Forum: General F-16 forum

How much of a redesign would the F-16 need to substantially reduce its RCS and bring it down to something close to the Super Bug or the Rafale? Looking at those aircraft, they don't look particularly stealthy...certainly nothing like the Raptor, JSF, PAK FA etc.

The Super Hornet looks pretty similar to the regular Hornet but it's reported to have a substantially reduced RCS. The Rafale too, with its giant fog horn refueling probe certainly wasn't built around stealth. But both aircraft do employ some significant RCS reduction measures.

It's a pretty small aircraft to begin with. I'm guessing it would need a major redesign around the engine intake and it would need some strategically placed radar absorbent materials. Reducing the number of bolts, seams etc. would also help.

An F-16 with a substantially reduced RCS and similar maneuverability characteristics plus an updated cockpit/avionics and an AESA radar would be a pretty lethal platform. Obviously it's not something the USAF is going to be using, but it could be a pretty attractive and relatively lower cost option for the export market.

F-16.net Sponsor

The problem is once you start hanging weapons, EFTs, sensor/jamming pods. You're talking about an aircraft that'll be similar in price to the F-35, but with all of the vulnerabilities of a 4th Gen aircraft. Not a great bargain.

wrightwing wrote:

The problem is once you start hanging weapons, EFTs, sensor/jamming pods. You're talking about an aircraft that'll be similar in price to the F-35, but with all of the vulnerabilities of a 4th Gen aircraft. Not a great bargain.

The Super Hornet is about $60 mil a piece right? That's still much cheaper than the F-35. Again, I'm not talking about a huge redesign. I'm thinking just a few mods here and there (if feasible) to reduce the F-16's RCS to something closer to the Super Bug or Rafale or maybe the Silent Eagle.

Quote:

An F-16 with a substantially reduced RCS and similar maneuverability characteristics plus an updated cockpit/avionics and an AESA radar would be a pretty lethal platform. Obviously it's not something the USAF is going to be using, but it could be a pretty attractive and relatively lower cost option for the export market.

I believe the USAF plans to do a cockpit/avionics and AESA upgrade at some point. I think the biggest objective is to get AESA radars into the nose of as many Vipers as they can.

Quote:

How much of a redesign would the F-16 need to substantially reduce its RCS and bring it down to something close to the Super Bug or the Rafale? Looking at those aircraft, they don't look particularly stealthy...certainly nothing like the Raptor, JSF, PAK FA etc.

LM did so much redesign it was like starting from scratch. The end result was the F-35.

Lockheed already has an AESA upgrade in the form of F-16V standard which can be sold as new aircraft or upgrade kits.

Quote:

Lockheed already has an AESA upgrade in the form of F-16V standard which can be sold as new aircraft or upgrade kits.

Have you heard of the SABR (Northrop Grumman) and RACR (Raytheon Advance Combat Radar)? They are tailored for the F-16 market. LM does not make radars for F-16s.

Changing the inlet to a diverterless supersonic inlet might help. See http://www.codeonemagazine.com/article.html?item_id=58

But I agree with wrightwing and discofishing once you start hanging external stores on the aircraft any R.C.S. reductions are rendered moot (and in my opinion the F/A-18E/F stealth advantages are nullified by external stores as well).

icemaverick wrote:

How much of a redesign would the F-16 need to substantially reduce its RCS and bring it down to something close to the Super Bug or the Rafale?

Good question.

The ultimate redesign, within reason, would have probably been something like the F-16XL concept with a reduced size all-moving vertical stab, pertinent surface treatments, and the SDI inlet as was mentioned above! An add-on Fluidic thrust vectoring nozzle probably by around 2015 (as part of a proper development strategy) would have been icing to the overall performance, rcs and reduced maintenance of the jet.

Taking into account 4x AMRAAM semi-recessed and the wing-tip AIM-9x, plus skin mounted IR sensors similar to those in use today by some Air Forces and a sniper pod... that would probably give equal to or less RCS than a Rafale with similar load-out, albeit with superior sensor capabilities.

Add an off-the-shelf, foreign-make AEA jamming pod on the centerline and it would be an overall highly competitive next-gen platform in terms of LO and survivability.

Price wise? Still woulda been more affordable than an FY14/FY15/FY16 F-35A total procurement unit cost, including the sensors, if someone was curious.

As for today is concerned? My gut feeling would be to invest less in structural enhancements to reduce RCS as that time was arguably about 5-10 yrs ago and invest more in latest off-the-shelf self-protection, latest avionics/EW and off-the-shelf AEA escort jamming pods.

Quote:

As for today is concerned? My gut feeling would be to invest less in structural enhancements to reduce RCS as that time was arguably about 5-10 yrs ago and invest more in latest off-the-shelf self-protection, latest avionics/EW and off-the-shelf AEA escort jamming pods.

Off-the-shelf technology only goes so far. At some point, you have to take some risk and develop new stuff. Sure we could put F-35/F-22 avionics (it's OTS right?) in an F-16XL with reduced RCS, but I don't think the aircraft would get close enough to the enemy to even use the stuff effectively. In my opinion this has been well thought out and the result is what we have in the F-22 and F-35. Instead of redesigning the F-16, I'd worry about updating the aircraft are still gonna be in services 15 years from now.

discofishing wrote:

Quote:

Lockheed already has an AESA upgrade in the form of F-16V standard which can be sold as new aircraft or upgrade kits.

Have you heard of the SABR (Northrop Grumman) and RACR (Raytheon Advance Combat Radar)? They are tailored for the F-16 market. LM does not make radars for F-16s.

Of course not, though nothing stops them from purchasing the parts and re-seling them in the bundle. I do the same for a living in the aviation business. Their planes always are delivered with non LOCKHEED equipment to the clients, and so do their upgrade kits such as MLU.

Pilotasso wrote:

discofishing wrote:

Quote:

Lockheed already has an AESA upgrade in the form of F-16V standard which can be sold as new aircraft or upgrade kits.

Have you heard of the SABR (Northrop Grumman) and RACR (Raytheon Advance Combat Radar)? They are tailored for the F-16 market. LM does not make radars for F-16s.

Of course not, though nothing stops them from purchasing the parts and re-seling them in the bundle. I do the same for a living in the aviation business. Their planes always are delivered with non LOCKHEED equipment to the clients, and so do their upgrade kits such as MLU.

I imagine after aircraft have received CCIP/CUPID/MLU or whatever that a good AESA radar is really the only thing they lack. Ya know, I take that back. From what some of the engine experts around have said, the F100-PW-229 will drop right into anything. That'd be a good MLU+ for anyone looking to have a better all-around engine. There are tons of upgrades available, but I don't think a Silent Viper is possible to the extent of something like the F-15SE. I don't think the F-15SE will even find a home given that the F-35 is available.

discofishing wrote:

Quote:

As for today is concerned? My gut feeling would be to invest less in structural enhancements to reduce RCS as that time was arguably about 5-10 yrs ago and invest more in latest off-the-shelf self-protection, latest avionics/EW and off-the-shelf AEA escort jamming pods.

Off-the-shelf technology only goes so far. At some point, you have to take some risk and develop new stuff..

Yeah, I guess what I meant to emphasize was the LATEST off-the-shelf (and including the latest enhanced stuff currently being developed and innovated), for example, relative to today's news release that Northrop Grumman was awarded an EMD contract for upgrading ALQ-131 ECM pods to the next generation they have recently innovated.

So as you commented also... probably concentrate more on investing on upgrading with the latest measures and systems available (and/or under development), instead of investing in structurally redesigning the F-16 to be more survivable. (unless of course something substantial developed, like F-35's production was being suspended, etc and maybe LM put out an innovative proposal which could be fast-tracked.)

With the declining World economy, this could be a "affordable" alternative.
I am not saying it is the best alternative, but certainly a more afordable one for most western countries that are in deep financial trouble..
With the right marketing, it could become a second success story for the F-16.

Personally? I believe more in an improved F-16 then in the F-35 that few countires will be able to afford without getting in deeper and deeper trouble..

dudes..great idea. however as many folks have said...once you hang a single GBU-31..that SA-10 is going to get yo' a$$. Internal bay is the way to go. period. As ive always said..we NEED the 35 if we want to kick down doors.

Sir, with all respect, once the F-35 is flying FOC, the old SA-10 won't be the main threat. It will of course be much more modern and capable systems. Now you hang a single AIM-9x under the wing or a single AGM-88 and the 35 will be just as vulnerable. The 35 (and 16) will still require a bigger missile under the wing to counter the threats, as well as require SoJ and Escort Jamming support, other decoys, etc. That is the required mid-term mix. Forget the Platform as a stand-alone fancy. In that regard... and keeping within topic... absolutely it's warranted to robustly upgrade the 16s with best possible off-the-shelf available and to develop appropriate next-gen systems too, asap, given the fact that the 16 will now remain a mainstay platform by default for the next 15 years. Respects-

Forum: General F-16 forum

Silent Viper?