TNI-AU interception of USN F/A-18C 2003
-
Our F-5s are BVR capable.Originally posted by insouciant:Just to correct to earlier misconceptions.
RSAF DOES use its F5S/Ts as air defense fighters. It's ground attack role is secondary.
RSAF F5S/Ts CAN carry the Maverick for air-to-ground.
Actually the earlier F16A/Bs are better dogfighters than the C/Ds. This is probably due to the fact that the A/B models are slightly lighter and have less things hanging off them, i.e. Lanterin pods, and other budgles and stuff. -
Yep, the F-5s are interceptors.
-
Finally found the same topic posted in this forum 2 years back by IAF:
http://military.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=50930
US, Indonesian fighters in tense encounter
JAKARTA - In a tense encounter above the Java sea, a group of US warplanes went into attack mode and were ready to fire on Indonesian jet fighters dispatched to intercept them after they flew into Indonesia's airspace, a senior officer said yesterday.
Rear Air Marshal Wresnowiro, head of Indonesia's air defence command, told a news conference that the US navy F-18 Hornets locked onto the Indonesian F-16 warplanes late on Thursday before communication was established and the incident resolved.
There were five Hornets in the group, although Rear Air Marshal Wresnowiro did not say if all of them had locked on.
'They adopted an attack manoeuvre. After they locked on, they asked whether the planes were friends or foe and an international sign indicating we're friends was relayed back.'
He said the US-made F-16s were dispatched after the US Hornets were picked up by air force radar and also noticed by an Indonesian airliner off the main island of Java.
He said the US planes were guarding an aircraft carrier, two frigates and a tanker which were travelling east.
He said the convoy was not in an area designated as a legal sea lane for passage, although the country's air force chief earlier said it was.
A spokesman for the US embassy in Jakarta said they were looking into the incident.
An Indonesian air force spokesman blamed the incident on slow Indonesian bureaucracy, adding the United States had sought permission to pass through but this was not approved in time.
'This was a sign of weakness in our bureaucracy because the request had to go through several institutions before it reached the hands of the air defence command on the ground,' air force spokesman Sagom Tamboen told local radio El Shinta.
The incident follows efforts to rebuild US-Indonesian military relations that were cut in response to Jakarta's failure to rein in militias that rampaged in Timor Leste when the tiny territory voted to break free in 1999. -- Reuters, AP -
i'm not sure if the hornet burns more fuel to feed its twin f404 engines than the vipers to attain the same amount of thrust. That will probably require in depth research into the actual machines itself, and such information probably cant be found on the net.
Still, the GE129 or PW229 is a fuel guzzler, and an F-16 can probably only last 5-7 mins in full afterburner afterburner given its 7162lbs of internal fuel. Fuel is a very limiting factor in dogfights. -
not really. The A/B models are powered by a weaker turbofan, hence would give a lower thrust to weight ratio, which is a disadvantage in air combat maneuvering.Originally posted by insouciant:Actually the earlier F16A/Bs are better dogfighters than the C/Ds. This is probably due to the fact that the A/B models are slightly lighter and have less things hanging off them, i.e. Lanterin pods, and other budgles and stuff.
unless the Falcon One programme installed a F100-PW-229 engine in the A/Bs. then i'd agree with you -
yep. agreed and agreed.Originally posted by Shotgun:i'm not sure if the hornet burns more fuel to feed its twin f404 engines than the vipers to attain the same amount of thrust. That will probably require in depth research into the actual machines itself, and such information probably cant be found on the net.
Still, the GE129 or PW229 is a fuel guzzler, and an F-16 can probably only last 5-7 mins in full afterburner afterburner given its 7162lbs of internal fuel. Fuel is a very limiting factor in dogfights.
how about our Block 52+ viper-Ds with the CFTs. they'd be able to last longer. how much fuel do the CFTs hold anyway? -
The Superbugs can supercruise cant they?
-
Forum ate mypost.
Superbugs dun supercruise, only the typhoon and f-22.
Now. the CFT's add a bit of weight initially. 900lbs for an empty CFT set, + an additional 3010lbs of fuel. Assuming that we are using a similar version, it would extend the viper's fuel capacity to 10172lbs.
Full Afterburners gobble up fuel at 58000lbs per hour for the viper. Approx 966lbs a minute. Lets round it up to 1000lbs a min.
This means that the F-16 can now punch AB for a full 10 minutes! Of course not that anyone goes into Afterburners for 10mins.
Dogfights might use up quite a bit of fuel, given bad entry condition. The more disadvantageous the situation, more fuel fed into the AB.
Dogfights = Bad. Stand off = Good. -
those f-16 would have became scrap metals
-
10 minutes can cover 1/6 of Mach 2.5
-
Unless u're in a hurry to intercept nuclear tipped cruise missiles, I doubt they'd punch 10 mins of afterburner to chase anything. After 10 mins of afterburner, pray that there's a tanker in the air nearby.
Besides, the F-16 don't hit mach 2.5. Mach 2, or 2.2 max.
Yeah, those F-16/J79's aren't worth crap. Fuel suckers and the don't even deliver as much power as the PW220s. -
they canOriginally posted by Shotgun:Unless u're in a hurry to intercept nuclear tipped cruise missiles, I doubt they'd punch 10 mins of afterburner to chase anything. After 10 mins of afterburner, pray that there's a tanker in the air nearby.
Besides, the F-16 don't hit mach 2.5. Mach 2, or 2.2 max.
Yeah, those F-16/J79's aren't worth crap. Fuel suckers and the don't even deliver as much power as the PW220s. -
you forgot the english electric lightningOriginally posted by Shotgun:Superbugs dun supercruise, only the typhoon and f-22.
okay so it's not in service now...nvm -
Coming back to the main topic Indonesia has acquired a small number of Su-27SK/ Su-30MK (2 + 2) fighters, with plans to acquire up to 44 more so any future encounters will perhaps present a greater challenge to the USAF/USN.
-
I doubt they will have the resources to acquire a fleet of 44 flankers. They are not THAT cheap.
Urr? The Electric Lightning can supercruise?? I'm not sure.. -
they need 44 jet fighters to cover their land.
4 advanced jet fighters are too little and too loosely spread around to guarentee a effective reaction timely during an emergency. -
China is a larger threat.Originally posted by Delta 5:Coming back to the main topic Indonesia has acquired a small number of Su-27SK/ Su-30MK (2 + 2) fighters, with plans to acquire up to 44 more so any future encounters will perhaps present a greater challenge to the USAF/USN.
Indonesia can't manufacture fighter planes .
China can. -
You might want to check how much the A/B actually weighs versus the C/D. Just bcuz u have a slight more powerful engine, doesn't mean ur thrust to weight ration is better. Also with maneuvering, you still need to consider airflow, etc.Originally posted by sgFish:not really. The A/B models are powered by a weaker turbofan, hence would give a lower thrust to weight ratio, which is a disadvantage in air combat maneuvering.
unless the Falcon One programme installed a F100-PW-229 engine in the A/Bs. then i'd agree with you
Believe someone mentioned about the J79s. Altho we initially ordered the F16/79, we actually got them in the usual F100 engine instead.
Also, I wasn't talking about RSAF jets. Just F16s in general.
Lastly, no one actually implemented the Falcon One program that was developed by ST Aerospace. -
I'd agree the A/B birds were lighter than their C/D cousins. They packed lesser avionics and equipment.
If i'm not mistaken A/B models weren't very proficient with air to ground work. Hence their payload would be generally lighter. -
How about TNI's New toys?
Su-30MKK? -
Depends how well they are equipped and how well their pilots are trained. Not to mention radar coverage.
-
Re: US, Indonesian fighters in tense encounter
This incident wasn't about F-16 vs F-18. It's about the audacity of one country to send it's fully armed warships and warplanes through the sovereign territory of another without permission.
The Americans shouldn't assume that having applied for permission automatically meant it'll be granted.
No reply, no matter how long you waited means NO PERMISSION.
Stand off till permission is given or go around. The American's total lack of consideration for the sovereignty of other nations is one of the reasons for their lack of popularity overseas and sometimes within their own nation. Their foreign policies are in crisis because of their "Thou is mightier" attitude, even towards friends and allies.
Even if all the Indoneisian F-16s are shot down by just one USN F-18.
The BIG LOSER is still the USA.
Case of winning the battle, losing the war.
ORCA
DE OPPRESSO LIBER
I WILL ALWAYS PLACE THE MISSION FIRST.
I WILL NEVER ACCEPT DEFEAT.
I WILL NEVER QUIT.
I WILL NEVER LEAVE A FALLEN COMRADE. -
Originally posted by DE OPPRESSO LIBER:
Buddy, DonÂ’t use the blood to change peopleÂ’s tear, right?
[...
Even if all the Indoneisian F-16s are shot down by just one USN F-18.
[b]The BIG LOSER is still the USA.
Case of winning the battle, losing the war ...[/b]
Must use blood to change blood.
Iraq is such a perfect case, You win the battle, you also win the war. -
True true and true. But can't Indon share a little of the blame for being slow in giving permission?
-
I remember an incident that resulted in the death of a British Aviator. Malaysian Authorities were slow in authorizing an RSAF SAR team to pass thru their airspace to rescued the brit. I believe the RSAF SAR team decided to bypass their airspace instead of waiting for the delayed authorisation.