‘Clean Sheet’ F-16 Replacement In The Cards: CSAF Brown

Ashwin

Agent_47
Staff member
Administrator
Nov 30, 2017
4,389
7,097
Bangalore
The study will include a “clean sheet design” for a new “four-and-a-half-gen or fifth-gen-minus” fighter to replace the F-16, Brown elaborated. Rather than simply buy new F-16s, he said, “I want to be able to build something new and different, that’s not the F 16 — that has some of those capabilities, but gets there faster and uses some of our digital approach.”

Brown explained that the idea would be to build on the lessons learned in digital engineering for the “e-series” T-7A Red Hawk trainer, and the Next-Generation Air Dominance (NGAD). In particular, Brown said he would like to see any F-16 replacement sport “open-mission systems” that would allow near-real-time software updates to meet new threats.

 

suryakiran

Team StratFront
Dec 1, 2017
747
886
Bangalore
The study will include a “clean sheet design” for a new “four-and-a-half-gen or fifth-gen-minus” fighter to replace the F-16, Brown elaborated. Rather than simply buy new F-16s, he said, “I want to be able to build something new and different, that’s not the F 16 — that has some of those capabilities, but gets there faster and uses some of our digital approach.”

Brown explained that the idea would be to build on the lessons learned in digital engineering for the “e-series” T-7A Red Hawk trainer, and the Next-Generation Air Dominance (NGAD). In particular, Brown said he would like to see any F-16 replacement sport “open-mission systems” that would allow near-real-time software updates to meet new threats.

Tejas Mk 2 :p
 

_Anonymous_

Senior Member
Dec 4, 2017
13,516
9,577
Mumbai
The study will include a “clean sheet design” for a new “four-and-a-half-gen or fifth-gen-minus” fighter to replace the F-16, Brown elaborated. Rather than simply buy new F-16s, he said, “I want to be able to build something new and different, that’s not the F 16 — that has some of those capabilities, but gets there faster and uses some of our digital approach.”

Brown explained that the idea would be to build on the lessons learned in digital engineering for the “e-series” T-7A Red Hawk trainer, and the Next-Generation Air Dominance (NGAD). In particular, Brown said he would like to see any F-16 replacement sport “open-mission systems” that would allow near-real-time software updates to meet new threats.

What about getting DA involved pushing for a Rafale or better still coming up with a SE Rafale? @Picdelamirand-oil
 

_Anonymous_

Senior Member
Dec 4, 2017
13,516
9,577
Mumbai
This proves that the F-16 is at the end of its career, which is not the case with the Rafale.
I was referring to joining in for the replacement program. The cost benefit ratio of a ready made 4.5++ G FA vis a vis a FA to be developed ought to be conveyed to the USAF. Plus with the factory in India, the FA should be much more economical to pitch in by DA.
 

AbRaj

Well-Known member
Dec 6, 2017
1,171
922
Republic of Wadiya
What about getting DA involved pushing for a Rafale or better still coming up with a SE Rafale? @Picdelamirand-oil
You mean NG-Novi Avion? I think It could have easily outperformed any 4th gen jet in the market. All DA had/have to do is slap an uprated Eurojet or GE 414 engine and maintain commonality with Rafale except for cheaper off the shelf components. Customisation according to the customer choice should have been top priority regarding Radars,EW suit, weapons as a package
BTW what’s the problem with F16 that USAF want to develop something else?
I thought it’s big enough to accommodate latest avionics and equipment. It’s design is a Gold standard for dog fighters anyway.
 
Last edited:

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
1,943
2,431
72
France
transition.wifeo.com
All DA had/have to do is slap an uprated Eurojet or GE 414 engine and maintain commonality with Rafale
I don't understand why all foreigners want to replace the M-88 when the need for power increases. You fail to understand that the M-88 is not a single engine but a family of engines that has been designed to operate from 7.5t to 11.5t.
Proof of this is this article from 1995 where it was planned to re-engine the Mirage 2000 with an M-88 of 11t thrust.

Snecma/S Korea discuss M88 for KTX-II

Dufour says that Snecma has begun studies into the eventual re-engineing of the Mirage 2000-5, whose single M53 engine would be replaced by an M88. The company is already looking at up-rated versions of the M88 for projected higher-weight versions of the Rafale - the M88-3 with a thrust of 90kN, and the M88-4 with 110kN - and he sees these as being suitable for the Mirage 2000.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Killbot and AbRaj

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
9,748
7,382
India
Lol. It will be really funny if you consider that they have been doing their best to sell the F-16 to the IAF for over 2 decades now, but end up buying the LCA Mk2 in the end for their own use.

What's interesting to note is they will be operating 600 other jets alongside the F-35, the F-16 and A-10, which the LCA Mk2 and/or Gripen E can replace at a much cheaper rate, especially the LCA. HAL is interested in selling the LCA SPORT to the USN. But the T-7 can also be modified for this role.

@vstol Jockey
The MSA will fit the bill here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Killbot

AbRaj

Well-Known member
Dec 6, 2017
1,171
922
Republic of Wadiya
I don't understand why all foreigners want to replace the M-88 when the need for power increases. You fail to understand that the M-88 is not a single engine but a family of engines that has been designed to operate from 7.5t to 11.5t.
Proof of this is this article from 1995 where it was planned to re-engine the Mirage 2000 with an M-88 of 11t thrust.

Snecma/S Korea discuss M88 for KTX-II

It’s because Saffran doesn’t market it like GE and RR/EuroJet do. I always thought M88 is meant only and only for Rafale and saffran has yet to develop more powerful engine suitable for single engine fighters.
There is a reason all upcoming SE and even TE fighters use GE engines.
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
1,943
2,431
72
France
transition.wifeo.com
It’s because Saffran doesn’t market it like GE and RR/EuroJet do. I always thought M88 is meant only and only for Rafale and saffran has yet to develop more powerful engine suitable for single engine fighters.
There is a reason all upcoming SE and even TE fighters use GE engines.
The M-88 with 9 t thrust was developed and demonstrated in the UAE simply to illustrate a proposal, i.e. how simple it is as a modification.
I was referring to joining in for the replacement program. The cost benefit ratio of a ready made 4.5++ G FA vis a vis a FA to be developed ought to be conveyed to the USAF. Plus with the factory in India, the FA should be much more economical to pitch in by DA.
The Rafale fit the bill, but US will buy US.
 

_Anonymous_

Senior Member
Dec 4, 2017
13,516
9,577
Mumbai
The Rafale fit the bill, but US will buy US.
Yes. I thought so but there's always a possibility that they may extend their enquiry to DA.

I see a golden opportunity for BAe. They ought to drop fantasy projects like The Tempest & focus on their core capacities which is developing 4 & 4.5 G fighter aircrafts else they're doomed to be sub contractors to their US principals or worse a right target for a takeover in the not so distant future. Like RR. Food for thought, Paddy.

@BMD.
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
1,943
2,431
72
France
transition.wifeo.com
Don't you think that if they develop this programme for the USAF, they will soon realise that they also need a derivative for the Navy to replace the SH F-18? Because after all the YF16 and YF17 were competing at the beginning and the SH F-18 is hardly better than the F-18 because it has snowplow skier aerodynamics and therefore cannot replace the F-16. On the other hand, the replacement of the F-16 should be able to replace the SH F-18..... within 10 years.
 

lcafanboy

Senior member
Dec 22, 2017
1,490
1,383
Bangalore
The study will include a “clean sheet design” for a new “four-and-a-half-gen or fifth-gen-minus” fighter to replace the F-16, Brown elaborated. Rather than simply buy new F-16s, he said, “I want to be able to build something new and different, that’s not the F 16 — that has some of those capabilities, but gets there faster and uses some of our digital approach.”

Brown explained that the idea would be to build on the lessons learned in digital engineering for the “e-series” T-7A Red Hawk trainer, and the Next-Generation Air Dominance (NGAD). In particular, Brown said he would like to see any F-16 replacement sport “open-mission systems” that would allow near-real-time software updates to meet new threats.

For those who were questioning whether IAF should go for MWF in 2030.
Even USAF wants a clean sheet 4.5 design for bulk of its force. If they start now they too will end up inducting that new fighter around 2030. Fact is we may have MWF earlier than that...😊😊
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
9,748
7,382
India
Don't you think that if they develop this programme for the USAF, they will soon realise that they also need a derivative for the Navy to replace the SH F-18? Because after all the YF16 and YF17 were competing at the beginning and the SH F-18 is hardly better than the F-18 because it has snowplow skier aerodynamics and therefore cannot replace the F-16. On the other hand, the replacement of the F-16 should be able to replace the SH F-18..... within 10 years.

The USN plans to replace all their Hornets with F-35C and all their SHs with NGAD. There may be a possibility they will reduce their F-35C purchase once NGAD becomes available.


As for this clean sheet F-16 replacement, I think the USAF plans to build a larger air force than initially thought.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
9,748
7,382
India
For those who were questioning whether IAF should go for MWF in 2030.
Even USAF wants a clean sheet 4.5 design for bulk of its force. If they start now they too will end up inducting that new fighter around 2030. Fact is we may have MWF earlier than that...😊😊

What we need it for is different though. They plan on using this new aircraft for a "low end fight", whatever that means. They probably plan to use it against terrorists and other contingencies that does not involve Russia or China. This way they get something cheap but is as or more effective than the F-35 and NGAD for such missions, no different from how effectively the Russians used their old Su-24s in Syria.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AbRaj

lcafanboy

Senior member
Dec 22, 2017
1,490
1,383
Bangalore
What we need it for is different though. They plan on using this new aircraft for a "low end fight", whatever that means. They probably plan to use it against terrorists and other contingencies that does not involve Russia or China. This way they get something cheap but is as or more effective than the F-35 and NGAD for such missions, no different from how effectively the Russians used their old Su-24s in Syria.
Frankly we too may end up using it against terrorists on our western borders...🤣🤣

For China we will have Rafales, AMCA, upgraded Su30mki...
 

Milspec

सर्वदा शक्तिशाली; सर्वत्र विजय
Moderator
Dec 2, 2017
2,007
2,580
United States
The study will include a “clean sheet design” for a new “four-and-a-half-gen or fifth-gen-minus” fighter to replace the F-16, Brown elaborated. Rather than simply buy new F-16s, he said, “I want to be able to build something new and different, that’s not the F 16 — that has some of those capabilities, but gets there faster and uses some of our digital approach.”

Brown explained that the idea would be to build on the lessons learned in digital engineering for the “e-series” T-7A Red Hawk trainer, and the Next-Generation Air Dominance (NGAD). In particular, Brown said he would like to see any F-16 replacement sport “open-mission systems” that would allow near-real-time software updates to meet new threats.

Just a study... there is no possible way that anything can come close to cost-benefit as well as modularity of the f16V/Blk80 configuration.
 

Milspec

सर्वदा शक्तिशाली; सर्वत्र विजय
Moderator
Dec 2, 2017
2,007
2,580
United States
For those who were questioning whether IAF should go for MWF in 2030.
Even USAF wants a clean sheet 4.5 design for bulk of its force. If they start now they too will end up inducting that new fighter around 2030. Fact is we may have MWF earlier than that...😊😊
No USAF is conducting a study, that's it.