F-16.net

Senior member Joined: Jul 01, 2007 Posts: 368

The block 25 would hold 1.06 in mil off of an abort during Tac Intercepts. It was a B00 jet though. It took burner and a descent to get it there but it held it once established.

F-16.net Sponsor

Salute!

C'mon TEG and Rap!!! No biting!! Single file, no pushing and wash your hands after going potty.

As a wise old Senator once asked during the TFX (read F-111) procurement hearings, when Sec Def McNamara started into tactical stuff versus $$$ stuff. "Just what, if anything, does the Secretary substitute for experience in these matters?"

So all you grasshoppers who have actually flown the Viper supersonic without burner please raise your hands.

And BTW, the damned thing is a "burner", regardless of the type motor. Only the Brits call a burner an augmentor. And PLZ don't get technical about the function of the "burner" or "augmentor" - they both pump out a lot more fuel and thrust than when not engaged.

Back in 1980 we could stay at 1.1M or so in mil power at 40K. This was with 'winders on wingtips and maybe a centerline tank. On a cold day, we could get supersonic at 20-25K in a shallow dive without using burner. This was with stock F100 motors, small mouth Block 5 and 10 beasts.

*********

I like the new definition of supercruise, as it is definitely a giant leap over our barely-supersonic demos.

I also agree with the "experts" here about transonic drag. Go look at most plots and you'll see the big drag rise between .95 and 1.05 M. OTOH, you ain't chasing a shock wave, you are creating one, and the sucker has strange lift characteristics on the supersonic side of it.

Go look at a "diamond" wing design and see the oblique shockwave pressure differentials ( F-104 a really great example). Unlike the motor intake, the shockwave around our wings were "oblique" and not "normal" as in the intake. So we had different pressures depending upon which part of the flow field you looked at. For you non-engineers, the oblique shockwaves have supersonic flow ahead of AND behind the shockwave you see on the pictures.

Damn, Roscoe, jump in here!!!!!!! Sheesh, where's a real engineer when you need one?

Enthusiast Joined: Apr 10, 2007 Posts: 73 Status: Offline

try a an FSD #2 F-16, outfitted with the original B1, F101-GE-DFE with adjustable AFTC schedules.

The inlet can't take much but it can barley tip the scales to supercruise.

The 132 in an earlier blk30 like 5C-456, may work as well.

Enthusiast Joined: Apr 10, 2007 Posts: 73 Status: Offline

If we are going to super cruise let's make sure we do it without the burner. Similar to the F-14+ when at MIL/INT throttle. Of course those GE400's were big un's for that plane and would have been idea for the F-111 as well. Smile

Elite 1K Joined: Jul 20, 2005 Posts: 1035 Status: Offline

Sticking to the most accepted definition of 'supercruise', I'd say that it cannot. Of course it was never designed to though.

F16JOAT wrote:

try a an FSD #2 F-16, outfitted with the original B1, F101-GE-DFE with adjustable AFTC schedules.

Slight error here, it was FSD # 1 F-16.

Enthusiast Joined: Apr 10, 2007 Posts: 73 Status: Offline

One word about the PW-232, Pratt had some home work left to make the bleeds user friendly for the F-16. Studies were never completed to fit the PW-232 into the F-16, though PW was trying to achieve GE common interface locations as well and did a good job, especially at the thrust pin interface where PW's pin moments SM are the limiting factor on current installations.

F-16.net

Forum: F-16 Design & Construction

Can the F-16 supercruise?