polish AF discussion..

since i see many of you on the forum are avid military aviation enthusiasts and have a good knowledge on modern fighters, i was interested to hear opinions on this issue..

 

As a new NATO member from central-eastern europe, Poland has chosen the block 50+ F16C/D's as their replacement multi-role fighter, over other offers including the JAS 39 Gripen (this was chosen by the czechs), Mirage 2000-5/E, F/A-18C/D and MiG-29SE..

from memory the cost of the mirage fighters was signifficantly higher than other offers (~32million USD from memory?). Apparently the MiG was actually the favoured choice amongst the lower ranks (ie pilots) and offered cheap initial costs (~18million?) however from what i have read the running costs are signifficantly higher than western aircraft?

Poland wanted some local involvement in maintanance/parts production which is i think a good idea, and both the Gripen and F16 offers allowed for this..

my questions are

*why did czech republic opt for gripen and poland for F16?

obviously there were political reasons as well as economical, but also aircraft performance and tactical ideas would have been considered.how do the planes compare? and the F/A-18C/D, MiG and Mirage? was the F16 the best choice?

*will the f16 be able to perform duties of the MiG21,MiG29 and su22's as well as those aircraft have been doing?

*how do these F16s compare with the latest Rafale, Eurofighter and american fighters?

 

just interested in everyone's opinion on this subject and any discussion..:D

Poland chose the F-16, but under the table IMHO it was a payment for all its activities POland has been making in the international scene following its join to NATO. In addition to that the US offered multi billion dollar ofset deals in the form of comunications infra structures in the country that nobody else could match. So you got a new plane but you actualy got alot more than just the falcons. Including a relationship with the US.

Gripen is optimal plane for country like Czech, which AF will never go to real combat. I have no idea about the unit price/maintenance and operational cost for F-16/JAS though. Gripens for Czechs are also brand new and leased, while F-16 were upgraded after general maintenance and had to be bought AFAIK.

Both are good multirole planes, e.g. can do even better what Su-22 and MiGs did.

Latest planes like EF are better, but much more expensive.

If I am country like Israel which fights from time to time, I would select F-16 as it is combat proven. For countries like Czech, if the JAS is cheaper, it is a good choice.

We have still MiG-29s but their operational cost is very high and A2G ability is rather poor.

since i see many of you on the forum are avid military aviation enthusiasts and have a good knowledge on modern fighters, i was interested to hear opinions on this issue..

 

As a new NATO member from central-eastern europe, Poland has chosen the block 50+ F16C/D's as their replacement multi-role fighter, over other offers including the JAS 39 Gripen (this was chosen by the czechs), Mirage 2000-5/E, F/A-18C/D and MiG-29SE..

from memory the cost of the mirage fighters was signifficantly higher than other offers (~32million USD from memory?). Apparently the MiG was actually the favoured choice amongst the lower ranks (ie pilots) and offered cheap initial costs (~18million?) however from what i have read the running costs are signifficantly higher than western aircraft?

Poland wanted some local involvement in maintanance/parts production which is i think a good idea, and both the Gripen and F16 offers allowed for this..

my questions are

*why did czech republic opt for gripen and poland for F16?

obviously there were political reasons as well as economical, but also aircraft performance and tactical ideas would have been considered.how do the planes compare? and the F/A-18C/D, MiG and Mirage? was the F16 the best choice?

*will the f16 be able to perform duties of the MiG21,MiG29 and su22's as well as those aircraft have been doing?

*how do these F16s compare with the latest Rafale, Eurofighter and american fighters?

 

just interested in everyone's opinion on this subject and any discussion..:D

Polish pilots what I heard in 1998 on Babie Doly Airshow prefered Grippen. This is truly 4+ generation multirole aircraft. BUT (!) it's still an early version so there is a big probability that some problems may occure. Czechs complain already. Same thing with Rafale and Eurofighter Typhoon.

F-16s are USAF workhorse proven in combat and what we get is a very last version free of bugs (well, let's say... :/).

Why we chosed F-16? It's all about offset and who paid more under table I think. We should better ask Edward Mazur :P.

Poland chose the F-16, but under the table IMHO

Excaclly, Im late with my opinion.

Gripen is optimal plane for country like Czech, which AF will never go to real combat. I have no idea about the unit price/maintenance and operational cost for F-16/JAS though. Gripens for Czechs are also brand new and leased, while F-16 were upgraded after general maintenance and had to be bought AFAIK.

Both are good multirole planes, e.g. can do even better what Su-22 and MiGs did.

Latest planes like EF are better, but much more expensive.

If I am country like Israel which fights from time to time, I would select F-16 as it is combat proven. For countries like Czech, if the JAS is cheaper, it is a good choice.

We have still MiG-29s but their operational cost is very high and A2G ability is rather poor.

 

 

Let me tell you that JAS-39 is far from being harmeless. It may lack the weapons carrial of the F-16, but it also has its own advantages. Its is a particularly smart plane for BVR combat.

Poland has chosen the block 50+ F16C/D's as their replacement multi-role fighter, over other offers including the JAS 39 Gripen (this was chosen by the czechs), Mirage 2000-5/E, F/A-18C/D and MiG-29SE..

And where did you get that info from? In second offer (the final in early 2000s) there were only Mirage, Gripen, and Viper, there were no MiGs or Hornets. The Hornet was in fact in the first auction, but the Boeing withdrawn from it making more room for Lockheed offer. Buying MiGs or Su's were never an option.

 

my questions are

*why did czech republic opt for gripen and poland for F16?

obviously there were political reasons as well as economical, but also aircraft performance and tactical ideas would have been considered.how do the planes compare? and the F/A-18C/D, MiG and Mirage? was the F16 the best choice?

I say this once again, we needed a true multirole fighter, capable of intercepting hostile fighters/bombers, carrying bombs, and performing SEAD missions. The 39 can't do SEAD, and his CAS capabilities are still limited. It also have short legs, just like our MiGs, and we are bigger country then Czech Republic.

 

 

*will the f16 be able to perform duties of the MiG21,MiG29 and su22's as well as those aircraft have been doing?

Few times better, and many times cheaper.

 

 

*how do these F16s compare with the latest Rafale, Eurofighter and american fighters?

F-16C/D-52+ is pretty new model, he can kick buts of Eurofighter and Rafale as ground pounder, because, those two are not yet finished. In the air, well it is different class, but it may hold its ground, the tactical knowledge and pilot skill will be decisive.

 

As to newest American fighters... which one? The only newer than our Vipers are the F/A-18E/F and F-22A. Our Viper could kick the Super Bug in aerial combat, and haul nearly as many bombs. As to the Raptor.... there is no other plane in the world that could compare with it, yet still our plane is 3 times cheaper :music_whistling:

So you got a new plane but you actualy got alot more than just the falcons. Including a relationship with the US.

 

I don’t see what could be the advantage of a relationship with the US except to piss off a lot of partners in the EU like France Dassault, Eurofighter, …the JAS 39 Gripen manufacture…etc….

Anyway it could be even worse like signing an F-35 contract for example.

nobody pisses anyone off Tucky. The Fact is that the F-16 is better suited for NATO integration than the Gripen (not talking about typhoon and rafale here but those are out of question due to costs).

 

Flip

and how would signing an F-35 deal be a bad idea? I mean, it is the most powerful and capable sing engine fighter the world has ever known... and for what it is is very cost effective. fact of the matter is, the block 50 is a combat capable powerhouse that holds it own and can surpass anything else in the sky minus say an f-22. theres so much secret squirrel crap that goes into these aircraft.. not to mention with something like that f-16 you are probably going to get lots of other goodies that come with western avionics like link-16 etc that many other a/c simply dont have. its more than just an airframe it is an integrated fighting platform. if you are going to do anything with nato, you will probably have awacs support and with link-16 you see everything everyone else does.

interesting!

 

sundowner, i got the info from rzeczpospolita.com ages ago, i remember it but cant find it now :(:doh:

im pretty sure MiG offered the 29SE and F/A18's were offered in 1st round, but like you said 2nd round was between mirage, viper and gripen..

 

yeah from what everyone has said it looks like the viper has the most going for it for sure..true multirole capability including air-to-air, CAS and SEAD, easy integrtation with NATO, proven capability in these roles, etc etc..

 

ok, in a purely-air-to-air scenario, how does the viper compare to the mirage and gripen?

 

oh, and here's some piccies i found on airliners.net (a great website, if any of you have not seen it) thought i'd share with u guys since theyre on topic i guess..:pilotfly:

 

 

Almost everyone here know it :). This is the biggest wallpaper browser :lol:. But thx :thumbup:

Both Mirage and F-16 would lose to Gripen. We have already proved this.

 

On one occasion there was a training 2 v 1 dogfight. 2 Belgian F-16s vs 1 Gripen. Our pilot managed to wipe-out BOTH F-16s in just ONE PASS. This was not staged, it was a full-contact dogfight (no live ammo, of course) :) I guess no more comment is needed.

 

BVR combat is like a game of chess, but not so matematically simple. There are too many variables, so you really can't guess the results until it actually happens.

 

But believe me, Gripen is one of the most agile and capable fighters in the world and we are very proud to have them.

Gripen its more maneuverability but Delta wing is one turn wing :)

 

Ps:

Not forget, Poland have 47 MiG-29 (36 in service) more beautiful airplane than f -16 :D

 

It is hard do compare those fighters. The Viper have better radar, but 39 is smaller both in size and RCS. In BVR the Viper would probably win, but only because of the newer weaponry he can carry (AIM-120C-7 vs AIM-120B).

 

In dogfight, well the Viper is more powerful and have higher sustained turn rate, and higher amount of fuel, so he can fight more aggressively for longer period of time.

 

The 39 when come into dogfight he'll try to do few snap turns using his higher instantaneous turn rate, but if won't get his enemy in 2-3 turns, he will have to disengage, or he'll burn too much fuel, and loose too much airspeed - that's with simple missiles and cannons.

 

When AIM-9X and IRIS-T comes to play the Viper have upper hand, because of his better self defense systems with towing decoys, and AN/ALQ-212 active countermeasures. Remember the 39 is too small to put some of those toys in them.

 

The F-16C/D-52+ is different then Belgium or Norway MLUs, so for decisive mock up fights we'll have to wait somewhere 2012 when all our squadrons will be combat ready, and people get experience in the new toy (in States, they train in Block42s)

In BVR the Viper would probably win, but only because of the newer weaponry he can carry (AIM-120C-7 vs AIM-120B).

 

Hungary equipped theirs with AIM-120C-5.

Plus Gripen is the platform used to test fire MDBA Meteor ;)

Meteor is ready for all plane ready for Amraam :)

It is hard do compare those fighters. The Viper have better radar, but 39 is smaller both in size and RCS. In BVR the Viper would probably win, but only because of the newer weaponry he can carry (AIM-120C-7 vs AIM-120B).

 

In dogfight, well the Viper is more powerful and have higher sustained turn rate, and higher amount of fuel, so he can fight more aggressively for longer period of time.

 

The 39 when come into dogfight he'll try to do few snap turns using his higher instantaneous turn rate, but if won't get his enemy in 2-3 turns, he will have to disengage, or he'll burn too much fuel, and loose too much airspeed - that's with simple missiles and cannons.

 

When AIM-9X and IRIS-T comes to play the Viper have upper hand, because of his better self defense systems with towing decoys, and AN/ALQ-212 active countermeasures. Remember the 39 is too small to put some of those toys in them.

 

The F-16C/D-52+ is different then Belgium or Norway MLUs, so for decisive mock up fights we'll have to wait somewhere 2012 when all our squadrons will be combat ready, and people get experience in the new toy (in States, they train in Block42s)

 

May I ask you a question? Have you actually FLOWN any of these aircraft in real life?

 

You are both right and wrong here. Personally I think that Poland got a very good platform (F-16C b. 52+), more versatile but not more capable. It can carry more fuel and more weapons, but it's one generation older aircraft. Gripen's data processing and weapon intergration capabilities go far beyond F-16. Gripen's datalink is much more sophisticated than Viper's one, for example.

 

As I posted in a different thread, dogfights are much more than just a few turns. And you just can't get two papers, each with the aircraft data, and compare them on that basis. As I told many people here for many times: It's a man, not a machine, that wins battles!

 

My conclusion is that F-16 could beat a Gripen in a dogfight under certain circumstances, for instance high altitude, better SA, etc., but Gripen can turn tighter, faster and accelerate more rapidly. It's a delta wing, of course, but its aerodynamic layout is just better, not to mention its more advanced avionics, for example the Electronic Warfare System. There is a plenty of information about Gripen's avionics suite on the web, if you are intersted.

 

Maybe someday we will have joint exercise with Polish Air Force and then we could compare our aircraft in much better way. ;)

 

Regards!

It's a man, not a machine, that wins battles!

 

 

 

Regards!

 

Corect :)

 

Polish MiG-21 Bis Guncam :D

 

I really hope so. Yet, you know that training fight say nothing abut the fighting machines, but only about the man, no life ordinance used, so nothing can go wrong from the lock on, to hit, as the Viet-nam was very good example of that ;)

 

No I'm not a fighter pilot, and to my knowledge, there is no one out there certified to fly combat mission in both 39 and Viper, so... ;)

 

About that "man, not the machine" thing.... well a human can't fly by itself, so I think the machine helps ;) The men is very important, but when we talk academics like here, the graphs and tables do count. Yes the aerial combat* is very complicated topic, but you can break it down to few simple things. When we talk about an air warfare**, well that's way more complicated.

 

Back to the topic, both airframes are very capable, but designed to do different things, the Viper suited most of our needs, so we bought it, the 39 did not, but did suited Czech and Hungary... and the South African thing is a story for a different discussion ;)

 

* - as let say 1vs1, 2vs1, 4vs4 etc.

** - as an Air Force vs Air Force

Well, actually we already have a number of Gripen pilots certified for combat missions. Our fighters fly on 24/7 basis in NATINEADS, and that's the place where you need Combat Ready pilots ;)

 

But I would prefer some nice meeting at the bar with glasses of good beer instead of fighting :)

I meant pilots certified in both airplanes ;)

 

Yeah, a nice cosy bar would be great, I know one in Opava... well actually I hope it still exist, I haven't been there for nearly two years :)

You mean the pilots certified both for Viper and Gripen? :) Ain't gonna happen, I'm afraid :(

 

By the way, there should be the Open day at Čáslav Air Force Base this year, so if you'd like to see the Gripen up close and personal, that would be your chance. Maybe we could even meet each other ;)

Bimbac, you said that there is plenty of information about the Gripen's avioncs suite on the web. Does that even include tactical manuals ?

 

You know that Olgerd is always looking for references for possible future ED sims. Perhaps you could help him to optain declassified Gripen manuals ( if available ) ? A Gripen sim would be sweet for sure :)

By the time ED gets about doing Gripen, theres gonna be plenty of info :)