Forum: F-16 Armament & Stores

which max speed can F-16 fly befor launching AMRAAM?
is it limited?

F-16.net Sponsor

agilefalcon16 wrote:

I'm still very confused over this, while the F-16 can tow around up to 6 AAMs, the F/A-18C can carry twice that amount. Just take a look at this photo:

I know that the Hornet can carry much more A2A weaponry thanks to those duel weapons racks it uses, but I just don't understand why the Viper wasn't wired to use those racks, after all the Viper already uses similar racks to hold multiple A2G weapons.

It may have been a while for me, but I'm telling this you from past experience: loading a F/A-18 in the config shown above would be a royal pain in the rear. Hanging anything on the shoulder stations of any Bug (F/A-18A, C, or E/F) is test of patience, especially if it's an AIM-7 (attaching the wings on it is when the real fun begins Rolling Eyes

). Lucky for us, we NEVER set a bird in that config during normal OPS, but we still had to setup AIMs on the shoulder stations quite regularly for OSW and OEF.

I've never really dug into how my USAF counterparts load their Vipers, but they're lucky... they don't have to deal with the LAU-115 w/ duel -127's let alone shoulder stations on their birds.

IYAOYAS

USAF is what got me into sims... but it's not really the most realistic one out there.

ao1_aw_sw_usn wrote:

It may have been a while for me, but I'm telling this you from past experience: loading a F/A-18 in the config shown above would be a royal pain in the rear. Hanging anything on the shoulder stations of any Bug (F/A-18A, C, or E/F) is test of patience, especially if it's an AIM-7 (attaching the wings on it is when the real fun begins Rolling Eyes

). Lucky for us, we NEVER set a bird in that config during normal OPS, but we still had to setup AIMs on the shoulder stations quite regularly for OSW and OEF.

I've never really dug into how my USAF counterparts load their Vipers, but they're lucky... they don't have to deal with the LAU-115 w/ duel -127's let alone shoulder stations on their birds.

IYAOYAS

What's so patience requiring with LAU-116s? I've only experience with AIM-120s... Maybe its wings are easier to attach? Of course installing fins/wings takes couple of minutes more than just throwing one to LAU-127 with wings installed, but still I don't consider LAU-116 a pain in the rear.

Then I'm not in USN so we might use different procedures.

Mechanic wrote:

What's so patience requiring with LAU-116s? I've only experience with AIM-120s... Maybe its wings are easier to attach? Of course installing fins/wings takes couple of minutes more than just throwing one to LAU-127 with wings installed, but still I don't consider LAU-116 a pain in the rear.

Then I'm not in USN so we might use different procedures.

You're right, -120's are easier to load on LAU-116's than -7's due to the differences in weight, wing and fin length. The biggest difference between loading an AIM-7 on a LAU 115 vs a LAU 116 is it's position. When loading a 115, you don't have to worry about squatting down with your share of 500lbs on your shoulders. Attempting to get the missile to latch within a short amount of time is the key because it can get really painful to keep that missile on your shoulder while fighting to get it secured. Then it's time for the wing and fin installation. If you put a scratch on the bird, the Aircraft Structure Mechanic Chief who in-charge of the Mech shop will remove your behind. If you put a scratch on the wings/fins and prey that G-1 Div doesn't notice it.

Above all, what really makes it a pain to load AIM-7's on stations 4 and 6 is when you only have 5-6 Ordies on deck. Normally it takes 3-4 personnel plus your Team Leader and a QASO on an AIM-7 loadout evolution. All the while, you have AIM-9 tone checks to do, AN/ALE systems to check and other duties to perform. Having to load AIM-7's on stations 2, 3. 7 and 8 saves a lot of time vs fighting with something that requires more time patience on stations 4 and 6. Time is defiantly not your friend when you are dealing with shipboard flight ops... but we always found a way to get the job done with 0% mishaps.

Hope I explained it well enough

IYAOYAS

we use jammers to load missiles.. it makes it all easy.. Smile

Thanks for the answer, I can see the differences.

We have to use 5 men to lift -120s according to our SOPs (doesn't matter if it's going to LAU-127 or LAU-116) and it's only around 300lbs, so that's a big difference there. Because the missile is lighter and we have more men lifting, we use hands instead of shoulders to lift the missile. We also have more man power to lift missiles (and attach wings/fins), because everybody working on the aircraft has a basic training to weapons and can be used to lift missiles as part of the group. (And weapon troops can turn around a plane without any sweat.)

I agree that the missile needs to latch at first attempt. Trying to fix poor initial lift rarely succeeds. If the first attempt is unsuccessful, we normally put the missile on the main wheel and take a 10s brake before another try.

Take Care

Mechanic wrote:

We also have more man power to lift missiles (and attach wings/fins), because everybody working on the aircraft has a basic training to weapons and can be used to lift missiles as part of the group. (And weapon troops can turn around a plane without any sweat.)

I read your post above and I had snip out this line. Now, before I scratch my noggin and go "huh?", let me get this straight... any non-ordnance personnel who has gone through a "basic" WEPSFAM can handle air-launched munitions (ALM's) in the USAF?. I wonder if they have to go though something as similar to our Ordnance Certification Program (ORD CERT) before they even come near an ALM? Does this involve handling and/or installing CADS as well?

All I can say is that if the USN had that going on, then the thought of a Plane Captain (aka "a Brown Shirt") getting involved in a loadout evolution would scare the tar outta me! Shocked

Interesting reading so far Mech. It's good to know how our USAF brethren goes about in beefing up their birds with shiny boom sticks! Always remember: a fighter jet without ordnance is nothing more than an expensive, single-seat taxi!

IYAOYAS

i'm thinking mechanic isn't in the USAF.. because for one we don't load 120s by hand. no Tech Data for it.. and 2 only weapons load crews (3 people for fighters) can load a jet or deal with its weapons.

poop_deck_popeyes_chicken wrote:

i'm thinking mechanic isn't in the USAF.. because for one we don't load 120s by hand. no Tech Data for it.. and 2 only weapons load crews (3 people for fighters) can load a jet or deal with its weapons.

Ahh ha! Now this makes sense. Thanks for the info.

here is a video of marines loading the 120.. i am actually pretty impressed by this.. personally if we could i would rather load it by hand on the F-16. it would save alot of time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEtcx3_xwDA

more differences between USAF and other services.. USAF is way strict on where u can handle the 120 at.. and setting a 120 on a tire thats kinda unheard of in the airforce world.. either a missile stand, trailer or OSLA cradle.

wish i could go work the the USN or USMC for a week and see how they do things compared to how we do things.

poop_deck_popeyes_chicken wrote:

wish i could go work the the USN or USMC for a week and see how they do things compared to how we do things.

We had a few of USAF guys on-board our little boat (yes, it's hard to imagine something that's has a combat load of 120,000 tons called a "boat") to do some training on the JDAM when it came out. We weren't training them, they were training us on how to program the munitions (I won't go any further than that). Anyways, they were in a state of culture shock when the visited our mess decks and seen our berthing spaces. They couldn't fathom 150 sailors living in a 1,200sq-foot area until they've seen it themselves. Our magazines and the way we use our building trays during weapon buildups impressed them the most. I agree that it would be a good thing to have inner-service personnel on TAD at each other’s facilities. I wish I had the chance to visit an AF base, but my CoC never allowed us an opportunity.

I did envy my USAF counterparts in a lot of ways. For example: I would have loved to have the same kind of ground gear that you guys have. But since space is obviously limited on our bird-farms we have to load a lot of ordnance by hand. We do have the HLU-196B/E to help us load out most of our heavier ordnance like the AGM-88 and the GBU's, but when it comes to all A-A missiles it's all by hand.

IYAOYAS

I'm not in the USAF nor Marine Corps... But we load -120s like the marines in that video.

Our personnel system differs much from what I've seen abroad. We have only one kind of technicians (but few qualification levels) at the squadron doing what ever tasks there are: pre-flight checks, refueling, towing, launching, small phase maintenance etc and to some extent - rearming the aircraft. The basic training to work at the flight line includes all those tasks. The lowest level of qualification allows one to work under direct supervision of a more qualified personnel. The training syllabus for even that lowest level include ordnance safety instructions and loading/unloading of training ALM's. Our ordnance personnel have also started doing pre-flight checks etc, but then they have taken specializing ordnance courses. However after those courses they don't stop doing other tasks at the squadron. (And those who have not specialized in ordnance keep training to handle ordnance.)

Getting couple of non ordnance "human forklifts" to a loading team is ok as they do it often enough to know what to do when "lift" is commanded Wink

Not rocket science actually.

We don't do Air to Ground (yet), so there are actually very few and quite simple types different ALMs to work with.

Waiting for sharper stings: http://www.deagel.com/news/FMS-Third-Ph ... 01010.aspx

Jane's USAF? Those were the days. I loved that game.

Shame that they dropped out of that business.

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.

However, I can't help but wonder if there was something going on with dual rails on the Sta.3/7 hardpoints way way back in the early 1990s?

I'm going to reference a PC game, which I really hate to do when talking about real world tech, but back when it was released it was considered the most realistic flight sim for a few years:

Falcon 3.0 (Yes, 3.0) allowed the player to load the F-16 with up to 8x AAMs, if at least 4x were AIM-120s. Stations 1/9 and 2/8 could carry 1x AIM-9 or 1x AIM-120 each, while Stations 3/7 could support 1x AIM-9, 1x AIM-120, or 2x AIM-120 each. For some reason doubled AIM-9s wasn't an option, and I don't recall the any default load-outs including doubled AIM-120s, you had to add them yourself....

Given that the game developers spent quite a bit of time getting many other details of the F-16 modeled in as accurately as possible, I can't help but wonder if some of the people they spoke to may have mentioned something about double launch rails on the 3/7 stations? There were also MER loads for bombs, and up to 4x GBU-15 on the inboard stations, and while I've heard that MERs were tested on the Vipet, I know they weren't ever fitted. Don't know jack about the GBU-15 story though.

I built a 1/72 scale model made in some eastern European country, and, out of the box, the kit called for air to air missiles (Actually AIM-7s, judging by shape and size...) on double launcher rails........And for using the same 370gal wing tanks on the centerline station... The kit had A model elevators and ca. 1989 copyright dates IIRC, so again, probably the result of some sketchy info?

IIRC, Falcon 3.0 was released late in 1991, maybe early 1992. I'm assuming that, at that time, the data on the AIM-120 and how it could be mounted was still somewhat sketchy to many people, and perhaps some talk about things that were being considered for future use were accepted as guaranteed facts by the design team, aviation enthusiasts, etc, and are now rumors that just won't die?

Forum: F-16 Armament & Stores

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