Hi! It would be interesting to post all material related to both these aircrafts as they are in service with the Geeek A-F.

This is NOT a Mirage vs F-16 but only an atempt to establish their strength and weaknesses.

If you have any article in Greek please try to translate them before posting, thanks!!! B)

Stardust..most things are classified but I can tell you that the Mirage is our main air defence fighter.
Not only cause of the airframe but also cause of it´s advanced electronics(RDY-2 and ICMS-3).

The F-16-52+ has right now the advantage in close combat cause of the JHMCS-Iris-T combo.

The F-16 will be our main bomber to replace all A-7 and F-4 in this role...but this will happen only when our next air-superiority fighter will be introduced by 2012-2014.

Well, lets try to post any relevant info on either plane that is not classified. It would be a good thread.

Mavro, TuAF does not field JHMCS w/IRIS do they? So do you think they would still hold the advantage over the mkII?

Alsom I think we are finnished buying F-16's. We didn't take the extra 10 before, and we won't later. So our F-16's alone will not be enough to replace all multi-role AC. So what is most logical to me, is that the rest of those numbers should filled with Rafale, while we acquire and operate 2 wings of EF for AD.

And not to divert the thread, but do either of you gents feel that Rafale and EF are/will be superior to JSF? How are they at detecting/engaging stealth/"stealthy"? Our next fighter will have to be able to do that.

Cheers,

Interesting comments guys! I was expecting some more in the lines of which i have previously been reading in this forum but it's all good to take.

@Thermopyles

I guess Stardust just asks how our AF compares the F-16 and the M2000..not about which capabilities the TuAF has.

@Stardust

Most things are well known since years now..the Mirage has the better instant turn rate and a better AoA.
The F-16 the better sustained turn rate and a better thrust.
The APG-68(V9) is also very good(SAR,longer air-to air range,etc).

The french fighter has a kickk ass RDY-2 Radar and a ICMS-3 suite which has been worked very long for to "meet the HAF requirements"...can´t say more.

;)

I got some datas from a good book writen by Mike Spike, The Great book of Modern Warplanes (Edition Salamander-2002) which i quote.

Infortunatly i canot neither validate them nor specify the type of F-16 compared.

Operational Ceiling: (Without pressure suite).

Mirage 2000 = 57.000 ft.

F-16 = 49.500 ft.

Acceleration from M 0.9 at the tropopause.

Mirage 2000 = 2 mn to M 1.85.

F-16 = 2 mn to M 1.75.

Mirage 2000 = 3 mn to M 2.17.

F-16 = 3 mn to M 1.86.

F-16 is significantly better at lower Mach, from M 0.4 to M 0.1 (no figures provided.)

Mirage fuel consuption is considerably lower, (in terms of fuel used, not SCF).

Instantaneous turn rates at 15.000 ft.

Mirage 2000 4°/sec better at M 0.7.

LEVEL from M 0.9 to M 1.5.

Sustained turn rates at 15.000 ft:

Mirage 2000 2° lower between M 0.5 and M 1.2.

LEVEL at 30.000 ft from M 0.7 to M 1.6.

next days i will add some articels ...(you know we are on vacation right now and its difficould to sit even infront of the pc...with this heat...lol (even with the aircondition on full....)

some plus of the F16s..,with the arivel of IRIS-t IN GREECE...

Here is a articel (older one) with the second evaluation of the Mirage 2000-5
with special mention about the Radar...

This radar together with a Scalp...and you have to be far away...(more than 400km away...lol

Thanks everyone for your posts. I'll be studying these at home! Keep up the good!!!