fully exploited?

IAF went for option 2.

There is no credible arguement in the WORLD challenging MMRCA decision.

---

f-16 block-60/f-16in being superior to Rafale F3 with RBE-2AA radar is a joke.

the only adavnatge f-16in would have offered is cheaper costs.

---

its funny how some people think the MMRCA desicion taken after 650 technical
evaultion points and generating 20k papers of technical reports on each fighter,
IAF test pilots flying 250+ flight hours on each fighter...can be challenged.

 

[acetophenol]

You are right. I forgot all about the F16 especially the new Block 52 or 60 or whatever. I think J10 would be replaced by F16 in my list. So my new list would be:

1. F22 Raptor
2. Su 30 MKI
3. Dassault Rafale
4. Eurofighter Typhoon
5. F18 Super hornet
6. F15 Strike Eagle
7. F16 (dont know the block numbers, some latest block 52 or 60 or whatever)
8. Mig 35/Mig 29 UPG
9. Su 27
10. Su 35

Bro, i avoided j10 because of my lack of knowlege about them. Now i believe j10 is a better fighter than f 16

 

[Gessler]

Bro, i avoided j10 because of my lack of knowlege about them. Now i believe j10 is a better fighter than f 16

J-10A does not give the performance of a F-16C Block-30.

as of J-10B, ist only a testbed like Su-47 Berkut and not a production type IMO.

 

[Don Jaguar]

Ah come on way to early for listing it in there, The we need more info and details for that...

Same for the F-35 Lightning II.

 

[UKBengali]

J-10A does not give the performance of a F-16C Block-30.

as of J-10B, ist only a testbed like Su-47 Berkut and not a production type IMO.

And how do you know that?

 

[Zabaniyah]

J-10A does not give the performance of a F-16C Block-30.

as of J-10B, ist only a testbed like Su-47 Berkut and not a production type IMO.

MY SCOOTER

Chuck Norris's scooter

 

[Sanchez]

And how do you know that?

By genetics...