Forum: F-16 Design & Construction

Hi. I am a language instructor at DLIELC. I was reading an article in Air Force Magazine/ January 2003 about the F-15 accident wherein Maj. James A. Duricy died. It stated in the magazine that the "airplane's honeycomb component in the left vertical tail stabilizer had 'structural failure,' causing the stabilizer's leading edge to break off."

Does the F-16 have this same structure? Would it be a potential hazard for the F-16 pilots?

Sincerely,
Language Teacher

F-16.net Sponsor

Pretty much sure all fighters do. High strength for low weight. Eagle has a particular history with that issue. Apparently not the first such occurence. Thing is folks rarely fly that fast in peacetime...why test pilots get the big bucks. Well, OK, so they don't get no additional pay, but they get the chicks!

As for Jim Duricy...Small world. I was in that unit (40th FTS at Eglin) and my finis-flight before moving to the Pentagon was in Duricy's pit about three flights before that incident.

Thanks for the response. It mentions in the same article that 20% of the F-15 fleet has been reworked (as of 2003) changing the honeycomb structure for Grid-Lock components. Do you think that the F-16 will also undergo this change from the honeycomb structure to the Grid-Lock structure?

Roscoe - very interesting story, you have had many experiences in your career. Is it true that honeycomb structures are indeed lightweight and strong, I believe it is, consider a bee-hive, a very strong structure and light weight as well. I believe the A-10 has many honeycomb structures incorporated into the airframe as well.

Actually the 16 doesn't have as much honeycomb as you would think. The forward edges of the LE flaps (a few inches), leading edges of the horizontal stabs (a few inches), ventral fins, rudder and flaperons. The reaminder of the horizontals is a bonded composite. The rest of the jet uses traditional semimonocoque construction which was chosen to save costs. It's a great fighter but construction/materials are nothing special.

Elite 1K Joined: May 26, 2005 - 08:39 PM Posts: 1496

I was watching some show on the Military Channel a couple days ago with footage of an F-15E on final. I was shocked by how much the vertical stabs wobbled around. I actually rewound the PVR and watched it a few times, they really flex a lot. Well at least that one's did...

Watching the vertical tails on the F-15 from the pit is scary. But when you think about it, it's better to flex then it is to break. I crewed them for 6 years and had no idea they moved that much until I got my first ride.

Viper wingtips do a fair amount of dancing under G's too - but the queen of the wing dances was the BUFF. 21 feet or so at the tips when it was sitting fully fueled compared to inflight. Used to get my students up on the wing and start it bouncing. Thing looked like is was made out of jelly.

Not sure if it's true, but I was told the Buff was designed with stiff wings, and as they flexed (on the models) they tried to design in more stiffness. Eventually most of the flexing stopped...and they broke. Flex ain't so bad...

Dunno about that one. I do know that they looked at deleting the tip tank on later models and found out that the wing developed flutter and the tanks actually added lift. Don't know why they ever made them jettisonable though - it's not like dropping them would have made the thing more manuverable....

It's like I used to tell my students - oak tree or palm tree in a hurricane - which one survives?

I've been up in both 16's and 15's and the 16 wings move no where close to the 15 tails...........but thye are both great rides

old topic new post.

the a-10 is full of honeycomb materials. all of the flight controls, parts of the vert's and several wing panels are made of either metallic or composite honeycomb.

Forum: F-16 Design & Construction

Honeycomb structure