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: smpod@venus.lerc.nasa.gov (Stefan)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: F-16 ?
Message-ID: <1991Mar20.033326.958@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 20 Mar 91 03:33:26 GMT
References: <1991Mar18.003736.23374@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (william.b.thacker)
Organization: NASA/LeRC
Lines: 29
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: smpod@venus.lerc.nasa.gov (Stefan)
In brummer@cc.helsinki.fi writes...
>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. 

I think the ratio was around 80 to 1 or 0!
Most of the kills went to F-15s

>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)

IMHO:

I think that the F-16 could handle the 25s and 29s (assuming that the MiG-25s
stick around to fight).  The avionics of the 16 would outweight whatever
aerodynamic advantage that the 29 has.  The only advantage that the  MiG-25 has
is speed and a large search radar and would be at a strict disadvantage in a
dogfight. Now if you could install Western technology avionics in a MiG 29....

Of course the main determinant in combat is pilot training, experience, tactics
and morale.