Viper First Impressions

Well ... I am "using" both of them (I am saying FLIR but I should say ENVS, however, I do not use EVNS for flight but only for ground ops).

... so I may have a little idea about the difference in term of use for navigation and night ops.

But maybe I am missing something (?)

It is true that FLIR is allowing a different vision (in IR spectrum), but for navigation purpose, it is roughly the same except in night level 4-5 where FLIR may be more efficient in some ways except that it doesn't allow scanning.

 

So for NOE flight by night, NVGs is for sure my preference.

Now, there is also the the PNVS of the AH-64 allowing FLIR image in monocle ... but we are speaking about something not existing on F-16. And for C3ISTAR mission, of cource, a Wescam with FLIR channel will do the job where a pilot with NVGs and "eyeballs MkI" can do nothing. Of course, we are not talking about the same suff and differences between FLIR and NVG are fundamental here.

 

So my conclusion is:

If I were an F-16 pilot, for low level night ops and furthermore CAS type ops, I prefer by far an F-16 blk 50 with NVGs rather than F-16 blk 40 equipped with WARHUD an the LANTIRN suite.

NVG = Image Intensifier, means it depends on a light source to intensify. Back in the late 90s we only had early gen NVGs. On a very dark night or without moon, you just can't see anything. It's useless against weather and it provides very bad depth perception.

FLIR = Forward Looking Infrared. It's independent from the visible spectrum. It's a passive sensor that detects heat difference in the enviroment.

LANTIRN = Low Altitude Navigation and Targeting Infrared for Night

The FLIR on LANTIRN is only part of a system designed to provide a relatively safe very low altitude navigation system for day/night/weather with targeting capability.

https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/lantirn.htm

If you were a F-16 pilot, without LANTIRN you would probably be restricted from any low altitude flying (<500ft) in a contested battlefield, as was the case during Desert Storm.

NVG = Image Intensifier, means it depends on a light source to intensify. Back in the late 90s we only had early gen NVGs. On a very dark night or without moon, you just can't see anything. It's useless against weather and it provides very bad depth perception.

 

FLIR = Forward Looking Infrared. It's independent from the visible spectrum. It's a passive sensor that detects heat difference in the enviroment.

 

LANTIRN = Low Altitude Navigation and Targeting Infrared for Night

 

The FLIR on LANTIRN is only part of a system designed to provide a relatively safe very low altitude navigation system for day/night/weather with targeting capability.

 

https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/lantirn.htm

 

If you were a F-16 pilot, without LANTIRN you would probably be restricted from any low altitude flying (<500ft) in a contested battlefield, as was the case during Desert Storm.

NVG's works in IR (Near-infrared, IR-A)

FLIR and LANTIRN works in IR (Long-wavelength infrared, IR-C)

Maybe he's confused about that.

NVG = Image Intensifier, means it depends on a light source to intensify. Back in the late 90s we only had early gen NVGs. On a very dark night or without moon, you just can't see anything. It's useless against weather and it provides very bad depth perception.

 

FLIR = Forward Looking Infrared. It's independent from the visible spectrum. It's a passive sensor that detects heat difference in the enviroment.

 

LANTIRN = Low Altitude Navigation and Targeting Infrared for Night

 

The FLIR on LANTIRN is only part of a system designed to provide a relatively safe very low altitude navigation system for day/night/weather with targeting capability.

Yep. I Know that.

If you were a F-16 pilot, without LANTIRN you would probably be restricted from any low altitude flying (<500ft) in a contested battlefield, as was the case during Desert Storm.

Which is not and never been the case for M2000D pilots who are flying with TFR without any FLIR nor NVGs (in the past, now they are using NVGs) ... not only by night, but also all weather including fog.

I do fly at below 500ft AGL up to night level 4 under NVGs (no FLIR no TFR).

EDIT:

The FLIR on LANTIRN is only part of a system designed to provide a relatively safe very low altitude navigation system for day/night/weather with targeting capability.

 

EDIT:

FLIR "do not" (badly) work through clouds/mist/haze/fog/rain.

Tell that to the Republican Guards who got their asses kicked from 3.5km away during heavy rain, shamal and dense fog on the Medina Ridge. :megalol:

Tell that to the Republican Guards who got their asses kicked from 3.5km away during heavy rain, shamal and dense fog on the Medina Ridge. :megalol:

I trust you. ENVS is maybe not working on the same wavelength then (?)

But if LANTIRN so "so perfect" under bad weather conditions, I do not understand why a Wescam MX do not see thought clouds and provides a crappy picture when weather is misty (?) ...

Please note that I mainly said "badly" ... I mean: not that much better for nav purpose than NVGs.

So I maintain my point: Does night ops nowadays requires heavy FLIR equipment mounted on PODs such as AN/AAQ-13? ... I am not sure.

And this is maybe why it is not that much used nor development on F-16.

But we are not obliged to be in accordance. We can disagree. It is fine. :thumbup:

Who said its perfect? And btw, what's your point in this whole discussion?

what's your point in this whole discussion?

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=4452918#post4452918

... that I agree with DrBackJack when he is saying that nowadays AN/AAQ-13 is obsolete (beside the fact that is it not integrated on F-16 Block 50/52).

Nothings more.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=4452918#post4452918

 

 

... that I agree with DrBackJack when he is saying that nowadays AN/AAQ-13 is obsolete (beside the fact that is it not integrated on F-16 Block 50/52).

 

Nothings more.

Yeah, but of course it is, it's a product from the 80s! Do you remember 80s computers and 360kb floppy disks?

I think the whole point of the discussion was that, me included, are still surprised that LANTIRN is not in the plans, regardless of being obsolete or not.

Do you remember 80s computers and 360kb floppy disks?

Yup! ... My first computer was this ...

... my first PC was that.

:smilewink:

I think the whole point of the discussion was that, me included, are still surprised that LANTIRN is not in the plans, regardless of being obsolete or not.

So I don't think they can simulate a LANTIRN pod on a BLK50/52 Viper.

...

And I think they have waaaay enough work to achieved to get the module to a descent standard Blk 50/52 before considering anything like this (this is my personal POV of course). For the moment, the F-16 module is at a VERY early stage, uncompleted and quite not accurate on some existing aspects.

... Step by step ...

Maybe someday they will consider a Blk40/42 ... Who knows ... maybe a 60 ... 70 ... ?!

Cheers!