F-16 versus F-15

Normsta3 · by **Normsta3** » 09 Nov 2003, 20:33

True, we don't KNOW if the Block 52+ or 60s will get it, but come, let's move on logical guesses. Unless they use indigenious radars, I'd say that the AESA is a good bet. And even if they don't, USAF F-16s will most surely have them in the future, right? As for the AESA itself, just HOW much of an advantage does a F-15 with AESA have on a F-16 with AESA, if any?

pucara70 · by **pucara70** » 09 Nov 2003, 21:30

Hi pals:
First of all, both aircraft were born for different tasks, the Eagle is an interceptor, the Falcon is a truly multirole fighter, more manouverable, with great speed, high climbing rate, turns into a coin, and has a lot of posibilities for A2A missiles, besides, it is smaller, easy to mantain, smaller radar echo, and cheaper

habu2 · by **habu2** » 10 Nov 2003, 01:42

habu2 said

Yes, AESA is planned for F-16 radars but I don't know if it will be exported, which means Blk 52+ and 60 may not have AESA.

Well according to a press release posted on this very site, Block 60 will get the AN/APG-80 with AESA: http://www.f-16.net/modules.php?op=modl ... =0&thold=0

I guess that answers that question... :oops:

ysslah · by **ysslah** » 10 Nov 2003, 05:56

Japanese Radar for F-2 caused many problems during its test in the progress of the development. Therefore, I would not want to rely on those on radars

**Guest** · by **Guest** » 10 Nov 2003, 19:53

Why do you think they test them if not to find out what's wrong with them?

Off-topic didn't the MiG-31 have an electronically scanned phased array too?

habu2 · by **habu2** » 10 Nov 2003, 19:57

Based on photos I have seen not only MiG-31 but also B-1B and B-2A also have planar arrays, which implies ESA.

habu2 · by **habu2** » 10 Nov 2003, 20:13

ysslah, I would not want to rely on the developmental versions either. I am quite confident the final fielded versions have these problems worked out. Remember, the US manufacturers have been building radars for many decades. This was a fairly ambitious undertaking for Mitsubishi Electric, especially when development of the FS-X radar started well over ten years ago.

Commando · by **Commando** » 11 Nov 2003, 16:52

This is quite confusing, considering that an F-16 Block 60 with AMRAAM should be able to take out an F-15A/Bs.

habu2 · by **habu2** » 11 Nov 2003, 17:01

And an F-15C/D MSIP with AMRAAM and APG-63(v)2 should be able to take out an F-16A/B... aren't you comparing apples to oranges?

Normsta3 · by **Normsta3** » 11 Nov 2003, 23:14

Well gentlemen, then doesn't that imply that they're equal in long - range AA combat? If so, then we should look a WVR combat, in which we all KNOW which plane (not pilot, but plane) is better. Falcon all the way.

TC · by TC » 16 Feb 2004, 04:33

Ok, this thread has been inactive for awhile. Granted, we'll probably never see the scenario where a Viper will have to go against an Eagle in "the REAL thing" unless a certain Viper-equipped, Middle Eastern nation that I might mention, starts something with an allied country. All in all though, most likely NOT going to happen. But, back to the topic. Both aircraft are great in their own right. The Viper can pretty much out-turn any aircraft in the world (except maybe now the 22 and the 35.) The Viper also employs a wide variety of ordinance, and can perform basically any fighter and/or attack mission. The Eagle can dogfight with the best of them (anybody remember Gulf War I?) The F-15 has never been beaten in a dogfight (but neither has the 16) and has a record of NEARLY 110-0. The Eagle can out-accelerate and out-climb any jet of its era, and anything new that the Russians come out with is STILL technologically inferior to the Eagle. The radar really gives the Eagle a wanted unfair advantage, as it will blow away most anything before it is seen. When an air to air engagement is ensuing, the Eagles get first dibs. Anyone else who gets a kill, usually either is in the right place at the right time, or is picking up the slack after the Eagles do an initial sweep. Pound for pound the radar and armament give the F-15 an advantage over anything in the sky. Regardless though, as Chuck Yeager once said, "It's not the machine, it's the MAN!!" Either aircraft will get you the results you want. However, if all we want to do is air to air, put me in an Eagle any day of the week.

awetsock · by **awetsock** » 16 Feb 2004, 05:11

It really is comparing apples and oranges...last December (2002) we flew DACT against the Saudi F-15's with our mixture of Block 30 big and small mouths. Needless to say we had some pretty green LT's eating some F-15. I agree with TC..."It's not the machine, it's the MAN!!"

elp · by **elp** » 16 Feb 2004, 06:26

Wouldn't want to try and keep a tally on the little F-16 in a turning fight. Then again I don't qualify for that job anyway.

. Put JR in a P Suit and an F-15 and he would show up at the fight at 70,000 feet, going fast, not burning much fuel and already have AMRAAM shots off cause of the speed and height. :twisted:

The test pilots here tell me that flying the F-15E with the big engines ( not the small engine ones ) and no CFTs are a lot of fun.

Wildcat · by **Wildcat** » 16 Feb 2004, 16:47

TC wrote:

The Viper can pretty much out-turn any aircraft in the world (except maybe now the 22 and the 35.)

Well, what about the Typhoon and the Rafale then? :wink:

( remember the Rafale F1 is now in full service aboard the Charles De Gaulle a/c carrier)

viper032386 · by **viper032386** » 16 Feb 2004, 22:28

What about the Gripen? I thought that was equivalent to the F-16?