Forum: F-16 Armament & Stores

TreadHead wrote:

Ah, yes, how many AAMs CAN an F-16 carry?

I'm going to have to agree with all the guys here who have said that the F-16 can pack only 6x AAMs at any given time.

Hypothetically, the block 50/52+ and block 60 can drop an A2A munition on the inner stations enabling your F-16 to employ 8x AAMs.

My personal selection for the two inner stations would be for a dropped AAM variant ESSM and/or ERAM SM-6.

With CFT and a centerline tank, such an 8 AAM load-out (among other modernized systems upgrades) would enable a significant air defense capability never seen before by the F-16 model.

Respects.

F-16.net Sponsor

i dont think there is any air to air capability on stations 4 or 6. its only air to ground missiles or bombs. i know there are no hard points on the for any kind of under wing adapters.

from loading T.O.
Basic armament includes a left-fuselage-mounted six-barrel 20MM gun and an air-to-air missile on each wingtip (stations 1 and 9). Additional air-to-air missiles can be attached to stations 2, 3, 7, and 8 by missile launcher adapters. Also, additional air-to-ground stores of various types can be carried on pylons mounted under the wings (stations 3, 4, 6, and 7) and at the fuselage centerline (station5).

I have only found a few photos of a F-16 carrying more than 4 AAMs.

Here is one of a F-16 with 4x Aim-9s & 2x Aim-7s.

Here is one with 6x Aim-120Cs. It is too big to post, so here is the link.
http://www.defense.gov/dodcmsshare/home ... G-939a.jpg

Oddly enough, both pics are with no wing tanks.

I wonder, if needed, if the F-16 can use the 2xAAM launcher (LAU-115 & 2xLAU-127 combo) that the USN uses on the F-18s?

Right out of the new Code One Magazine...

I meant with no tanks. Sorry I was not clear enough.

Not a weapons guru, but I recall back in the early 80's the F16 had problems with rocket exhaust being ingested into the engine?

Does this ring any bells to anyone?

wasn't there a switch in the cockpit long ago regarding that?

Might be a valid rationale why the 16 does not fire any rocket propeled munitions from the inside stations

Am I mixing up my memories from long ago?

And.... I recall crewing 6x loaded jets for Zulu alerts in Europe (early 80's) and it was kinda hairy pulling pins on them under wing 9J's/P's.....this back when us crew dawgs armed missles on alert facilities.

I remember a few cases where missile motor exhaust caused a self-recovering engine stall. There were no hardware changes to the cockpit as a result. And I don't think there were any loading restrictions. Some words were added to the flight manual that such a thing could happen.

No, I wasn't suggesting AMRAAM launch rails on a block 50/52+ or block 60 Sta 4/6.

For discussion sake only, it was hypothetically suggested to involve a next-gen integration of military off the shelf, pylon 'dropped', air-launched SM-6 ERAM-derived class munitions, or an ESSM-derived munition.

Substitute the A2G class munitions as referenced in this pic, w/ such next gen high-end dropped AAM/ARM...

http://cavok.com.br/blog/wp-contents/up ... 6in-11.jpg

Dumb question, why do they not put pylons above the wings for rail-launched missiles like they did for the Jaguar. Did the above wing pylons act like fences?

because that is one of the worst designs ever.. that would be the biggest pain in the a$$ to load on. the F-16 does fine with 4 AAM and what ever they wanna put on 3 and 7. gotta remember its not just one jet its a big ship of them.. thats plenty of fire power.

OK, on the shoulder pylons...

First of all, I think those are only used on UK flown Jaguars. I might be mistaken, but I don't ever recall seeing a photo of a French Jaguar with the over-wing ("Shoulder") pylons fitted. I have no clue if any of the two-seat versions can utilize the over-wing pylons.

My understanding is that those pylons were fitted simply because the designers ran out of places to put weapons. The F-16 has a respectable internal fit of chaff and flare launches as designed, but apparently the Jaguar was somewhat lacking, with many countermeasures carried externally.

For example, during the Gulf War, RAF Jaguars usually carried an ALQ-101 jammer pod on the outboard of one wing, and a Phimat Chaff/Flare pod (Seen closest to the camera in the photo) under the other. This left the inboard wing pylons and the centerline pylon for carrying the actual payload, typically being either a drop-tank under each wing and 2x bombs (Fore/aft) on centerline, or a centerline fuel tank and 1-2 bombs under each wing. This didn't leave any room for air to air missiles, the jet was apparently not designed for wingtip rails, and so the over-wing pylons provided a place to carry a pair of AIM-9's for self defense.

For what it's worth, the French Air Force Jaguars that went to the gulf seem to have only sometimes carried a single Magic 2 for self defense under one outboard pylon, the other one always being used for ECM pods. If no Magic 2 was carried, they brought along a Phimat pod. Because they opted for a radar rather than a designator like the RAF, some French Jaguars flew missions carrying THREE electronics pods (The Phimat, an ECM, and a targeting pod on centerline), a drop tank, and a SINGLE bomb...

Compare these jets to the F-16:
The F-16 has countermeasures internally, and wingtip rails for missiles, three pylons under each wing for fuel, ordnance, more AAMs, etc, a centerline hard-point for more fuel or an ECM pod, and now mounts on the intake for targeting pods. It doesn't have over-wing pylons because it doesn't need them!

For some reason the British are very fond of using wing hard-points to carry countermeasures in pods...The Tornado has four main wing hard-points, and the outboards are used for an ECM pod on one side and a BOZ chaff/flare pod on the other...RAF and RN Phantoms were not fitted with an internal cannon, even though the F-4E was already in development at that time*, opting instead for SUU-16/SUU-23 pods on centerline...The Harriers that went to the Falklands arrived without chaff dispensers, and crews initially packed the speed brakes with bundles of chaff so that the pilots could tap the brakes and release a cloud of chaff if they got in trouble...

If anybody knows why the British like to put everything in external pods instead of just building it in...Let me know...

* McDonnell proposed a gun armed F-4 sometime in 1961 or 1962, but USAF wasn't interested. McDonnell started developing the design more in depth in 1964, USAF took interest in 1965, the YF-4E prototype flew in August of that year. The RAF and RN Phantoms were contracted in June of 1965, IIRC, but nobody even looked at a design with an internal gun...

What dual launcher are you talking about?

Forum: F-16 Armament & Stores

How many air-to-air missiles can an F-16 airframe carry?