Forum: F-16 versus XYZ

Is the block 60 the best F-16?

If so can it beat the Typhoon in A2A?

F-16.net Sponsor

Hi viperrulez,

IMHO, you can't really say or tell which fighter is the best, especially when you're talking about the Viper block 60, Typhoon and all the rest you mentioned.. All of them are 4th generation fighters, so to speak, and are designed to do multirole operations with the nations that have/will have them. As such, there will be some areas where a particular fighter is better, like maybe A/A, but there may be other areas where other fighters can do a lot better. Then again, "better" is a relative term. It depends on a lot of factors to decide who is the best, and like KarimAbdoun said, the pilot in control of the aircraft plays an integral role in determining that. An analogy: If you put a veteran ace in lets say a spitfire, and you put in an inexperienced guy in an F-16, no matter what that inexperienced guy does, I can bet you the spit can schwack the 16 upside down, inside out, before you can say "knock it off". Ever heard of this phrase "its the man, not the machine"? Other factors include the fighter's own design and performance. Better turn rate and turn radius will mean that you can rake your nose onto the other guy faster, and you probably have a better chance of shooting him down. But then again, that depends on how well the pilot uses the advantages that he has. One thing to note tho, its always good to know what your fighter's capabilities and weaknesses are, so you can exploit that strength and minimise the mistakes you make in a dogfight. Better yet, know your enemy's strength's and weaknesses. That way you can exploit his weakness and negate him the chance to get angles on you.

So the answer to your question, is simply this: It depends...maybe, maybe not.

Check six!

Well in this case there is really no discussion.
The only thing where the block 60 is equal is Avionics and man machine interface.

The Typhoon has higher trust to weight ratio and lower wingloading.
The Typhooon has lots of stealth features in the design right from start.

The Typhoon has more hardpoints. e.g it could carry 2 GBUs. 2 Harms, 3 BVR and 2 WVR missles, plus all 3 external tanks.
The F-16 would have to decide (harms or bombs) and still carrys 2 A/A missile less.

Future upgrades: The F-16 is reaching the end of its life, Its hard to squeeze in more stuff into the airframe. As seen on the block 60, bumps and warts all over the plane.

Of course the typhoon is also more expensive.

Well one must also not forget that the Typhoon has had its share of hiccups too, like for example needing 2 pilots to fly the jet because of its "unreliable" navigation systems. There has also been a series of crashes involving the Typhoon, and its definitely not a good sign with regards to the fact that it only recently entered service in certain parts of the world, and that sales are still ongoing to export it to other nations (Singapore being one of them). I can dig up the news reports to substantiate my claims, but i'm just too lazy(and busy) to do that, so you're gonna have to take my word for them Razz

As for the F-16, the reason why those dudes are preserving the plane's shelf life is because of one very important reason: Its combat proven. Its been to countless wars and conflicts, not to mention having the largest share of countries and nations around the world using it as their main air defense fighter. The continuous upgrades of its avionics and systems would mean it can incorporate any new weapons suite being made for the air force. Maybe reason number two is because its cheap, wayy cheaper than the other 4th generation fighters out there, but does what its supposed to do. Its so famous that if u ask anyone around the world what's the plane with the bubble canopy and the "smiley" air intakes under its nose, they can answer you without a moment's hesitation that its an F-16 Fighting Falcon.

On a personal note, i've always been attracted to the F-16's unique design as well; there's a mysterious aura around the jet's design and shape that really appeals to me. The new CFTs on the F-16E/Fs make it look like its on steriods, and just adds to the glamour and glitz.

However with that being said, give me either of these 2 fighters to fly and I will gladly fly them, period. Nothing beats being a 4th generation fighter pilot flying a 4th generation fighter, whatever that fighter may be.

Edit: Ohh and btw, hello Hans, never knew u were lurking around these parts too Wink

Quote:

Well one must also not forget that the Typhoon has had its share of hiccups too, like for example needing 2 pilots to fly the jet because of its "unreliable" navigation systems.

The majority of the Typhoons are single seaters. The 2 seaters are used for training and maybe if a customer requests it special strike variants with a dedicated WSO are created. Oh and please explain why the navigation system would be unreliable, it uses the same of the shelf components then any other modern jet (laser-gyros and GPS recievers)

Quote:

There has also been a series of crashes involving the Typhoon, and its definitely not a good sign with regards to the fact that it only recently entered service in certain parts of the world

As far as I know only one Typhoon crahed so far. This happned in November 2002 during a testflight. The reasons were problems with the control software of the engines., This problem is has been fixed a long time ago.

Quote:

As for the F-16, the reason why those dudes are preserving the plane's shelf life is because of one very important reason: Its combat proven.

It is combat prooven as bomb truck in a war against a 3rd world country.

Quote:

Its been to countless wars and conflicts, not to mention having the largest share of countries and nations around the world using it as their main air defense fighter. The continuous upgrades of its avionics and systems would mean it can incorporate any new weapons suite being made for the air force.

Many other nations needing upgrades for their older A or C modells won´t help you to much if you have a Block60.

Quote:

Maybe reason number two is because its cheap, wayy cheaper than the other 4th generation fighters out there

Yes, its cheap. Specially of you buy used C modells and upgrade them to the latest CCIP standard. Lots of bang for the buck but not the latest and greatest.
Do you have good info how much the UAE payed for the Block 60s and what is included in that price?

Quote:

Its so famous that if u ask anyone around the world what's the plane with the bubble canopy and the "smiley" air intakes under its nose, they can answer you without a moment's hesitation that its an F-16 Fighting Falcon.

On a personal note, i've always been attracted to the F-16's unique design as well; there's a mysterious aura around the jet's design and shape that really appeals to me. The new CFTs on the F-16E/Fs make it look like its on steriods, and just adds to the glamour and glitz.

Irrelevant and emotional.

Quote:

However with that being said, give me either of these 2 fighters to fly and I will gladly fly them, period. Nothing beats being a 4th generation fighter pilot flying a 4th generation fighter, whatever that fighter may be.

I would say a great pilot in a block 60 has a small chance against an not so good pilot (which won´t be a fool either, he passed difficult and extensive training) in a typhoon. The typhoon has much better supersonic performance. a smaller radar cross section and a more powerful radar (its no phased array radar bit it has a bigger antenna and lots of output power). They typhoon would most likely get the better BVR shot.

WVR things are equal. HMDs and high off boresight IR missiles make it likely that both pilots will die.

Quote:

I would say a great pilot in a block 60 has a small chance against an not so good pilot (which won´t be a fool either, he passed difficult and extensive training) in a typhoon. The typhoon has much better supersonic performance. a smaller radar cross section and a more powerful radar (its no phased array radar bit it has a bigger antenna and lots of output power). They typhoon would most likely get the better BVR shot.

By making a statement that talks of a great Viper Pilot in a F-16E versus an inexperienced pilot in a Typhoon in which the Viper Pilot has a small chance tells me that you don't have a clue.

You mention that the not so good Typhoon Pilot won't be a fool......just because someone has completed training on a particular fighter doesn't make them what they need to be to go and win a dogfight. There is a very good reason that when you see an Viper pilot walk by with a 3000 hour patch on one shoulder and a Fighter Weapons School patch on the other, he will smoke you 95% of the time 1 V 1 if you are some guy that has just completed training. As has been mentioned several times in this topic, there is no substitute for experience.....no matter what fighter you are flying.

Let's face the facts........the Typhoon is a very good airplane that will likely be around for years to come and evolve into one of the better multirole fighters around the world.....I can't deny that.

The Viper remains one of the best values on the world market when it comes to countries looking for multirole combat aircraft. Best value doesn't mean that its the best at everything......it means that the unit cost with the operational cost weighed against the capabilities combined with the historical track record make it the obvious choice for the backbone of a nations air force.

On a seperate note.......what makes you think that the Typhoon has a smaller RCS than a Block 60? And why do you think that just because the Typhoon has a bigger antenna on its radar would it get the first BVR shot. This tells me that you don't know very much about the APG-80 and I don't care how great your radar is, if you don't have a great weapon to employ, you can't make a shot. The latest version AMRAAM employed by an APG-80 is a great BVR shot.

One of the few fighters around that would have the advantage in this situation would be the F/A-22.......it makes it awfully easy to win a fight when you can see them but they can't see you.

First and foremost, let me get something straight. I dont intend to make this discussion a flame war. Whatever I have stated above is based on personal opinion, and looking at matters from all perspectives. However, knowing your infamous reputation to piss people off in every forum you go to Hans, whether intentionally or unintentionally, I'll keep my cool here.(And at just the second post too, a record-breaking feat I must say). As much as i'd like to bust your butt with every single counter-argument u just popped up, i'll leave it as that. As for the which fighter is the best: To each his own, I would say.

I'm sure the other 1624 registered users, and god knows how many other unregistered lurkers, would agree, that the fact that these forums and this site as a whole is solely dedicated to the F-16 would mean to say it has a special place in the rest of OUR hearts. Would u call them irrelevent and emotional too? I would say that those who DONT share the same feelings, DONT belong here. The Eurofighter Typhoon forums are elsewhere on the net.

As such, I consider this post my last for this topic, and I wont be bothered to reply whatever's posted next. As for why the Typhoon's systems are unreliable, go find it out yourself. You *seem* to know everything. As far as I am concerned, this discussion is over.

Likeing the F-16 should not bias anybody to make it something it is not.

That it looks cool does not make it a good plane (which it is). I have a hard time to undersand why you wrote these lines and why you get pissed when I state that this part of your post was irrelevant.
We were talking about which plane is better, not which we like more. A AC Cobra is a much cooler car then a Mercedes SLR but its not a better car.

Tothils, as I outlined there won´t be a major difference in a classic dogfight. the combination of HMD and 9X or HMD and Iris-t/asraam, will make a visual fight basically unwinnable for everybody.

For BVR the machine is important. I say that the Typhoons pilot would get his radar contact first. the radar is more powerful. the advanatges of the phassed array radar of the block 60 (super agile beam, the abillity to split beams etc) does not help in a max detection range 1 vs 1 scenario.

The better acceleration of the typhoon, and the better supersonic performance leads to the fact that the eurofighter will have a better energy state as he launches his shot. the lower wing loading and higher thrust to weight ratio will lead to a better faster extension maneuver. The Typhoon will have better PK in his first shot and in all follwing shots during the BVR fight. His more powerful machine allows him to keep the advanatge. I say that this advantage is big enough to make a LT with 100 hours in the typhoon beat a Major with 2000 hours in (several different types of F-16 some clearly not a BVR machine).

1vs1 BVR is not overly complicated, there are not many tricks the experienced pilot could exploit without takeing extreme risks. The picture would change if its a situation with many more jets in the scenario but again that was not what we talk about.

Personally I think these X vs Y threads are pretty much a waste of electrons.... Rolling Eyes

What I want to know is: why does everyone (except tohtihs) have such a difficult time spelling shithot backwards???? Mr. Green

Quote:

It is combat prooven as bomb truck in a war against a 3rd world country.

I was under the impression that Israel had used the F-16 very sucsessfully in air to air. I'm not making any political statement by this, just a factual observation.

I must agree with Habu2.
I realise at this point in my life, after reading 2.5 tons of military aviation publications, that to compare planes is a very difficult task, you must know a heck of a lot to be able to put the right arguments forward. There are just too many factors involved that require investigation that even the "experts" get it wrong or are challanged by interested parties.
Also, one must be very specific when comparing, let's say F-16C block 50D versus F/a-18F with AESA for example, all other things being equal. Also, let's not forget that there is a lot of stuff we are not told that could make a huge difference.

I read an article in Aviation Week some two years ago, that indicates for example that for some possibly unknown reason, Royal Australian Air Force Hornet pilots are still superior in A2A combat to a similary trained USAF pilot. I will dig out he article, but it is just an example of things that could make all the difference in combat.

Just my humble opinion.

Ya know, after that last post, I have to agree. The pilot is what makes the difference. I don't what X is up against Y, Gums WILL BEAT "Joe Baggodonuts" everytime. Von Richtofen had it right - the crate matters little - it's the pilot that counts. Just think back to when you got your driver's licence. I know you didn't have the training or hours that a new pilot in the armed forces does, but you get the idea. EXPERIENCE is what matters. NOTE - this is a humble civilian speaking. Wink

Of course the pilot plays a important role. The skills of the pilot become more imprtant as the situation becomes more difficult. Gunzo dogfight is very difficult. Challenging situations on SA (lots of planes around, additional SAM threat, fuel considerations etc) make pilot skill an imprtant factor.

Thats why plane on plane comparisions always focus on relatively simple situations.

And of course it is not only the pilot that decides the outcome. The machine is important. If your machine allows you to reach a higher energy state then your adversary, then your missile shot will have a better Pk.

The ace pilot can´t move the throtte the slightest bit more forward then a newly trained LT. In the old time our ace could fly a better intercept profile.

Well, now the Typhoon finally has a soohisticated auto-pilot, which flys perfect intercept profiles when asked to do it (in the same way the autopilot of a modern jet-liner can fly a cost effective climb profile better then any pilot)

Michael Schumacher wound not win a grand prix in a formual 3000 car.

@parrothead, the isareli F-16s with A2A kills have been A modells using winders only- This does not tell us anything about the capablities of the Block 60 armed with Slammers.
If you want to mention A2A kills made by F-16s then better focus on Yugoslavia or the no fly zone operations over Iraq.

When a country tries to decide which fighter to buy, they invariably will end up locking at how much bang for the buck they can get. If you look at the sales statistics of ANY FIGHTER there is no competition what ever pilot, training, engine, avionics, industrial work share etc, etc, the Viper wins by order of magnitude. This is neither personal nor emotional, but pure business. If a Ford GT can do 200 MPH, why buy a Ferrari for 3-4 times the money...

OK handsandfrance, so why do we even need pilots? If you use the plane as the sole criteria would a face-off of identical F-16CJ vs F-16CJ result in a standoff every time? No individual could win because their aircraft were identical in capability and performance?

An A2A engagement is not all about top speed, or max radar range, or LO. It is about the most effective application of the combination of capabilities. Making blanket statements about which plane has a higher energy state, that may only apply to one tiny corner of the engagement envelope.

Also, the day of two aircraft going head to head is long gone. The key to effective airpower today is integrated air power, including AWACs, ground controllers, satellite etc.

In other words, its fine to sit in our armchairs and say F-22 has a lower RCS, Typhoon has a higher T/W, F-15 w/ESA has a longer radar range etc. What makes little sense to me is to say "which is better" or "which would win" in a comparison of dissimilar aircraft.

Here I go, wasting electrons...

Forum: F-16 versus XYZ

F-16 block 60 versus Typhoon