polish AF discussion..

[Boberro]

They're used, not new :)

 

I don't know is it true 100% but supposedly they will be equipmed with NVIS, Programmed Depot Maintenance system, IFF ect.

Edited March 23, 2009 by Boberro

[topol-m]

Man, it was US influence that was crucial for theat choice. I think Gripen is the perfect fighter for most of the countries in East Europe that are modernizing their AF. F-16 might be a workhourse but its a grandpa already, lets buy some new, small, efficient, economical, advanced fighter what you say? Poland clearly had no choice, it HAD to be F-16. For Mig we are not even talking about, Poland wouldnt take migs cause migs are build in Russia. That big bad neighbour.

[Kusch]

Cool, didn't knew Poland will recieve some.

 

Are they brand new or refurbished?

 

 

Refurbished ;) Picture:

 

http://www.mon.gov.pl/pl/galeria/2390

 

[Groove]

Thanks for the updates Bob and Kusch :)

[GGTharos]

Poland wouldn't take MiGs because MiGs are not up to the level of what an F-16 can do right now. Ask the Algerians ;)

 

Further, the Gripen is too small, too little TWR, and too little payload for many applications. What are you talking about, man?

 

Man, it was US influence that was crucial for theat choice. I think Gripen is the perfect fighter for most of the countries in East Europe that are modernizing their AF. F-16 might be a workhourse but its a grandpa already, lets buy some new, small, efficient, economical, advanced fighter what you say? Poland clearly had no choice, it HAD to be F-16. For Mig we are not even talking about, Poland wouldnt take migs cause migs are build in Russia. That big bad neighbour.

[topol-m]

Poland wouldn't take MiGs because MiGs are not up to the level of what an F-16 can do right now. Ask the Algerians ;)

 

Further, the Gripen is too small, too little TWR, and too little payload for many applications. What are you talking about, man?

 

 

Well i dont see how a plane being small is a bad thing for country that will probably use it for air defence only and doesnt have the ambition of bombing...lets say Iran for example. Whether the mig is up to the level of the F-16 can be a subject of another thread cause we will corrupt this one with arguing, again. And for the payload lets not compare it to F-35 for instance cause we`ll see it can carry more than enough.

[Sundowner.pl]

Too bad those are not Juliets.

 

Well at least it can take a truck on board, not like the OTHER aircraft... and actually exists... not like that DIFFERENT aircraft :music_whistling:

[GGTharos]

No MiG offered for export so far, save the MiG-35, has shown itself to have capabilities similar to the F-16. Period, end of story.

 

The F-16 can do MORE per flight, it can go FARTHER per flight, and it doesn't cost a whole lot more IIRC. So it is a better deal. It also fits with the supply structure better since there are options to buy/get parts from other countries that produce the F-16 under license. The Gripen loses there because it doesn't have the same capability. Why would you buy something smaller when you can get something that works better? Poland isn't a huge country, but it isn't small either.

 

Well i dont see how a plane being small is a bad thing for country that will probably use it for air defence only and doesnt have the ambition of bombing...lets say Iran for example. Whether the mig is up to the level of the F-16 can be a subject of another thread cause we will corrupt this one with arguing, again. And for the payload lets not compare it to F-35 for instance cause we`ll see it can carry more than enough.

[topol-m]

No MiG offered for export so far, save the MiG-35, has shown itself to have capabilities similar to the F-16. Period, end of story.

 

The F-16 can do MORE per flight, it can go FARTHER per flight, and it doesn't cost a whole lot more IIRC. So it is a better deal. It also fits with the supply structure better since there are options to buy/get parts from other countries that produce the F-16 under license. The Gripen loses there because it doesn't have the same capability. Why would you buy something smaller when you can get something that works better? Poland isn't a huge country, but it isn't small either.

 

 

So it seems the polish pilots know s..t cause they dont support the F-16. Its a political decision afterall.

[GGTharos]

Last time I saw a Polish F-16 pilot (In Poland!!!) he was pretty happy with his F-16. We departed from the same airport (Poznan) though of course he got to fly out in his F-16, and wave at us with a few wing rocks. ;)

[topol-m]

Well they have been bought already, nothing can be done i just hope no other east european country gets more of these old, used fighters. It would be a disapointment.

[Kusch]

"old, used fighters"? LOL No comment...

[Boberro]

old, used fighters

 

 

...

[Sundowner.pl]

"old, used.." hahaha, good one :megalol:

 

Those are the newest F-16 airframes in whole Europe (except for the Greece, that begun getting their own b52+ ), and so far the most capable strike fighters in whole continent... though unfortunately not for long, as the Typhoon and Rafale getting closer to their final version - and F-35 getting closer to signing contracts.

 

"old, used" are those Hercs, whose airframes remember rolling down the termac of Saigon Internation during the "fun times", the Vipers are surely not :smartass:

[Groove]

Don't let yourselfes lure into a troll discussion.

[Sundowner.pl]

We're just having fun :smilewink:

 

You have to know there was one guy that said those F-16s are old and used... he got bad taste in sweaters, ties, and liked to stop traffic in whole country for... umm... apparently no reason at all.

[topol-m]

First of all i didnt say the polish ones are used. I meaned old and used F-16s as such have been sold not once to different countries. And as i`m constantly punished from moderators i`ll speak in facts:

Gripen is rated 4.5 generation fighter (compared to 4th F-16), it has modern avionics, all weather radar, it is able to attack 4 targets simultaneously, its economical, can carry 6 Air to Air missiles (as much as F-16), have similar or even higher combat radius, the F can beat it with external tanks as it has higher payload but as it is intended for Air deffence it is irrelevant, it is small, can operate from 800m runaways. So if anyone can explain me how is that the F-16 is so much a better deal as the stats of both are similar i`ll be gratefull and not trolling.

[Kusch]

Each 4.5 generation fighter ejected himself?

[EtherealN]

I so misread that. :|

[Sundowner.pl]

First of all i didnt say the polish ones are used. I meaned old and used F-16s as such have been sold not once to different countries. And as i`m constantly punished from moderators i`ll speak in facts:

Gripen is rated 4.5 generation fighter (compared to 4th F-16), it has modern avionics, all weather radar, it is able to attack 4 targets simultaneously, its economical, can carry 6 Air to Air missiles (as much as F-16), have similar or even higher combat radius, the F can beat it with external tanks as it has higher payload but as it is intended for Air deffence it is irrelevant, it is small, can operate from 800m runaways. So if anyone can explain me how is that the F-16 is so much a better deal as the stats of both are similar i`ll be gratefull and not trolling.

Hope you will do your end of the bargain:

 

1. "generation" rating is misleading and the 4.5, 4+, 4++, 4+++, 4.92837 is simply marketings talking. It's a multirole combat aircraft, that can perform many roles without switching equipment ? It's a 4th generation aircraft. It have also a passive low visibility ? Than it's 5th gen aircraft. No middle ground there.

 

2. F-16C/D Block 52+ in Polish variant (it is unique mind you) have very good avionics suite, the WRE is especialy capable, probably only the Israeli Sufa and purpose build WRE aircrafts can top that right now. Radar have better range and power (burn through jamming is esential in defender role).

 

3. F-16 have better combat radius that availble Gripen variants, with CFTs and drop tanks - there is no competition... plus we always can give it Israeli mod with 5 droptanks total, including 600 gal ones on inner underwing stations. And range IS crutial in defender role - time on station is very important if you don't have tankers, or enough airplanes to replace those in the air guarding airspace.

 

4. '39 IS small, that is correct... small also means low growth potential. The RCS is not really a problem after "Have Glass" program on Viper, and the difference betwen RCS of a Flanker, and a Viper.

 

5. Viper can operate from 800m runways too... actually hauling the same amount of junk and juice as the '39 on its MTOW. That big engine makes a lot diference.

 

6. IIRC Saab asked 78 mln USD per aircraft with training, spares, some armament inlcuding their license build AIM-120A, AIM-9M, and Maverics (IRIS-T were to bought later). Lockheed sold F-16 for 82mln USD also with training, spares and armament inlcuding AIM-120C-5, AIM-9X, JDAM, JSOW, Maverics, Panthera targeting and DB-110 recce pods. Hell of a deal if you ask me.

[topol-m]

I accept this explanation, with some notes i think that the differences in combat radius, payload tanks are irrelevant for Poland. How much better the F-16s radar actually is i don`t know havent found detail info. And for the 4th, 5th gen fighters there is a gap between old 4th gen and 5th gen fighters, that modernised 4th gen or completely new fighters that dont have all the advanced techs of 5th gen fighter fill. They are just much more capable that older 4th gen, in various aspects so 4th+ or 4.5 is conditionally assigned to them.

[GGTharos]

Actually tanks are very relevant as they increase combat radius or loiter time. Pick your favorite.

 

The F-16's radar is already bigger, and since they're of similar quality, it'll do better.

[topol-m]

Actually tanks are very relevant as they increase combat radius or loiter time. Pick your favorite.

 

The F-16's radar is already bigger, and since they're of similar quality, it'll do better.

 

With 3000+ km with external tanks i dont see why Polish AF will need any more. Any info on maintanance cost for both aircrafts? Initial price is one thing but the cost in long terms might be different.

[GGTharos]

3000km is for ferry flight, not combat.

[EtherealN]

It's not 3000km+ that's the really relevant thing. Greater fuel capacity can give you longer action radius, yes. But it can also allow you to stay in airborne alert for a long time as opposed to being on alert but on the runway. And finally, greater capacity of course also allows you to spend more time on full military power as opposed to more fuel efficient cruise settings, decreasing the risks of having to disengage from a fight due to fuel worries. (Such as happened several times with israeli Nesher aircraft fighting over Egypt, way back.)