Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac,att!cbnews!cbnews!military From: hnkst2@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Hanhwe N. Kim) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: F-16 ? Message-ID: <1991Mar19.043822.7905@cbnews.att.com> Date: 19 Mar 91 04:38:22 GMT References: <1991Mar18.003736.23374@cbnews.att.com> Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (william.b.thacker) Organization: University of Pittsburgh Lines: 51 Approved: military@att.att.com From: "Hanhwe N. Kim" In article <1991Mar18.003736.23374@cbnews.att.com> brummer@cc.helsinki.fi writes: > > >From: brummer@cc.helsinki.fi >I read somewhere that the Israeli Airforce had many encounters with >Syrian Migs during the campaign in Lebanon beginning of 80. >What was the drop ratio? As I understood it the F-15 and F-16 -planes >handled remarkably. These planes would interest me, because Finland is >going to renew its airforce and buy 60 new fighters. >Under discussion are Mig-29, Mirage 2000(?), Saab Gripen and F-16. >Is the F-16 really up-to-date anymore? >How would a F-16 handle against a Mig-25 or -29? (have there been any >encounters? I don't really know too much about planes) > The Isreali Airforce in its conflict with Syria over lebannon's Bekka Valley achieved a drop ratio of something like 70+ to 1. The Israelis flew f15's and f16s, supported by Awacs on Hawkeyes (propeller driven E2's used by the US Navy rather than the E3's used by the USAF) and used RPV's (remotely piloted vehicles) to find and attack SAMs. The Syrians flew mig23's and were supported by SAMs. In addition to reconfirming the skill of Israeli pilots the conflict demonstrated the potency of having Awacs: The Awacs operators were able to see the Syrians taking off and able to direct f15s and f16s in a manner that insured that Israeli pilots would have numerical superiority on each encounter ... I can't remember where I read this.. The f16 itself is a very agile plane with good dogfighting capabilities, and probably will not be outclassed by the other choices. Recently, air warfare specialists seem to be of the opinion that pilot skill and especially actual combat experience, or realistic training like the US navy's Top gun school and USAF's red flag exercises are more important than marginal advantages in weopon range, air speed, etc. The instructors at the USAF Red flag exercises are top rate pilots and fly really cheap f5's(freedom fighters) against f15/16's, and usually win! Also among really good pilots, numerical advantage in a dogfight is a very big plus ... and hence the advantage of airborne radar and control. In light of the complete ineffectiveness of the Iraqi air defense against an Awacs armed invader, I'd suggest that finland and other small countries that have to be 'porcupines' to defend against potentially technologically AND numerically superior invaders consider integrated dispersed groundbased electronic countermeasures against Awacs and soviet Il-79(? radar planes, or surface to air anti-radiation missiles. Just my opinion of course -Han Kim