| Author |
Message |
|
Master-of-Disaster
|
 Posted: Mar 07, 2009 - 05:14 PM
|
 
|
|
Active Member
Joined: May 08, 2005 - 10:26 PM
Posts: 104
Status: Offline
|
|
fasteagle wrote:
There is something about the C/D/E with spine, CFT, wing tanks and full LANTIRN suite, plus GBU's. Couldn't be further from a lightweight fighter if you tried!
That's true, but it looks so damn mean! |
_________________
When flying, always make sure the pointy end goes forward.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Sponsor
|
 Posted: May 21, 2013 - 11:40 AM
|
|
|
F-16.net Sponsor
|
|
|
|
|
|
SnakeHandler
|
|
Posted: Mar 07, 2009 - 08:31 PM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran
Joined: Jul 01, 2007 - 07:22 PM
Posts: 620
|
| Plus it'd free up two more weapons stations. That's another 8 SDBs that it could carry. Put the ECM pod in the spine and but the centerline back on and you've got a mean machine. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FDiron
|
|
Posted: Mar 07, 2009 - 09:44 PM
|
|
|
Active Member
Joined: Apr 28, 2005 - 02:20 PM
Posts: 143
Status: Offline
|
| So what is the reason the U.S. doesn't use CFTs? I didnt know they didnt have any g-limitations. Seems like a really good idea. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
yasirbhojani
|
|
Posted: Mar 07, 2009 - 10:43 PM
|
|
|
Active Member
Joined: Mar 17, 2008 - 07:07 PM
Posts: 230
Status: Offline
|
|
Quote:
Turkey also ordered 30 F-16C/D Blk50+ with CFTs.
Pakistan also has ordered 18 F-16C/D with CFT'S too. I don't get it. Proffesionals say that A-10's are ugly and you say that F-16's with CFT's are ugly too. Why is that so ??? I really like the looks of A-10 and I love F-16 with CFT's more than F-16's without it. Guess our perspectives are different. |
_________________
Regards
Yasir Bhojani
|
|
|
|
|
|
SnakeHandler
|
|
Posted: Mar 08, 2009 - 01:11 AM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran
Joined: Jul 01, 2007 - 07:22 PM
Posts: 620
|
|
FDiron wrote:
So what is the reason the U.S. doesn't use CFTs? I didnt know they didnt have any g-limitations. Seems like a really good idea.
Who has the money for it? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
yakuza
|
|
Posted: Mar 09, 2009 - 04:04 PM
|
|
|
Active Member
Joined: Nov 08, 2008 - 06:17 PM
Posts: 205
Status: Offline
|
may be not for money!
it´s more costly to keep a huge fleet of Tankers than to equip vipers with CFTs
I think:
Vipers+CFT=less tankers,less support(jobs),and no contracts for industries(threat for their interests)
so the industrial-military lobby would always go against such step!
just my  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
_Viper_
|
|
Posted: Mar 09, 2009 - 08:35 PM
|
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: Aug 02, 2006 - 11:53 AM
Posts: 91
Status: Offline
|
| Does anyone know does these CFTs affect on F-16's maneuverability? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
stamatisg2002
|
|
Posted: Mar 10, 2009 - 02:09 AM
|
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: Aug 12, 2006 - 12:45 AM
Posts: 28
Status: Offline
|
| Just as a pair of AIM-9s... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scorpion1alpha
|
|
Posted: Mar 12, 2009 - 09:17 AM
|
|
|
F-16.net Moderator
Joined: Oct 21, 2005 - 01:47 AM
Posts: 1375
Status: Offline
|
|
_Viper_ wrote:
Does anyone know does these CFTs affect on F-16's maneuverability?
Using a comparative loadout of 2 Sidewinders or AMRAAMs on 1 & 9 for BFM, you may notice only a slight decrease in instantaneous turn rates. Otherwise, the F-16 w/CFTs retains it's full 9G envelope which is very impressive. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
plant#4
|
|
Posted: Mar 12, 2009 - 10:43 AM
|
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: Mar 12, 2009 - 10:32 AM
Posts: 36
Location: Fort Worth
Status: Offline
|
| Greece, Poland, Israel, and Singapore bought the Block 52 plus, UAE bought the Block 60. Only these moden airforces have the CFT advantages. If you dont buy it, you dont get it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
yakuza
|
|
Posted: Mar 12, 2009 - 10:50 AM
|
|
|
Active Member
Joined: Nov 08, 2008 - 06:17 PM
Posts: 205
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
sprstdlyscottsmn
|
|
Posted: Mar 12, 2009 - 12:26 PM
|
|
|
Elite 1K
Joined: Mar 10, 2006 - 01:24 AM
Posts: 1193
Status: Offline
|
|
Scorpion1alpha wrote:
_Viper_ wrote:
Does anyone know does these CFTs affect on F-16's maneuverability?
Using a comparative loadout of 2 Sidewinders or AMRAAMs on 1 & 9 for BFM, you may notice only a slight decrease in instantaneous turn rates. Otherwise, the F-16 w/CFTs retains it's full 9G envelope which is very impressive.
The CFTs themselves do not drasitcly affect performance, its the 6000lbs of fuel inside that does that. |
_________________
James,
-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic (WTF?)
|
|
|
|
|
|
blkdog
|
|
Posted: Mar 12, 2009 - 09:26 PM
|
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: Jun 19, 2005 - 03:49 PM
Posts: 30
Location: Cesena, Italy
Status: Offline
|
|
Racer181 wrote:
So how do you get the gun hold back tool installed or uninstalled if the CFTs are on? is there and access through the tank?
The left CFT has an access door that you can install the HBT. As far as CFT's go, they are not maintenance friendly. If there is any maintenance to be done on the top of the aircraft i.e. Gun Lube, PDU, ISA's etc... then you have to take a portion of the tank off to access or in case of the PDU, both fwd sides. I have taken off hundreds of them wilst working the blk 60. So what it it add extra range, No G-limit. but they do cause drag. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
blkdog
|
|
Posted: Mar 12, 2009 - 09:27 PM
|
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: Jun 19, 2005 - 03:49 PM
Posts: 30
Location: Cesena, Italy
Status: Offline
|
|
FDiron wrote:
So what is the reason the U.S. doesn't use CFTs? I didnt know they didnt have any g-limitations. Seems like a really good idea.
The USAF has airborne tankers and their not stupid. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
blkdog
|
|
Posted: Mar 12, 2009 - 09:31 PM
|
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: Jun 19, 2005 - 03:49 PM
Posts: 30
Location: Cesena, Italy
Status: Offline
|
|
plant#4 wrote:
Greece, Poland, Israel, and Singapore bought the Block 52 plus, UAE bought the Block 60. Only these moden airforces have the CFT advantages. If you dont buy it, you dont get it.
The UAE also got 600 gal wing tanks. They're a lot of fun too.  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Search
Register
Private Messages
Forum Guidelines
