Lockheed Martin completes first F-16I for Israel

"Bjørnar Bolsøy" wrote in message
...
(Henry J. Cobb) wrote in
om:

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald...ss/7264071.htm
"The range ability increases dramatically. It allows us to reach
any place in the Middle East," he said. "It's a very
sophisticated aircraft that allows us to do almost anything."

Yes, but are they nuke capable?

Don't know, but it's definitely a mean lookin' machine:

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapo...6i/f-16I_7.jpg


Judging by the size of those conformal fuel tanks it needs a toilet or
at least paper and nappy dispenser.

In article ,
(Henry J. Cobb) wrote:

Scott Ferrin wrote in message
. ..
On 16 Nov 2003 08:48:24 -0800, (Henry J. Cobb) wrote:

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald...ss/7264071.htm
"The range ability increases dramatically. It allows us to reach any
place in the Middle East," he said. "It's a very sophisticated
aircraft that allows us to do almost anything."

Yes, but are they nuke capable?

Without knowing the requirements for Israeli nukes it's impossible to
say. Just because US aircraft require dedicated circuitry doesn't
mean the rest of the world does.

Well, there's lots of stuff you'll want on any nuclear bomb equiped
aircraft.

Hardened electronics, flash protection (even what color the planes are
painted can tell you a lot), inertial navigation, etc.

I've worked on lots of military aircraft, but only one had a req't for
hardened electronics. Several others were nuc capable, too.

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur

Scott Ferrin wrote in message . ..
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 10:44:41 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
.. .
On 16 Nov 2003 08:48:24 -0800, (Henry J. Cobb) wrote:

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald...ss/7264071.htm
"The range ability increases dramatically. It allows us to reach any
place in the Middle East," he said. "It's a very sophisticated
aircraft that allows us to do almost anything."

Yes, but are they nuke capable?


Without knowing the requirements for Israeli nukes it's impossible to
say. Just because US aircraft require dedicated circuitry doesn't
mean the rest of the world does.

lun



Maybe you could enlighten us with more of your "expertise"?

The nuke question is an easy one. The Jerusalem Post reported that
both the F-15 and 16 "I" versions are primarily intended for reaching
Iran in the event that Israel has to launch a pre-emptive strike on
their nuclear program. Iran is 1,300 km away.
A while back F-15I aircraft flew to Poland which was 1,600 km away,
proving the capability.
As far as the nukes are concerned, it is a given as these aircraft are
regarded as "strategic" weapons in the eyes of the Jewish State.

Rob

(guaranteed response by Tom Cooper anticipated)

(Harry Andreas) wrote in message ...
In article ,
(Henry J. Cobb) wrote:

Scott Ferrin wrote in message
. ..
On 16 Nov 2003 08:48:24 -0800, (Henry J. Cobb) wrote:

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald...ss/7264071.htm
"The range ability increases dramatically. It allows us to reach any
place in the Middle East," he said. "It's a very sophisticated
aircraft that allows us to do almost anything."

Yes, but are they nuke capable?

Without knowing the requirements for Israeli nukes it's impossible to
say. Just because US aircraft require dedicated circuitry doesn't
mean the rest of the world does.

Well, there's lots of stuff you'll want on any nuclear bomb equiped
aircraft.

Hardened electronics, flash protection (even what color the planes are
painted can tell you a lot), inertial navigation, etc.

I've worked on lots of military aircraft, but only one had a req't for
hardened electronics. Several others were nuc capable, too.


Surely that massive wooden structure at Kirtland was not built to test
a single aircraft design?

I would imagine that at least all of the command related aircraft have
some EMP hardeining measures included in their design, as would most
combat aircraft, especially those with a nuclear delivery mission.
Heck, hardeing to some degree is required just to protect from
lightning strike effects.

[Regarding the VH-60 version of the Blackhawk] "...The VIP transport
is designed with maximum survivability, range, and communications
capabilities while providing professional and comfortable
accommodation. Systems include; executive interior with sound
dampening and an improved environmental control system, additional
armor and EMP hardening..."

unsd.macrossrpg.com/blackhawkhelicopter.html

Brooks

In article ,
(Kevin Brooks) wrote:

I've worked on lots of military aircraft, but only one had a req't for
hardened electronics. Several others were nuc capable, too.


Surely that massive wooden structure at Kirtland was not built to test
a single aircraft design?

I would imagine that at least all of the command related aircraft have
some EMP hardeining measures included in their design, as would most
combat aircraft, especially those with a nuclear delivery mission.
Heck, hardeing to some degree is required just to protect from
lightning strike effects.

[Regarding the VH-60 version of the Blackhawk] "...The VIP transport
is designed with maximum survivability, range, and communications
capabilities while providing professional and comfortable
accommodation. Systems include; executive interior with sound
dampening and an improved environmental control system, additional
armor and EMP hardening..."

Suit yourself. I design electronics systems for military aircraft for a
living, including radar, EO, EW, and recently, GPS.
Out of 17 different systems I have worked on, and probably another
20 proposals, only 1 aircraft had a requirement for "nuclear
hardening", which is different from EMP, by the way.

I hate those "show me your qualifications" emails, but I wonder
if you've done similar work?

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur

The hardened electronic are only useful after the blast, right? If
backed up to the wall and the security of the nation were at stake,
I'm sure you could get volunteers for a suicide mission.

Having worked a bit in rad-hard integrated circuits, the major
difference between an ordinary chip and a rad hard chip was the use of
epi-wafers and the testing to prove the process. Most modern
electronic is on epi anyway, so the chips are rad hard, but not proven
to be rad hard, if that makes any sense. I'm sure the final systems
have additional components to make them hardened, i.e. rad hard chips
are not enough.


(Henry J. Cobb) wrote in message . com...
Scott Ferrin wrote in message . ..
On 16 Nov 2003 08:48:24 -0800, (Henry J. Cobb) wrote:

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald...ss/7264071.htm
"The range ability increases dramatically. It allows us to reach any
place in the Middle East," he said. "It's a very sophisticated
aircraft that allows us to do almost anything."

Yes, but are they nuke capable?

Without knowing the requirements for Israeli nukes it's impossible to
say. Just because US aircraft require dedicated circuitry doesn't
mean the rest of the world does.

Well, there's lots of stuff you'll want on any nuclear bomb equiped
aircraft.

Hardened electronics, flash protection (even what color the planes are
painted can tell you a lot), inertial navigation, etc.

-HJC

(Henry J. Cobb) wrote in message . com...
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald...ss/7264071.htm
"The range ability increases dramatically. It allows us to reach any
place in the Middle East," he said. "It's a very sophisticated
aircraft that allows us to do almost anything."

Yes, but are they nuke capable?

Dude, even crappy Pakistani F-16As are nuclear capable so you know
that Israeli F-16Is are going to be nuclear capable.
Israel allegedly has the capability to launch harpoon cruise missiles
equipped with nuclear warheads from SUBMERGED Dolphin Submarines.
That is MUCH MUCH more complex than Israel dropping nuclear gravity
bombs from F-16Is for example.
BTW, it's all the American Taxpayers who paid for all this stuff that
Israel gets.
It's NOT just American taxpayers either.
Even the 3 Dolphin Submarines that Israel has were paid for by German
Taxpayers.
Israel's military budget is less than that of Iran, and Israel's
military budget is WELL less than half that of Saudi Arabia.
Israel would not be the regional superpower if it is without all the
help of taxpayers from around the world(many of of the taxpayers don't
even know that their hard earned taxpayer money goes to Israel instead
of helping poor kids at home or even in Africa).
There was a financial expert that extimated that Israel has cost
American Taxpayers over 3 TRILLION dollars since 1948.


-HJC