Philippine Air Force Discussions and Updates

[Ozzy Blizzard]

I am more inclined with the KFIR, the Panavia Tornado, the Harrier (my favorite), and may be the F16.

Both of these are platfomrs everyone is trying to get rid of.

 

[STURM]

I am more inclined with the KFIR, the Panavia Tornado, the Harrier (my favorite), and may be the F16.

Surplus aircraft like the Tornado will be cheap to buy but will be very mantainance intensive and expensive to operate. Malaysia in 1988 had wanted to acquire 12 IDRs but had to scrap the deal as the operating costs was too high for it. Another factor is the question of spares which no doubt are still stocked in quantity but will be increasingly hard to source in the future and will be expensive. Given the large area to cover, the Harrier may not be right choice. Plus, with the Harrier additional conversion training will be needed.

On paper at least IMO, the perfect choice would be surplus F-16s, plus a couple of long range mobile radars. Anyone know what radars are currently in use with the PAF?
Though some in this thread have suggested Russian fighters as a cost saving option, this is highly unlikely given the strong economic, military and diplomatic support from the U.S. Another issue would be the high operating costs associated with Russian fighters.

 

[swerve]

I am not... I am actually just gathering opinion about the MiG23 as the PAF's MRF.

I am more inclined with the KFIR, the Panavia Tornado, the Harrier (my favorite), and may be the F16.

No spare Harriers. The remaining users are having to manage airframe hours carefully to keep them in service until their replacements arrive.

Tornado is unsuitable. Two-seat twin-engine & swing-wing: maintenance heavy, high operating cost.

Used Kfir or F-16 would be cheaper to buy & much cheaper to operate, as would Mirage F.1 & Gripen. All are available & well-supported.

 

[STURM]

No spare Harriers. The remaining users are having to manage airframe hours carefully to keep them in service until their replacements arrive.

Thailand, several years ago was engaged in talks with the UK government and BAE Systems for the RN's Sea Harriers, as a replacement for the RTN's Matador fleet which is grounded.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Thailand, several years ago was engaged in talks with the UK government and BAE Systems for the RN's Sea Harriers, as a replacement for the RTN's Matador fleet which is grounded.

So did the Indians IIRC, but without Blue Vixen FCR & AMRAAM they turned it down.

 

[swerve]

So did the Indians IIRC, but without Blue Vixen FCR & AMRAAM they turned it down.

Which was very odd indeed, since they knew before they started negotiating that AMRAAM couldn't be sold by the UK, & if they want it, they have to ask the Yanks, & they'd already decided to upgrade the Sea Harriers they already had with EL/M-2032 & Derby, & could easily have extended the programme to cover the ex-RN SHARS. Indeed, it seems to have been assumed by the UK that India would do that. Blue Vixen might be better than EL/M-2032, but the latter is a good radar, & there are advantages to having the same radar & missiles on the entire fleet.

 

[swerve]

Thailand, several years ago was engaged in talks with the UK government and BAE Systems for the RN's Sea Harriers, as a replacement for the RTN's Matador fleet which is grounded.

But that was then, & this is now. The RNs SHARs are now all grounded, & there are only a few still in existence which could be restored to flying condition. They aren't a sane option for anyone except an existing Harrier operator.

 

[gforce]

Both of these are platfomrs everyone is trying to get rid of.

Not the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia because they will be upgrading some 80 Panavia Tornado IDS and ADV at a cost of $4.66 billion to serve their Air Force until 2020.

The Panavia Tornado and the Harrier would have been a good choice for the Philippine Air Force because of their ability to take-off and land over short distances. The PAF maintains a small airstrip in the Spratly Islands and some areas in Mindanao where Air Support is much needed.

But again the KFIR could be the better choice if the ratio is indeed 2 KFIRs : 1 F16

Yesterday's local newspaper reported that the current Philippine defense secretary is stepping-up efforts to acquire Huey Cobra night attack helicopters from Israel before he resigns in June 30, 2010. This would allow an open door with Israel in bidding/negotiating/acquiring the KFIR for the Philippine Air Force.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Not the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia because they will be upgrading some 80 Panavia Tornado IDS and ADV at a cost of $4.66 billion to serve their Air Force until 2020.

Again, simply high hour airframes being upgraded to see though their service life. No one is acquiring any Tornado derivative AFAIK.

The Panavia Tornado and the Harrier would have been a good choice for the Philippine Air Force because of their ability to take-off and land over short distances. The PAF maintains a small airstrip in the Spratly Islands and some areas in Mindanao where Air Support is much needed.

There are no harriers for sale and the global harrier fleet is approaching the end of its service life. So you have high hour airframes which are maintenance intensive and, unless they are refurbished (expensive), flight hours will have to be rationed. Additionally you suffer a capability loss for STOVL, the Harrier's capability is significantly less a MiG 29SMT or F-16C, all for a comparable price.

The only Tornado’s possibly for sale are also very high hour and even more maintenance intensive and expensive.

All of the above platforms (Harrier, IDS, ADV) are very specialised. They are all designed to do a specific job, about as far from true multi role as possible.

So in summing up Tornado & Harrier are expensive to buy, expensive to maintain, limited in capability and not multirole.

If the airstrip on the Spratly Islands to small the money they saved buying Kfir or F-16C could be spent lengthening it.

 

[Ananda]

But again the KFIR could be the better choice if the ratio is indeed 2 KFIRs : 1 F16

In my humble oppinion, PAF should aim for F 16 only. Forget about KFIR. Look, PAF, is an Air Force with limited budget. Ozzy says that TNI AU was a bad example for an Air Force on maintaning aircraft. In one side I agree, but on the other side I think TNI AU was a good example on an Air Force with limited budget (just like PAF) will face much difficulty when facing with maintance problem with too many Aircraft types or acquiaring Aircraft only based on acquisition costs and not maintanance costs.

Forget what Saudi Air Force can do..Forget what Singaporean can do..those are the examples of Air Forces with Huge Budget.
An Air Force with limited budget (like TNI AU and PAF) should focus only with limited types of Aircraft and only acquired aircraft with long term maintance costs availability. Streamlining the number of Aircraft types will enable you to maintan larger number of Aircraft on each types thus provide easier logistics (which in the end lower maintanance costs).

PAF has one thing that TNI AU does not have...constant readiness of support from US. If you asked people in TNI AU, they will say, that realistically they do not want to have SU 27/30. However since the relations with US is not something that in long term can be guaranteed, then Flankers is the answered to keep relative stable fleet readiness.
However this choice will increased the costs significantly, thus this's one of the reasons the planned fleet rejuvenations has been delayed for some time.

Look at the example of TNI AU, and you can see by maintaining F 5, Hawk 53/100/200, OV-10, F 16, and Su 27/30 only resulted with fleet readiness in average of only 50%. Sometimes is less than 30% in the case of F 5 and OV 10.
In the future many TNI AU brass says that the want to focus only to SU 27/30 and F 16. Still many temptations on getting other Aircraft with less acquisition costs still there. Hopefully they've learned that maintanance costs is more important than acquisition costs in getting fleet readiness on avarege of more than 80% like what any Air Force should have.

Again, many examples already there. F-16 was the cheapest fighters to maintain for foreseable future. It's better PAF will have 12 F 16 then 24 Kfir, but with good relations with US and the readiness of F 16 spare parts and logistics supply, you can have better probability that those 12 F 16 will have 80% readiness while the 24 Kfir perhaps only less than 50% readiness.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

In my humble oppinion, PAF should aim for F 16 only. Forget about KFIR.

Why?

Look, PAF, is an Air Force with limited budget. Ozzy says that TNI AU was a bad example for an Air Force on maintaning aircraft. In one side I agree, but on the other side I think TNI AU was a good example on an Air Force with limited budget (just like PAF) will face much difficulty when facing with maintance problem with too many Aircraft types or acquiaring Aircraft only based on acquisition costs and not maintanance costs.

Forget what Saudi Air Force can do..Forget what Singaporean can do..those are the examples of Air Forces with Huge Budget.
An Air Force with limited budget (like TNI AU and PAF) should focus only with limited types of Aircraft and only acquired aircraft with long term maintance costs availability. Streamlining the number of Aircraft types will enable you to maintan larger number of Aircraft on each types thus provide easier logistics (which in the end lower maintanance costs).

PAF has one thing that TNI AU does not have...constant readiness of support from US. If you asked people in TNI AU, they will say, that realistically they do not want to have SU 27/30. However since the relations with US is not something that in long term can be guaranteed, then Flankers is the answered to keep relative stable fleet readiness.
However this choice will increased the costs significantly, thus this's one of the reasons the planned fleet rejuvenations has been delayed for some time.

Look at the example of TNI AU, and you can see by maintaining F 5, Hawk 53/100/200, OV-10, F 16, and Su 27/30 only resulted with fleet readiness in average of only 50%. Sometimes is less than 30% in the case of F 5 and OV 10.
In the future many TNI AU brass says that the want to focus only to SU 27/30 and F 16. Still many temptations on getting other Aircraft with less acquisition costs still there. Hopefully they've learned that maintanance costs is more important than acquisition costs in getting fleet readiness on avarege of more than 80% like what any Air Force should have.

Look I agree, both the PAF & TNI-AU should be focused on a single type fleet and thus need something truly multi role. The RMAF is in a similar boat with their Su-30MKM/F/A-18F fleet aspirations (why not just stick with one type?). The question is which one.

Again, many examples already there. F-16 was the cheapest fighters to maintain for foreseable future. It's better PAF will have 12 F 16 then 24 Kfir, but with good relations with US and the readiness of F 16 spare parts and logistics supply, you can have better probability that those 12 F 16 will have 80% readiness while the 24 Kfir perhaps only less than 50% readiness.

That’s the assumption I have to question, will the disparity in maintenance costs really lead to any real difference in availability rates? You assume an F-16 will be cheaper to maintain, but as I stated earlier the J-79's global parts pool is extensive so supporting the engine will be cheap, supporting the avionics and other elements should be as simple as a straightforward maintenance contract with IAI. So how is Kfir so expensive to maintain? Ecuador and Colombia don’t exactly have Western European defence budgets and both are more than happy supporting the Kfir.

Additionally I honestly doubt 3000+ hour F-16C Block 30's will either prove cheaper to maintain or have better availability rates than zero hour Kfirs. Unless the PAF is looking at F-16C Block 52+ they aren’t going to be ordering vipers off the production line and that means clapped out airframes.

IMHO the supposed benefits of a high hour F-16C are simply a false economy.

P.S. 12x Kfir 2000 would provide more capability than 12x F-16 Bock 30's, thus you wouldn't need 24x.

 

[Ananda]

That’s the assumption I have to question, will the disparity in maintenance costs really lead to any real difference in availability rates? You assume an F-16 will be cheaper to maintain, but as I stated earlier the J-79's global parts pool is extensive so supporting the engine will be cheap, supporting the avionics and other elements should be as simple as a straightforward maintenance contract with IAI. So how is Kfir so expensive to maintain? Ecuador and Colombia don’t exactly have Western European defence budgets and both are more than happy supporting the Kfir.

Ozzy, I'm still trying to find some reliable data on F-16 and Kfir maintanances cost comparison. So far has not found one.

However:

1. OPSSG already show sources from Taiwan that clearly stated that costs of maintanances for F 16 A/B was three times cheaper than Mirage 2000. I don't think Kfir will be substantially cheaper to maintain than Mirage 2000.

2. I.m not going to put Flankers as comparisons, since verybody knows they are much more expensives to maintain than F-16. However I do have seen the statement from our then ministry of defences on why he refused Qatar offer on Mirage F-1 (sorry in Bahasa and printed in magazines, and I'm still trying to found on line sources). In Sense it's due to maintanance costs. In fact he even reinstated to the Air Force brass, that if they still want those Mirage F-1 then they have to choose between F-16 or Mirage F-1, since the maintanances budget clearly
can not cope to handle both. The Air Force choose to stay with F-16 due to cheaper to maintain.

3. Also F-16 already being used significantly with Singapore, and Thailand, and even us our Air Forces already stated that even with continue purchase of Flankers, we still in the future add more F 16 to the TNI AU inventories. I know for one thing that from time to time TNI AU borrow spare parts from Singapore Air Forces before the spare parts they order can come (and then redirect back to Singapore as replacements from Singapore spare parts). In our case this mostly for C-130 spare parts, however in theory it can also be conducted for F-16. In sense having simmilar aircraft to your ASEAN neighbours can also help your logistics.

I'm suggesting for PAF to take F-16 with already have MLU upgrade. Thus it's will be comparable in airframe hours to zero hours Kfir that you've mentioned (which I believe this's from Batch of Kfirs that will be throughlly upgraded by Israel before selling, since I don't see any real zero hours Kfir except those upgrade versions in Israel inventories).

I know it will be difficult for Philipines to found second hand F-16 which recently just has MLU upgrade, however it's not conceivable that US can provide second hand F-16 (batch 25 or 30), then conducts thourough MLU, which in sense will provide PAF with comparable airframe hours with upgraded Kfir.

Again I'm never suggesting F 16 will be cheaper to acquaire then Kfir, however so far from what I read on maintanances costs issue of F 16 vs Mirage 2000 or Mirage F 1, I still tend to believe a MLU second hand F 16 will be cheaper to maintain in long run then upgraded Kfir.
And for limited budget Air Forces like PAF, long run maintannaces cost will be more important then acquisition cost.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Ozzy, I'm still trying to find some reliable data on F-16 and Kfir maintanances cost comparison. So far has not found one.

That’s going to be difficult, but you need to remember that the comparison must be subjective, the block, number of hours on the airframe, number of hours on the engine ect will all have a significant impact.

However:

1. OPSSG already show sources from Taiwan that clearly stated that costs of maintanances for F 16 A/B was three times cheaper than Mirage 2000. I don't think Kfir will be substantially cheaper to maintain than Mirage 2000.

Yes, but I'm not sure how much that bears on this discussion.

2. I.m not going to put Flankers as comparisons, since verybody knows they are much more expensives to maintain than F-16. However I do have seen the statement from our then ministry of defences on why he refused Qatar offer on Mirage F-1 (sorry in Bahasa and printed in magazines, and I'm still trying to found on line sources). In Sense it's due to maintanance costs. In fact he even reinstated to the Air Force brass, that if they still want those Mirage F-1 then they have to choose between F-16 or Mirage F-1, since the maintanances budget clearly
can not cope to handle both. The Air Force choose to stay with F-16 due to cheaper to maintain.

Again that doesn’t have much to do with the choice we are talking about, apart from illustrating that TNI-AU chose to keep their F-16's over Mirage F1's (of course the state of the airframes are unknown).

3. Also F-16 already being used significantly with Singapore, and Thailand, and even us our Air Forces already stated that even with continue purchase of Flankers, we still in the future add more F 16 to the TNI AU inventories. I know for one thing that from time to time TNI AU borrow spare parts from Singapore Air Forces before the spare parts they order can come (and then redirect back to Singapore as replacements from Singapore spare parts). In our case this mostly for C-130 spare parts, however in theory it can also be conducted for F-16. In sense having simmilar aircraft to your ASEAN neighbours can also help your logistics.

The global support infrastructure is an advantage for the F-16 however is it an advantage that means PAF shouldn’t even consider Kfir?

I'm suggesting for PAF to take F-16 with already have MLU upgrade. Thus it's will be comparable in airframe hours to zero hours Kfir that you've mentioned (which I believe this's from Batch of Kfirs that will be throughlly upgraded by Israel before selling, since I don't see any real zero hours Kfir except those upgrade versions in Israel inventories).

I know it will be difficult for Philipines to found second hand F-16 which recently just has MLU upgrade, however it's not conceivable that US can provide second hand F-16 (batch 25 or 30), then conducts thourough MLU, which in sense will provide PAF with comparable airframe hours with upgraded Kfir.

IIRC IAI offered the Kfir 2000 with an option for a full refurbishment; they replaced over 60% of the parts on the airframe, basically anything that could conceivably degrade. These Kfirs literally would be zero hour airframes. AFAIK the MLU program was not of that magnitude.

And if you are talking about an MLU F-16 then you are effectively buying a Block 50/52, and that aint cheap.

Again I'm never suggesting F 16 will be cheaper to acquaire then Kfir, however so far from what I read on maintanances costs issue of F 16 vs Mirage 2000 or Mirage F 1, I still tend to believe a MLU second hand F 16 will be cheaper to maintain in long run then upgraded Kfir.
And for limited budget Air Forces like PAF, long run maintannaces cost will be more important then acquisition cost.

But you're making that judgement without any information on what supporting the Kfir would actually be like. Right now there are 3 states which are economically comparable to the Philippines who are happily supporting the Kfir; they are even buying more of them (over Mirage F1's). That tells you something.

As important as thru life costs are they are only a single element you need to consider; I’m sure a P-51 would be cheap as hell (they could produce it domestically) but that doesn’t mean you would buy one. Thru life cost is not more important than acquisition cost; they should both be budgeted for at the outset. In order for one platform you have to weigh any difference in acquisition cost to any projected savings throughout the life of the platform in order to determine what the best value option is and then weigh that against actual warfighting capability (including availability rates).

I'm not arguing PAF should buy Kfir over an F-16 derivative (it really depends on the particulars) however I don’t think you can dismiss the Kfir out of hand.

 

[swerve]

Not the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia because they will be upgrading some 80 Panavia Tornado IDS and ADV at a cost of $4.66 billion to serve their Air Force until 2020..

They're upgrading IDS only. Not ADV. The ADV are being retired, right now.

The price would include weapons (part of the upgrade is integrating new weapons) & support, & I suspect it's based on an old exchange rate.

Additionally I honestly doubt 3000+ hour F-16C Block 30's will either prove cheaper to maintain or have better availability rates than zero hour Kfirs.

P.S. 12x Kfir 2000 would provide more capability than 12x F-16 Bock 30's, thus you wouldn't need 24x.

While in general I agree with what you've posted, you're comparing stored Kfirs after being zero-houred & upgraded to Kfir 2000 configuration with off the shelf stored F-16s. Any customer would have to pay for the rework & upgrade of the Kfirs, as they would for F-16s & Mirage F.1s - but such a rework & upgrade could be done to both types, e.g. the ASTRAC Mirage F.1 upgrade for Morocco.

 

[Ananda]

IIRC IAI offered the Kfir 2000 with an option for a full refurbishment; they replaced over 60% of the parts on the airframe, basically anything that could conceivably degrade. These Kfirs literally would be zero hour airframes. AFAIK the MLU program was not of that magnitude.

But you're making that judgement without any information on what supporting the Kfir would actually be like. Right now there are 3 states which are economically comparable to the Philippines who are happily supporting the Kfir; they are even buying more of them (over Mirage F1's). That tells you something.

As important as thru life costs are they are only a single element you need to consider; I’m sure a P-51 would be cheap as hell (they could produce it domestically) but that doesn’t mean you would buy one. Thru life cost is not more important than acquisition cost; they should both be budgeted for at the outset. In order for one platform you have to weigh any difference in acquisition cost to any projected savings throughout the life of the platform in order to determine what the best value option is and then weigh that against actual warfighting capability (including availability rates).

I'm not arguing PAF should buy Kfir over an F-16 derivative (it really depends on the particulars) however I don’t think you can dismiss the Kfir out of hand.

Ozzy, you've got me on making judgement without having more info on Kfir. I should done more research. Perhaps I put much consideration that the cost of Kfir will not be much differences with Mirage F 1.
Still in here, I still reserve my doubts whether this Kfir 2000 will be really comparable as Zero Hours Kfir, thus will provide significant differences (on long run costs) with second hand F 16.

On whether acquisition costs will bear simmilar importance or more with long run/life time maintanance costs, in case for Low Budget Air Force like PAF, I do still believe life time maintanance cost will be more important.
In sense air force in those situations should look to any modern airliners in managing their readiness. I know it's not pure apple vs apple case, still on fleet readiness, life time maintanances will more determental.

But you're right, I can't provide strong arguments on the case of F 16 vs Kfir, due to lack of reliable data on maintanances issue of those Fighters. My bad..tend little bit judgmental on behalf of F 16 cases..

 

[gforce]

24 KFIRs is better than 12 F-16 because the PAF has the habit of reserving some so they can either have them for future use or to cannibalize hard to obtain or expensive parts. The Philippines is set to acquire refurbished Huey Cobra night attack helicopters from Israel this year as what the outgoing defense secretary mentioned in a local newspaper report so I hope the Israelis can also make an offer for their KFIRs and make the same conviction as what Ozzy Blizzard posted here in this forum.

Who is from the promised land here? Sooner or later I will be changing my avatar with a KFIR image in support of the Philippine Air Force's acquisition of Israeli KFIRs!

 

[adroth]

The PAF currently operates Vietnam-era technology. Practically at the century-series-fighter level.

Any aircraft selection, therefore, must take the PAF's ability to assimilate new technology into consideration. After all, you have pilots, maintenance crews, logisticians, ground intercept operators, etc. to train.

One must also look to the future, and bear in mind what will it take to prepare the PAF for the state of the art (I need to believe that the Philippines will not be a basket-case forever). So whatever purchase is made must also put the PAF on the road to assimilate . . . at least 4.5 Gen fighter technology. (5th Gen capability might as well be science fiction given where we're starting).

The points above beg the following questions:

Would the jump from Zero/2nd Gen aircraft technology to 4th Gen (F-16 et. al.) technology be facilitated by having an interim 3rd Gen aircraft (Kfir et. al.)?

What would be an acceptable interim fighter that the PAF can use for its current needs, as well as leverage as an introduction to modern avionics?

Given that there is an executive order (AO 169) in place that demands that whatever we buy must remain in service for 15 years, will an interim fighter be detrimental to future growth?

Would it make more sense to bite the bullet and go straight to early versions of 4th Gen aircraft?

===== ~~~ =====

Money has always been a problem. But the funding question has recently (just last February) been theoretically resolved by a new fiscal instrument that essentially integrates the cost of acquisitions like an MRF system (aircraft and radars) into the national debt. So the modernization program will no longer be dependent upon annual budgetary allocations. Costs will therefore be spread across multiple fiscal years, and the country's purse strings will not be as tight as it used to be. (Only time will tell if this actually works out).

This opens the possibility that we can actually buy not we need . . . not just not what's cheap.

 

[AVBsupersonic]

This is according to ATAC guys in the US re; KFIR C10

INTERESTING INFO REGARDING THE KFIR:

kafir made in isreal built after the mirage. my
client, atac usa, of newport news, va. operates 7 of these on a navy master
contract for target tow, jamming, and threat simulation. i equipped all of
these aircraft with colllins arc-159 uhf radios , colllins arn-118 tacans,
and hazeltine apx-72 transponders.
atac bought in addition the garmin 530
gps/vhf nav and com systems. an isreali team is located in va. maintains
these aircraft for jeff parker, pres atac usa. jeff is usaf academy grad 1980
and f-16 pilot.
he selected the kafir because it will out turn an f-16 and can do mach II as
well as be purchased used from isreal for about
$200,000 much less than the f-16 which are not yet in civilian hands. he
says it turns like it is on rails. note the canard wing on the front of the
aircraft the ground crew are young ex-usaf kids both male and female who work
for atac usa.santa barbara, ca web page Balance Industries my
company cell818-370-9407

I think choosing Israeli Kfir is a wise one, why? I believe they are all LOW-MILEAGE and it was flown by Israeli Air Force between 1975 and 1982 during the Lebanon Invasion. Since then Kfirs were put on Storage awaiting deployment or to be sold to 3rd world countries such as Sri Lanka and Colombia and Israeli AirForce concentrate on using US made F15 and F16s.

PRICE= $4.5Million USD INTERIM FIGHTER FOR PAF

Multi Role Fighter Jet for the cash strapped PHILIPPINE AIR FORCE!!!

Kfir 2000 will definitely buy us some time while waiting for our proper modern MRF's it will be a good addition in nos. for the price that your paying, considering it is also equipped with the latest ;
Kfir C10/2000
Features a new multimode radar, capability to use a HMD (Helmet Mounted Display) and Python IV air-to-air missiles and two 127x177mm Multi-Function Displays.
The latest upgrade is the Kfir C10 standard, the upgrade is developed for export. It features a new multimode radar, capability to use a HMD (Helmet Mounted Display) and Python IV air-to-air missiles and two 127x177mm Multi-Function Displays. Brazil looked at leasing 12 Kfir C10s to replace the Mirage IIIEBR until the arrival of the F-X program aircraft, however no deal materialized. After several delays on a decision, the F-X program was cancelled in 2005. In June 2005, Brazil announced the selection of second-hand Mirage 2000Cs as an interim solution.

Armament Two Rafael-built DEFA 553 30-mm cannon with 140 rpg.
Maximum ordnance of 6085 kg (13,415 lb)
Shafrir 2
Python 3 IR AAMs
Mk 80 series bombs
Shrike
Maverick
GBU-13 guided weapons
TAL-1 and -2 CBUs

FROM NOW 2010-2015,18 anything can happen!!!! especially re; CHINA!

You can check out the IAI website re; upgrades and w/ regards to acquiring F16's C/D from other nations by 2018 not good! they are the most overrated, overused planes in all air forces around the world and even the USAF,USN are retiring some of them already especially the A/B's due to weak air frame fatigue and most of the USf are afraid to fly them... they just don't want to make a big fuzz out of it now because nobody would buy them if they knew about the problems but that's the truth coming from a buddy USN.

The KFIR C10 is capable of going against any 4.5 gen FJ's, considering it's updated technologies and not overused like the 3 years younger F16's, they were just not given the chance to prove it's full potential, Introduced 1975 and they were short lived 1976 by the F15 Eagles delivered by the US to Israel as main air superiority, knowing US interests in Global air superiority fighter jet market and US control and influence over the KFIR Technology with regards to the GE J79 made it limited or not available to other countries! it was only recently that they allowed some particular countries like ECUADOR,COLUMBIA,SRI LANKA to have these....and up to now still needs US approval to acquire one!!? Question; WHY DO "CLASSIFIED AIR FORCE USERS" still use them???!! I DON'T KNOW IF YOU NOTICED? that KFIR's air frame designs from the Mirage 2000 are still used by NEW LATEST MRF's like the EURO TYPHOON....

FROM; IAI's technology

KFIR UPGRADE

The Kfir (Young Lion) multi-role combat aircraft was designed and built by Lahav to provide the Israel Air Force (IAF) with an indigenously produced replacement for the Mirage aircraft that had constituted the backbone of its fighter force from the early 1960s. The requirements for the Kfir were based on the vast operational experience amassed by the IAF in numerous air-to-air encounters with Soviet designed aircraft. The Kfir aircraft was proven to be a worthy successor to the Mirage with a close-coupled canard/delta wing configuration offering significant improvements in agility, payload and range.

Much of the Kfir's outstanding agility is owed to its forward canards, which contribute greatly to the aircraft's high instantaneous and sustained turn rates. The canards also provide the Kfir with excellent low speed flight characteristics by enabling high angles of attack to be attained. These advantages, together with its small visual signature and high thrust to weight ratio, make the Kfir a tough opponent in the air-to-air combat arena.

In conjunction with the powerful GE J-79 engine and the high strength airframe and undercarriage, the nine hardpoints enables a total external payload of 5,500 kg (12,100) pounds to be carried. The Kfir can thus be configured with the mix of missiles, bombs, pods, fuel drop tanks etc. required for optimal mission performance. For example, ample internal fuel capacity and the ability to carry large external fuel drop tanks without compromising other stores carriage afford the Kfir the extended range, loiter time and stores load required for effective long range strike and combat air patrol missions. The Kfir's range can be further extended with the implementation of the aerial refueling option.

Ruggedness and dependability are additional important features incorporated into the Kfir as a result of the IAF's vast operational experience. The Kfir's sturdy, "fatigue free airframe" provides a service life of well over 8,000 flight hours. The Kfir's General Electric J-79 engine was upgraded with a smokeless combustion chamber and the Israeli-designed and developed digital engine temperature control amplifier. Furthermore, with over 3000 J-79s in service worldwide the "availability of spares and support is guaranteed." These features, together with the aircraft's affordable acquisition cost, enable Kfir users to enjoy very low life cycle cost.

Lahav has also made great effort to ensure that all versions of the Kfir, from the C-1 through to today's advanced C-10, feature highly effective mission optimized avionics systems. (In fact, the avionics system equipping the Kfir C-10 places the aircraft at the "forefront" of fighter design in terms of its human engineering, radar performance, weapons delivery and navigational accuracy, maintainability and growth potential.) The Kfir C-10's flexible centralized avionics architecture enables the following features to be incorporated:

Pilot friendly advanced "Glass" Cockpit
Hands On Throttle And Stick (HOTAS) operation Advanced multi-mode Fire Control Radar (FCR) with SAR
State-of-the-art weapons delivery, including Beyond Visual Range missiles
Digital Moving Map (DMM)
Electronic Warfare (EW) Suite
The Kfir C-10 draws upon the operational experience of IAF pilots to provide an optimized cockpit layout and man machine interface. The HOTAS controlled cockpit is equipped with a new Head Up Display (HUD), two 5"x5" Multi Function Color Displays (MFCDs), Up Front Control Panel (UFCP) and an optional Helmet Mounted Display System (HMDS), affording outstanding situational awareness and efficient avionics and weapons system operation. Furthermore, by providing only that information which is required for each mission segment, the Kfir C-10's easy to use menu driven display screens minimize clutter and afford reduced pilot workload.

Also included in the Kfir C-10 avionics system is IAI/Elta's operationally proven EL/M-2032 multi-mode fire control radar, which offers a wide range of air-to-air and air-to-ground modes, including SAR, for optimal mission performance in all weather conditions. The Kfir C-10 can incorporate additional advanced sensors that provide highly effective day/night target detection and designation capabilities.

The Kfir is in service with many satisfied customers worldwide and has contributed greatly to the excellent reputation enjoyed by Lahav. The list of countries that operate the Kfir includes Colombia, Ecuador and other "classified users". (The Kfir aircraft has recently seen a great deal of action with a classified Air Force, which is exploiting its exceptional air-to-ground capabilities.)

As the Kfir's original manufacturer, Lahav provides comprehensive support for all versions of the aircraft. Moreover, being the world's most experienced combat aircraft upgrade house, Lahav is equipped to provide effective, "cost efficient upgrade solutions that are tailored to each customer's operational and budgetary requirements."

WE CAN DO THIS WHILE WAITING FOR OUR PRE-ORDERED MAIN AIR SUPERIORITY MRF's!!!

 

[adroth]

WE CAN DO THIS WHILE WAITING FOR OUR PRE-ORDERED MAIN AIR SUPERIORITY MRF's!!!

If the PAF buys the Kfir, regulations require that it retain the type for 15 years.

Will it really be worth the expense of retention?

Will there be sufficient logistical support for that long?

Wouldn't be more efficient to spend the money on Kfirs on improving the air defense infrastructure (e.g., runways, radars, etc.) and getting lead-in fighter trainers?

Would it really make sense to make a pit-stop in 3rd Gen before moving on to more newer generations?

 

[raven333]

Not the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia because they will be upgrading some 80 Panavia Tornado IDS and ADV at a cost of $4.66 billion to serve their Air Force until 2020.

The Panavia Tornado and the Harrier would have been a good choice for the Philippine Air Force because of their ability to take-off and land over short distances. The PAF maintains a small airstrip in the Spratly Islands and some areas in Mindanao where Air Support is much needed.

But again the KFIR could be the better choice if the ratio is indeed 2 KFIRs : 1 F16

Yesterday's local newspaper reported that the current Philippine defense secretary is stepping-up efforts to acquire Huey Cobra night attack helicopters from Israel before he resigns in June 30, 2010. This would allow an open door with Israel in bidding/negotiating/acquiring the KFIR for the Philippine Air Force.

and also allow an open door for their old F-16's, hehehe (hopefully block 30's)
Oh by the way. Hello to all members! I'm new here.