F-16.net

Why is it not uncommon to see a block 40/42, on training sorties, with only 1 AIM-9? I haven't seen many photos of Block 50/52 vipers with this load out on a training mission (From what I have seen, mosty from photos, blk 50/52's generally carry 2 -120's on stations 1 and 9, and 2 -9's on stations 2 and 8 on trainning sorties) Is there any reason for this type of load out on the two different types of vipers?

F-16.net Sponsor

First I've heard of that. That's a lot of redundant work for training sorties.

Only one aim-9 is needed for training,you will see some units flying 120's, if they have enough of them,on wingtips
because it reduces wing flex, and cracking over the long term. The inert 120 is just a concrete tube.

Elite 1K Joined: Jan 31, 2004 Posts: 1563 Status: Offline

The twin loadouts (2XAMRAAM, 2XHeater) may just be a local policy. Most of the sorties I saw taxing out had at least 1 heater loaded. Sometimes 2, but not often. However if 120's are called for, you'll generally see two 120s loaded as a safety measure to eliminate assymmetry.

Thanks for the replies.

falconloader wrote:

Only one aim-9 is needed for training,you will see some units flying 120's, if they have enough of them,on wingtips
because it reduces wing flex, and cracking over the long term. The inert 120 is just a concrete tube.

I would have to disagree. Slammers on 1/9 increases wing flex and damage to the wing. That is a lot of unneccesary weight to be supported. We usually fly heaters on 2/8 and leave 1/9 empty.

Thanks for all the replies.
This missile placement is just a trend I've seemed to notice from looking at photos.

For example heres a couple 4FS Block 40's(none are carrying -120's, but -9's on either 1/2/8/9)
http://www.f-16.net/gallery_item31301.html
http://www.f-16.net/gallery_item31217.html

Then some Block 52s with -120s on 1/9, and -9s on 2/8
http://www.f-16.net/gallery_item31307.html
http://www.f-16.net/gallery_item31322.html

Taco, I don't want to get into a pissing match here, but it's a pretty well known fact that having heavier 120's on the wingtips reduces flutter and over the longterm will reduce the incidence of cracking. In tucson we have alot of experience with all blocks of a/c over the years. Maybe we can get an engineer to chim in on this subject. Also is just putting an aim-9 on 2 or 8 with nothing on 1 or 9 a legal load? I don't have a dash 1 in front me but I seem to remember this being an issue in the past.

Enthusiast Joined: Aug 21, 2004 Posts: 76 Status: Offline

We just completed a PP/BRU-57 stores evaluation test program. Our AFSEO Flight Clearance had both configurations (AIM-9 and AIM-120 on Stations 1 & 9).

I agree with falconloader - the heavier 120's on the wingtips reduce flutter..

Rocky

falconloader wrote:

Taco, I don't want to get into a pissing match here, but it's a pretty well known fact that having heavier 120's on the wingtips reduces flutter and over the longterm will reduce the incidence of cracking.

You are 100% correct, 120's are the preferred missile on the wingtips to reduce flutter. And I am an engineer...

Cheers,

Viperdude

Enthusiast Joined: Oct 16, 2005 Posts: 39 Status: Offline

and having a aim-9 on 2 with nothing on 1 is completely legal, thats our standard config out here...

Now does the wing flex and flutter problems affect the different blocks in different ways? Or does this policy (1 AIM-9) go for all blocks regardless? Does this have anything to do with the aging of the different blocks? (figuring that the Block 50/52's are a couple years younger then the Block 50/52's)

Newbie Joined: Aug 03, 2005 Posts: 13 Status: Offline

It also doesn't hurt to fly training missions loaded like you would be in combat. Yeah, an AIM-9/ACMI on 1/9 config with no other rails is a great air-to-air config, but you're never going to hit the merge that way. Having flown BK 50's, we usually flew with 2 x 120's, AIM-9/ACMI, ECM pod(or centerline tank) and MAU's with ALICs (HARM launch rails.) We did that partially to make Mx job easier, but also because that is the basic config we would do A/A maneuvering with in combat. You wouldn't think that MAUs on 3/7 would affect performance that much - but you'd be wrong; it makes a noticable difference.

ts79 wrote:

and having a aim-9 on 2 with nothing on 1 is completely legal, thats our standard config out here...

It'd better be! Otherwise, as soon as I fired 2 -120's at someone, I'd be flying an illegal config! Laughing

Thanks for the replies rexxxx, and vipertrunk...you guys have experience with actually flying in these type of missile configurations.

F-16.net

Forum: F-16 Armament & Stores

Missile placement on training sorties