Officials: Heavy Use In Iraq, Afghanistan Shortening F-16’s Service Life

Inside The Air Force
June 8, 2007 - Pg. 1
by Marcus Weisgerber

The heavy use of F-16 fighter jets in combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan has reduced the aircraft’s projected service life, prompting two key modernization efforts intended to keep the fleet viable through 2025, service officials tell Inside the Air Force.

While there are no flight restrictions on F-16 aircraft, the fighter’s current 8,000-hour service life without modernization has been reduced “because of the way we’re operationally using them,” said Lt. Col. Angie Suplisson, F-16 program element manager in the service’s acquisition office. Older Block 20, 30 and 32 jets are limited to 4,500 hours and newer Block 40, 42, 50 and 52 aircraft are reduced to 5,000 hours.

“The aircraft was never designed to carry as many weapons as we’re currently putting on it,” she said during a June 4 interview at the Pentagon. “We’re demanding much more of the jet. Sometimes they’re landing with the same configuration that they’re taking off with, they’re refueling many more times in air [and] they’re pulling more Gs.

“It’s basically more structural demand and fatigue on the aircraft then it was designed for so we had to change the service life on it,” Suplisson added.

Since 2004, the Air Force has flown more than 81,000 close air support missions over Iraq and Afghanistan, according to air power data obtained by ITAF.

Once the F-16s reach their service limit, it does not mean they can no longer fly. However, officials need to conduct more inspections in the specific areas that have fatigue damage, Suplisson said.

“There are certain life-limiting blocks that are having fatigue issues,” she said. “In order to get those to 8,000 hours, they need to be replaced or redesigned.”

In order to keep the fighters viable through 2025, the F-16 -- which makes up more than 50 percent of the Air Force’s fighter fleet -- must receive two critical upgrades: the Common Configuration Implementation Program (CCIP) and the Falcon Structural Augmentation Roadmap, also called Falcon STAR.

The CCIP improvements will make the 651 Block 40 and 50 jets’ software identical and Falcon STAR will ensure the aircraft are structurally sound through 8,000 hours, Suplisson said. The F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter is expected to replace the F-16 after 2025.

The Air Force has already begun phasing out Block 10 and 15 aircraft and will begin retiring Block 25, 30 and 32 aircraft between 2014 and 2017, she said.

The CCIP upgrades include the installation of the Joint Helmet-Mounted Cueing System, a Link 16 datalink and color multifunction displays, as well as a new modular mission computer and air-to-air interrogator, she said.

All 254 Block 50 and 52 jets have received the CCIP modernizations and, to date, 136 of 397 Block 40 and 42 jets have received the updates, she said.

The Air Force has also begun installing a new operational flight program -- the M4.2+ -- in the F-16, she said. In late May, Block 50 and 52 Falcons stationed at Spangdahlem Air Force Base, Germany, received the update, Suplisson said. The remaining jets in this block are expected to receive the update by June 2008.

Block 40 and 42 jets will begin receiving the flight program updates this month and will be completed by 2010, she said.

“It [was] costing too much in development and procurement to maintain two different aircraft,” Suplisson said, noting the difference also prevented some aircraft from conducting specific missions.

The Falcon Star modernization addresses structural upgrades allowing the aircraft to sustain the 8,000-hour service life, she said. Modifications to the Falcon’s skin, flaps, and bulkhead are all part of the upgrade.

To date, 281 mixed-variant aircraft have received the Falcon STAR upgrade, Suplisson said. The Block 40s going through CCIP simultaneously get the Falcon STAR upgrades at Hill Air Force Base, UT.

Additionally, the service is also working on an F-16 radio improvement program in which Falcons will receive a secure line-of-sight ARC-210 radio, which is currently being flight tested on two test jets at Nellis Air Force Base, NV, she said. The service has funding for 72 radio units to be used on Block 40 and 42 aircraft. The service will begin installing the radios on the 72 F-16s this month and will deploy the aircraft into theater this fall.

As for munitions, officials expect the aircraft will begin carrying the Small Diameter Bomb in fiscal year 2012, Benny Hockersmith, an F-16 support staff member, said in the same interview.

In its FY-08 budget proposal, the service has asked Congress for $329 million for upgrades to its F-16 Falcon fleet, according to budget justification documents.

The largest chunk of the request -- $112 million -- goes toward the Falcon STAR upgrades. Additional funding in FY-08 has been requested to modernize the F-16’s engines, Global Positioning System, cockpit displays and datalink, according to the justification documents.

F-16s fly with two engine variants, a General Electric power plant on Block 30, 40 and 50 aircraft and a Pratt & Whitney engine on Block 25, 32, 42 and 52 jets, Suplisson said. Officials are currently performing an engine service life extension program on the GE engines so they reach 8,000 hours.

The program stiffens the engines’ turbine shaft and the No. 4 bearing, Hockersmith said.

--Marcus Weisgerber

InsideDefense.com, from the award-winning Inside the Pentagon family of newsletters, is the nation's best online news service for defense and aerospace professionals.

We specialize in exclusive, hard-hitting news on Defense Department programs, procurement and policymaking.

At the center of InsideDefense.com are Inside Washington Publishers' five defense newsletters -- Inside the Pentagon, Inside the Navy, Inside the Army, Inside the Air Force, and Inside Missile Defense.

InsideDefense.com is available by subscription only. [...]

[...] We are an independent news organization: Inside Washington Publishers, the Defense Group's parent company, was founded in 1980. Our motto, "the best information first," is taken very seriously by our award-winning team of 18 defense reporters and editors.

InsideDefense.com combines the excellence of our defense and aerospace newsletters with the power of the Internet. We believe you will agree InsideDefense.com is the largest and most comprehensive source of news about the military. [...]

Hey there viper dude`s.
I`m not adding anything to the article, but here is my opinion about the whole upgrade show. It a fast changing world and especially electronics seem to change all the time. Therefore any Fighter Aircraft will need up grades along the way. But the upgrades on the F-16 sometimes seem like a money-machine for LMTAS. The Falcon Star pro gramme is a very big and expensive upgrade, and you don`t get any advantage from it, naturally you get life extension, but thats it. Now that is a different story with some of the other mods like CCIP, there you really get some advantage. From my point of view it was better to only upgrade avionics/ software, and simply wear the planes out to the max, and then scrap them at the age of 20. Some get the feeling that when you make a big upgrade the plane will just like the ones rolling out of the factory. That is big misunderstanding, you will still receive the old plane all included. Therefore they will not be as reliable as new/newer ones, which is my point. Instead of all these mods they should receive new block 60 aircraft now, and starting scrapping the old ones. The new aircrafts could then fly for the next approximately 20 years along with the upcoming replacement F-35.This would be a much more expensive way, but in the long run you might not need as many, and would always have the best gear....!

Thanks for posting this news article, Elp! Very interesting and very important! But at least in my eyes, there should be some problems to simply "create" a related F-16 news.

By searching "Google" for your online source, I found out that "Inside The Air Force" is part of <a href="http://www.insidedefense.com">www.insidedefense.com</a>. Their home page states:



<a href="http://insidedefense.com/about_ID/about_id_copy.asp">More details</a>

In comparison with some other news stuff on the web (partially available "for free"), in this special case, we must simply respect their strong copyright rules.

Are you a subscriber, Elp? If yes, can/will you share with us the latest document from their DefensePlus section: "Air Force Briefing on the F-16 Common Configuration Implementation Program"? The June 2007 Air Force briefing slide details the F-16 Common Configuration Implementation Program (PDF: 149,412 bytes). Or use you simply their offer "your first three downloads are on us" (including credit card info and some more)?

It´s a great news source, but too expensive for that what I really want.

I took a first look on the article, and I´m nearly sure that the headline "Officials: Heavy Use In Iraq, Afghanistan Shortening F-16´s Service Life" is only an "eyecatcher". Related to F-16 OEF/OIF deployments, I only can understand some "structural problems", related to flight hours, loadouts (bombs, missiles, pods and other external stores), and phase checks under deployed conditions which also include sandstorms. But at least from my personal viewpoint, these signs of "heavy use" have nothing to do with some other upgrade programs, quoted in the article.

The 60 production line is generating aircraft aren't they?