F-16.net

Veteran Joined: May 26, 2008 Posts: 277 Status: Offline

This is a question I've always had but never seen addressed: the F-16C/D originally had a wider base at the vertical tail ostensibly so the then-planned ASPJ could be fitted. Since the USAF never went through with the planned jammer - much to my dismay - why were all F-16C/Ds manufactured after the death of the ASPJ produced with the wider tail root? Presumably, the A/B's thinner root is a lot less draggy, while the USAF would have never needed the wider root, which is useful only for those nations that opted for an internal jammer like Greece and Turkey.

F-16.net Sponsor

This message from our sponsor will disappear if you log on as a member.

Elite Joined: Dec 14, 2005 Posts: 687 Status: Offline

Gives additional "internal volume" for other extra goodies.

Elite Joined: Jan 31, 2004 Posts: 1496 Status: Offline

That and GDFW had all the toolin' for the wider fin root already up and goin'. So why not go ahead and use it? Would've been a waste of resources and cash to go back to the old fin just 'cause the gizmo it was designed for didn't get fielded. With regards to the extra drag, the P/W users may have had second thoughts (ICBW) but once the GE motors got installed it became pretty much a non-issue I think.

Elite Joined: Dec 25, 2003 Posts: 517 Status: Offline

Well, even though the USAF jets (well, aside from Test) didn't get ASPJ, the HAF jets did; ASPIS.

The wider C/D vertical tail dorsal sure proved useful in flight test. Everything from MUX/8mm tapes, cameras, telemetry, and other SI equipment has been stuffed up in there.

Sim dude is right, as after the tooling was done, it was cost effective to leave well enough alone. It's the same story when the ALE-47 antennas were move to the LEFs, as the nose RW antennas domes though just empty shells, remained on the forward avionics doors. Until recent mods, they were simply painted over with the rest of the fuselage surfaces and were not neoprene coated.

Mike V

Removing the nose-mounted RWR blisters would have resulted in adversely affecting the AOA vane calibration, so rather than redo the AOAs they decided to just keep the blisters there and save a bunch of money. Seems like a good decision now since they went and put more antennae in there.

F-16.net

Forum: General

F-16C/D wider tail base