F-16.net

Why doesn't the air force update the 16 like the navy did the 18? yeah i know the israelis have but why can't we? is it because of the f22 and f35 programs threatning to take its place? or do they just not care? even though i'm still a "kid" i know that the f-16 is better than the 18 by a long shot, that's why the air force chose it over the 18 in the first place if i'm not mistaken, and i'm not. if the f-16 is so good then why are we replacing it? i know i'm rambling but help me out here. i know i'm probly not the only one asking this so please if you can i'd like to know what's up.

Thanks,

Brice

F-16.net Sponsor

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

I'm just a kid too but I think I know the answer to your question. An F-22 has stelth tachnology and is capable of carring better weapons. And why keep upgrading f-16 when you can probably in the long run cut costs by buying an f-22/f-35. Also I heard in training they pitted 6 veteren f-16 pilots vs. 1 rookie f-22 pilot... the f-22 pilot won. P.S. one of my topics is a pole about who is better f-35 or f-16... f-35 is winning by a land slide.

Elite Joined: Jul 08, 2004 Posts: 609 Status: Offline

The Viper is beeing upgrade - currently the Block 40/42 is going through CCIP - while block 30/32 and some 25 are beeing CUPID'ed. Block 50/52 already completed the CCIP program.

The F-16I and F-16S for Israel and Singapore are hightech weapons platforms of the Delta model Viper, while the Block 60 (F-16E/F) was paid for by UAE.

But by and large, the USAF is relying on taking the next step in the shape of the F-35.

Newbie Joined: Jul 14, 2008 Posts: 13 Status: Offline

The F-16s are getting old, & upgrading them significantly (i.e. Block 50/52, AESA.. etc) is simply not worth it - particularly because the F-35 is (arguably) not too far away.

Elite Joined: Dec 14, 2005 Posts: 688 Status: Offline

Not to mention the only upgrade since the PW-200s were "converted" into PW-220E.

From a congressional report:

Quote:

House Report 110-146 - NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008

AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE

OVERVIEW

F-16 block 42 engine upgrades

The budget request contained $329.4 million for F-16 modifications, but contained no funds for F-16 block 42 F100-PW-229 engine upgrades for the Air National Guard (ANG).

The committee notes that, without an engine upgrade, the ANG's F-16 block 42 aircraft are underpowered compared to F-16 block 40, block 50, and block 52 aircraft, reducing their combat effectiveness. The committee understands that 31 of the ANG's 48 F-16 block 42 aircraft have been upgraded with the F100-PW-229 engine; and notes that this engine upgrade provides a twenty percent thrust increase, and improved durability, reliability, survivability, and speed. The committee believes that the ANG's F-16 block 42 aircraft fleet should continue to be upgraded with the F100-PW-229 engine.

The committee recommends $358.8 million for F-16 modifications, an increase of $29.4 million, for four F100-PW-229 engine upgrades for the ANG's F-16 block 42 fleet.

But I agree with keeping the mods on the F-16s WHILE moving forward on the F-35. As a mechanic I can see where the Vipers are showing their age and maintenance has increased over the last 10 years.

Newer engines with more power and reduced maintenance costs are just "smart" The USAF pays more PER YEAR, PER ENGINE to maintain the old F100-PW-100s of the F-15 that it did to buy them NEW in 1970!?! That is why they are being retired or replaced by PW-220s removed from F-16s that are being sent to the Bone Yard.

Newbie Joined: Jul 03, 2008 Posts: 17 Status: Offline

I have also seen an increase in maintenance as a NDI tech, I'm having to verify cracks in parts of the Jet that there is no Tech Data for. and our S/M shop is having to fab more and more parts that are no longer made. the Falcon Star mod does help but it is not the cure all for the aging viper.

Veteran Joined: Feb 06, 2004 Posts: 385 Status: Offline

Money, plain and simple. The Af is not going to get more dollars. That's why there are BRACs and downsizing and retiring aircraft early, to help pay for new aircraft. They can either buy new stuff or upgrade the old stuff but not both. Big defense dollars went away with the Cold War

The F/A-18 was upgraded in the way it was because they dont have a new fighter as we do in the F/A-22. At the same time they just retired the F-14 so now they're even one fighter short! The F-16 while I think is a sexy aircraft and at the same time a pain in the a$$ to work on was made for a reason. To be an inexpensive disposable fighter. I would bet that when we started production we didnt foresee still using it today which is why you dont see too many airframe type mods as you did with the F/A-18. When the Navy cut the 14 and after it built the newer 18 they still I'm sure had all kinds of money for their budget. Now in the same process we are Building TWO new aircraft while at the same time attempting to upgrade older jets. So for us (USAF) the money just isnt there.

I would like to comment on the "dogfight" with the 4 16's an the 1 22. These guys fight using rules that WOULD apply in realtime...meaning the 22 used his sh*t the way it works, seeing the 16's before they even knew he was there. When I was at Edwards I do remember some of the Viper pilots sayin they beat the 22, but that was only after losing one or two of their wingmen (almost as decoys) Poke

Money. Pure and simple. The budget just isn't there to upgrade the platform past CCIP. Sidenote; I think it was also argued that the 16 that got the kill was already "dead" and came back into the fight too early.

Elite Joined: Oct 21, 2005 Posts: 757 Status: Offline

For those that said "money" is partially correct. We have the money to upgrade, it's not what we want to do with it though as something better already is coming along. As ACC has said many times now, they are not interested in purchasing (or even upgrading) legacy platforms anymore when the Lightning II exists and should focus efforts in making that program strong.

what happens when a 22 or 35 breaks down and needs expensive replacement parts? they can't just go to a bone yard and pick one out of an old 22 because there wont be enough to do that (im kinda referring to some time in the near future and there wont be any cheap aircraft to fall back onto. what i mean is lets not have another vietnam type error where we bring in this new system thats gonna wipe out existing stuff and then get blown up by cheap jets. i think we need a reliable backup jet just in case.

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

Look...it's not like they're gonna fly all the fielded Vipers to D-M the day the first few squadrons of F-35s goes IOC. There'll be Vipers in the fleet years after the F-35 gets fielded. There's your reliable, albeit non-stealthy, backup.

And as for spares, the supply chain to handle those parts will (hopefully) already be in place by the time the F-35 is declared combat capable. It may take some time to get the bugs worked out but it'll happen in due course. It happens with every new weapons system in it's early stages. Don't lose sleep over it. Wink

Elite Joined: Apr 26, 2004 Posts: 1175 Status: Offline

Bottom line is they have been and always have been upgraded. The upgrades start at birth and go forward. But you can only upgrade so many times before it's no longer cost affordable.

Purple

Veteran Joined: Feb 22, 2006 Posts: 324 Status: Offline

hobojet wrote:

P.S. one of my topics is a pole about who is better f-35 or f-16... f-35 is winning by a land slide.

Landslide? How, by being more expensive, heavier, carrying less weapons? Or by its "proven" combat record compared to the Viper? F-35 is a piece of sh*t money trap that I hope it won't be acquired in large numbers leaving the reliable Viper do its job it has been doing without a blemish in its record, until it can. That sh*t is not replacing the Viper, the Viper is retiring from its spot...

Hey Bushy, you need a C-Pill.

I will type slowly so you can hear me clearly, being that you are U.S. Army Wink

Just kidding, I was 19K myself Smile

I will address your concerns one at a time.

1. "Landslide?": Yes, on the poll it is winning 93% to 6%

2. “being more expensive” Compared to what? In what year dollars? Make sure that your are doing an apples-to-apples, feature-to-feature cost comparison.

3. “heavier” Yes it is. It also has a massively larger engine, more internal fuel, and an internal weapons bay that is part of that weight. Throw in all the internal sensors & designators and you end up with a completely combat configured aircraft that flies CLEAN.

4. “carrying less weapons” In a completely CLEAN & stealthy configuration, the F-35 will carry less weapons than the F-16 that is fully loaded… BUT, the F-35 will have STEALTH that the F-16 will never have. Once stealth is not a priority, the F-35 can mount over 15k of external stores and still be fully fueled which the F-16 CANNOT.

5. “it’s ‘proven’ combat record compared to the Viper?” You can NEVER compare & depend on the combat record of an existing fighter to that of the next generation. If you did, your F-16 would have never replaced the F-4, A-4, or any other previous generation aircraft.

6. Nobody ever said that the F-16 has blemishes… it’s just that it has been outclassed by the F-35 and other international aircraft. Remember that we in the US have not relied on an Airforce that was “good enough”, but on one that dominates the airspace over the battlefield. The F-16 can no longer to that.

7. “not replacing the Viper, the Viper is retiring from its spot” Where do you come up with this stuff? If the AF wanted, they could build block 52/60 airframes for the next few decades.

There are a few things that contribute significantly to the cost of the F-35 that you forgot to mention:

1. STEALTH. You know, that thing that acts as a massive force multiplier. When you speak of F-35 to F-16 costs, remember to count 3-5 F-16s for each F-35. That is a realistic comparison of features and more importantly, survivability.

2. EOTS/DAS/RWR. This gives the F-35 Situational Awareness (SA) and strike capability that no other aircraft has ever even dreamt of having.

3. Three Airframes. Remember that the F-35 program is replacing 3 programs. If we had developed 3 separate airframes, the overall cost would have been a lot more than the F-35 program.

Overall the F-35 program will be able to do anything the F-16 can do (in a combat situation) and more than likely, even better.

Btw, what would have happened if the US Army had listened to your arguments when they were looking at the AH-64 to replace the AH-1?

Times change and weapon systems evolve. Go with the flow. Smile

F-16.net

Forum: General

Why don't we update F-16s