Jump to content

Pakistan fields newest F-16s


Recommended Posts

I'm still not convinced that this deal does not have serious potential to come back and bite someone someday ...

 

From ARES

 

Pakistan Fields Newest F-16s

Posted by Robert Wall at 6/28/2010 4:34 AM CDT

 

The Pakistan air force on June 27 formally took delivery of the first F-16C/D Block 52s, with a goal of having all 18 aircraft in country before year-end, the service says.

 

The handover at the PAF Base Shahbaz represents a big jump in the service’s air-to-ground attack capability. In particular, the service stresses the new aircraft will provide a vital capability to carry out missions at night.

 

99a771d2-3846-4ffe-8e96-064d124e0cdc.Full.jpg (credit: Pakistan air force)

 

Pakistani air force pilots carried out the ferry flights, with three aircraft arriving on June 26.

 

The ceremony was attended by ACM Rao Qamar Suleman, the Pakistan air force chief of staff, as well as USAF Gen. Norton Schwartz, his U.S. counterpart.

 

During the ceremony, the Pakistan air force chief noted that “these new aircraft will begin a new era of high tech environment in the PAF. This technology will not only eliminate our existing limitations of precision night operations but also enable the PAF to meet its mission more effectively.”

 

The F-16s also come with an advanced electronic warfare suite and datalink capabilities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still not convinced that this deal does not have serious potential to come back and bite someone someday ...

 

 

You are almost certainly correct in your concerns. However, if Pakistan goes hostile, everybody in A-stan is so utterly screwed anyway that a few F-16s plus or minus is unlikely to make much difference ... :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, let me qualify that last --- it's dead easy, if you've got write access to the bomb sight software. If you don't, you probably need to do a certain amount of experimentation to determine the ballistics of your bomb, figure out which standard weapon they most closely resemble, and what the relevant corrections are for the pilot to add manually. Still not difficult at all, just takes a little longer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, let me qualify that last --- it's dead easy, if you've got write access to the bomb sight software. If you don't, you probably need to do a certain amount of experimentation to determine the ballistics of your bomb, figure out which standard weapon they most closely resemble, and what the relevant corrections are for the pilot to add manually. Still not difficult at all, just takes a little longer.

 

You may not be terribly concerned about precise accuracy, either. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 10 months later...

Possibly... We certainly weren't selling/giving them F-16 Blk 50/52 in order to bomb terrorists. If the goal was to give Pakistan even a tiny credible conventional deterrence to India then I suppose it has been a workable idea to send over even advanced weaponry. Did anyone seriously expect Pakistan not to sell any secrets, not for a second imho. There hasn't been a Pakistan/India nuclear exchange so imho, yes, it was a defensible idea. No way will I go so far as to say a good idea!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There hasn't been a Pakistan/India nuclear exchange so imho, yes, it was a defensible idea. No way will I go so far as to say a good idea!

 

Pakistan and India were facing each other with fists clenched and teeth bared long before the USA lifted the arms embargo, though, and with nukes to boot. I am doubtful that giving Pakistan new weapons did much of anything to assist in deterring further conflict between these two.

 

I'm not saying the question isn't a difficult one, of course, because imposing a new embargo would presumably push them even closer to the Chinese, and that relationship has been cultivated nicely since the 1970s era embargo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In light of recent events, anyone still think passing advanced weaponry to the Pakistanis was (is) a good idea?

In the bin Laden scenario, modified with the FARP present, I was surprised because if they are F-16 Block 52 present and in range, the GE change the Intercept loadout to GP and destroys the FARP :angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the bin Laden scenario, modified with the FARP present, I was surprised because if they are F-16 Block 52 present and in range, the GE change the Intercept loadout to GP and destroys the FARP :angry:

 

You're surprised that Red wants to destroy Blue? :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In light of recent events, anyone still think passing advanced weaponry to the Pakistanis was (is) a good idea?

 

Yeah, it was a good idea then, and it still is, for a couple of reasons. If they didn't buy F-16s, they would have bought Rafales, or J-10s, or some Flanker variant. So they were going to get the capability, regardless. Might as well get some of that aid money back, then, no? :P Also, whoever provides the weapons also gets to provide the training, which means contacts and influence with the Pak military. That may not be all that useful if things go completely south on us, but it's potentially very useful in keeping things from going south in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

From PAF Falcons (via Flight Global's DEW Line blog)

 

[excerpt]

 

Interview: Pakistan Air Force Viper Pilot

 

Q 16: Any memorable experiences that you would like to share?

 

A: On one occasion – in one of the international Anatolian Eagles - PAF pilots were pitted against RAF Typhoons, a formidable aircraft. [CV32: 2009?] There were three set-ups and in all three, we shot down the Typhoons. The RAF pilots were shocked.

 

Q 17: Any particular reason for your success?

 

A: NATO pilots are not that proficient in close-in air-to-air combat. They are trained for BVR engagements and their tactics are based on BVR engagements. These were close-in air combat exercises and we had the upper hand because close-in air combat is drilled into every PAF pilot and this is something we are very good at.

 

...

 

Q 28: One of the stories going around is that the Block 52s are coming with strings attached: (i) the PAF can only base them in one airbase, Jacobabad; (ii) they cannot be used for offensive operations beyond Pakistan’s borders; (iii) some sort of monitoring mechanisms will be put in place to monitor the location of each aircraft and (iv) PAF cannot take them outside Pakistan without the permission of the US. Are these correct?

 

A: To some extent, yes. However, it is important to understand the background to these conditions. When the PAF asked for the Block 52, the initial US reaction was “no”. Their main concern was that if this potent technology could be released to Pakistan, sooner or later, it would end up in the hands of the Chinese who would reverse engineer it. It was the PAF that offered a solution. We could place the Block 52s in a separate airbase where the Chinese would have no access. This meant an airbase that had no Chinese aircraft. We could not base them in Sargodha because we would not deny the Chinese access to our most important airbase. Jacobabad was a forward base which had been revamped by the Americans for Operation Enduring Freedom, including a new first-class runway, so it was the first choice. The US agreed to this proposal provided that it would have the right to monitor the aircraft. To recall an interesting little story: soon after the first F-16s were delivered to Pakistan in the mid-80s, the PLAAF Chief visited Sargodha. The Americans were there as well. As a gesture of courtesy, the PAF showed the PLAAF Chief one of the F-16s and let him sit in the cockpit. Some US technicians were there looking on. As soon as the PLAAF Chief sat in the F-16 cockpit, the first thing he did was to start measuring the HUD with his fingers, you know, when you extend your little finger and thumb to measure something? This worried the Americans.

 

Q 29: What are the monitoring mechanisms? I have heard they will have US personnel stationed at Jacobabad?

 

A: The US personnel stationed at Jacobabad will be transitional. They will be training PAF aircrew on the maintenance of the Block 52. Most of these US personnel will be from Lockheed Martin. The US does not need to have personnel physically present in Jacobabad to monitor the Block 52s.

 

Q 30: Could you elaborate?

 

A: They have ways of keeping an eye on the Block 52s without being personally present. The main concern is the transfer of cutting-edge technology – the avionics and radar, the Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System (JHMCS) the Sniper pod. They have put digital seals all the sensitive technologies, which can only be opened via a code, which only they know. If there is a malfunction or these parts need to be serviced, they will be taken out of the Block 52s and shipped back to the US for repairs/servicing. If we try to pry open these systems without the codes, inbuilt alarms will be relayed to the Americans, which will be a breach of the contract.

 

Q 31: Will the Americans be able to track the locations of the Block 52s through some sort of tracking devices hidden inside the aircraft?

 

A: If there are tracking devices then they will be inside the sealed systems, like the avionics suites or the sniper pods because we will not have the ability to look inside. If their Predator and Reaper drones are transmitting their GPS locations via satellite so can a Block 52 F-16. ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...