Forum: F-16 versus XYZ

I thought F-16CJs had IFF antenna cases mounted just in front of the canopy. Also from what I know they're empty (not connected to anything) because there is no IFF used on F-16s (at least on American). They look like 4 slicers as seen on this picture:

LMTAS worker applying the 'Rescue' coat on this Israeli viper

(Only two are visible)

F-16.net Sponsor

They're not empty, and IFF is used on -every- US Armed Forces aircraft. With maybe a couple of minor exceptions.

EVERY NATO nation uses compatible IFF on its aircraft, even if modern Rules of Engagement often oblige fighter pilots to see their target before shooting.

I know many European NATO countries use IFFs but I've heard that most of the American F-16s don't. It was never clear to me why.

The IFF antenna cases were mounted on Block 50/52s first, earlier -16s were not equipped with them, even Blocks 40/42. So it would be possible to start mounting IFFs only on US F-16-50/52 and most of USAF is still using older Blocks.
However those cases were also mounted on European MLUs (USA never upgraded their F-16s to MLU).

So IFFs can be mounted only on Blocks 50/52 and MLUs. The question is if they actualy were used everywhere. I've heard that most MLU countries had also bought APX-113.

In USA only some F-16s were issued with IFFs.

At least that's what I know, I'll try to confirm that on ACIG later.

All US F-16's have an IFF system on-board! To that matter as Wildcat said all NATO aircraft use an IFF system. The antennas you see are not IFF and I will leave those at that. In early block models I believe those were the ADF antennas. I have worked block 40's for 7 years and they came with IFF from the factory. The patriot missle systems use IFF to identify friendly aircraft. Would be alot of F-16's in the dirt if they didnt have it.

Right, without IFF the allied SAM units and missile warships in Iraq would have spent most of their time automatically downing coalition aircraft! Confused

Big Mac, you're right about the antennas you describe: these were not used on previous blocks. But it does not mean the older Blocks did not have IFF, it only means that they used other kind of antennas fitted elsewhere in the aircraft (sabre-antennas under the nose, if my memory is good, I'm not sure).

Oh, I remember now what I've read more specifically.

It said that F-16s had IFF _transmitters_ so that other friendly a/c could identify them but they didn't have receivers so they could ID other planes.

It sounds even stranger. Why would they give them transmitters and no receivers? That does not make much sense to me but that's what I've heard. I've asked that question on ACIG.org and I'm waiting for a reply. Probably you're right.

The antenna in question (bird slicers on the nose of USAF CJs) are part of the CCIP mod. CJs w/o the IFF slicers haven't been thruough CCIP yet, those with them have. Eventually all USAF 50/52 then all 40/42s are planned to go through CCIP. The CCIP upgrade is the rough equivalent to the MLU program for the older Blk 10/15 FMS aircraft.

Big Mac,

The antennaes on the nose are IFF interrogators. All USAF F-16s have Mode 1,2,3,C, and 4 IFF transponders which reply to things like ATC or a Patriot battery. The interrogators allow the USAF F-16 to get IFF info from other aircraft now.

The only USAF F-16 which had it prior to the CCIP mod was the Block 15 ADF version. No other blocks had it, although it obviously has been available. The MLU update added it to the European jets, and it also has been exported to many other nations and in other blocks.

As to why the USAF versions didn't get it 'til now - that's debatable. Some say it was because the F-15C community didn't want us to get that air-air capability, others say it was simply a matter of money. I don't have that answer.

Yes, that's exactly what I've heard.

F-16 had transmitters so Patriots could see them but no interrogators until CCIP.
I also remembered that about Bl 15 ADF but wasn't sure.

Big Mac, if you only wanted to speak about IFF interrogators when you wrote that older Blocks (except ADF) had no IFF, so you were right. Like you, I cannot find any really logical reason for that. I have to suppose the USAF thought that the air combat should be the arena of the F-15 only.

Joined: Feb 01, 2007 - 02:38 AM Posts: 0 Status: Offline

habu2 wrote:

If they are carrying pods on the inlets stations (5L and/or 5R) you might be able to tell. If the jet has both LANTIRN pods on at the same time it is a CG but if it only has the targeting pod then you can't be sure because it might be the LITENING II instead of LANTIRN, and both CG and CJ can use LITENING II.

If you've seen photos of the ANG Blk42 CGs in combat load you would notice they only use the TIRN pod of the LANTIRN system.

See Code One Online — Ken Murray Photo Gallery
http://www.codeonemagazine.com/archives ... ray_2.html (linking is legal?)

At first our jets were said to not have the power to push both pods with a full combat load. (USAF only uses Blk 42s for training duty.) Now that the -229s are going in, maybe we'll see the LAN pods!?

Then again with the '05 BRAC we may be working at the USPS?

Well after CUPID and CCIP added LANTIRN/LITENING/??? capability to everything from Block 25 up you can't automatically say that a pod-carrying bird is a CG...

Joined: Feb 01, 2007 - 02:38 AM Posts: 0 Status: Offline

Was just pointing out that a single pod does not rule out the CGs. Even if Blk40s cary both, most often Blk42s do not.

Janes Defense wrote:

AIRCRAFT IDENTIFICATION AND SAFETY OF FLIGHT (SOF) SYSTEMS,United States

Date Posted: 14-Mar-2005

Jane's Avionics

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AN/APX-113(V) Combined Interrogator/Transponder (CIT)

Type

Identification Friend-or-Foe (IFF) system.

Description

The AN/APX-113(V) Combined Interrogator/Transponder (CIT) is a complete Mk XII identification system which includes crypto computers. It consists of one unit and incorporates growth for the next generation of IFF and combat aircraft identification equipment. The AN/APX-113(V) provides both interrogation and IFF responses on IFF Mode XII Modes 1, 2, 3/A, 4, C and S Level 3.
The multiple antenna configurations feature electronic or mechanical scan. The system features Ada software and a MIL-STD-1553 bus interface.

Specifications

Dimensions:
(combined interrogator/transponder) 209.8 × 152.4 × 368.3 mm
(beam-forming network) 165.1 × 212.9 × 101.6 mm
(fuselage-mounted antenna elements) 39.4 × 82.6 × 332.7 mm
(lower interrogator antenna) 15.2 × 431.8 × 355.6 m
Weight:
(combined interrogator/transponder) 14.52 kg
(beam-forming network) 4.54 kg
(fuselage-mounted antenna elements) 0.23 kg
Power supply: 28 V DC, 200 W
Range: 185 km
Coverage:
(azimuth) ±60º
(elevation) ±60º
Accuracy:
(range) 500 ft
(azimuth) ±2º
In-beam targets: 32
Reliability: 1,600 h MTBF

Operational status

Developed specifically for F-16 Falcon. Fitted to F-16 Block 16 A/B MLU, Block 20 A/B. Also fitted to ASW/surveillance helicopters and the Japanese FS-X fighter.
The US Air Force intends to retrofit the AN/APX-113 to its F-16 Block 50/52 aircraft. This installation is designated the Advanced Identification Friend or Foe (AIFF) system. AIFF flight trials commenced in 2001, with aircraft installation starting in July 2002.
BAE Systems (Rochester, UK) was selected to supply Successor Identification Friend or Foe (SIFF) systems for retrofit on UK Royal Navy Sea Harrier F/A Mk 2 aircraft, required to upgrade IFF Mk Xa to Mk XII Modes 1,2 3/A, C and S level 2. Development work, based on the AN/APX-113 system, was completed during 2000, with full-scale production beginning later that year.

Contractor

BAE Systems North America,Greenlawn.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2005 Jane's Information Group Edward Downs

*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. It is being made available without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance their understanding of arms trade activities, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

Forum: F-16 versus XYZ

F-16CJ vs F-16CG