What if F-16 had F-35 engine?

rowbeartoe · by **rowbeartoe** » 20 Aug 2019, 03:41

Hi Everyone.

With a bigger mouth, perhaps a longer body, what benefits if any would having an engine as powerful as the F-35 do to the airframe of an F-16? Would it take away any advantage that other 4th generation fighters may hay such as the Typhoon, Su-35 etc.???

Thank you.

wil59 · by **wil59** » 20 Aug 2019, 07:06

rowbeartoe wrote:Hi Everyone.

With a bigger mouth, perhaps a longer body, what benefits if any would having an engine as powerful as the F-35 do to the airframe of an F-16? Would it take away any advantage that other 4th generation fighters may hay such as the Typhoon, Su-35 etc.???

Thank you.

Hello, It would be simply impossible to achieve. Or you would have to redo an F16 to the dimensions of the engine f135-pw-100, it would not resemble at all the f-16 more must be added tanks in the wings and around the engine like the F35 .Imaginer a f16 to the dimensions of the f35 for the circumference part of the plane. Rethinking F16 transactions, engine management and flow calculator,engine ventilation has redesigned for the F16. And other innumerable technical challenges, the structure of the aircraft to withstand the vibrations of such an engine. Squeezed another plane in every way.Block f16 60/70 is already a good plane. I could simply add something, I will add a reduction rcs and a data merge.

hornetfinn · by **hornetfinn** » 20 Aug 2019, 09:28

I think it would be easier to put F119 from F-22 to F-16 than F135. AFAIK, F119 has smaller dimensions and is closer to current F-16 engines. But I doubt there would be any real world benefits except possibly lower RCS. I'm sure the intake would be limiting factor for F119 as would be the F-16 airframe itself. With some airframe and intake tweaks, I'm sure it could break the speed record for single engined jet fighters though...

vilters · by **vilters** » 21 Aug 2019, 08:28

If the F-16 would go faster, the canopy would melt.
The canopy is the limiting factor.

sprstdlyscottsmn · by **sprstdlyscottsmn** » 21 Aug 2019, 15:25

An F-16 with an F119 motor would never need to use the AB unless they were in combat above 20,000ft. Granted AB use would suck the fuel tanks dry in a hurry.

hornetfinn · by **hornetfinn** » 22 Aug 2019, 06:55

vilters wrote:If the F-16 would go faster, the canopy would melt.
The canopy is the limiting factor.

I think that could be pretty easily changed at the expense of forward (or possibly overall) visibility. It would not make much sense for actual operational use, but could be done for speed record bird for example. Of course the days of breaking speed records with special versions are long gone and it will never be done.

dragracingmaniac · by **dragracingmaniac** » 22 Aug 2019, 07:11

vilters wrote:If the F-16 would go faster, the canopy would melt.
The canopy is the limiting factor.

If it flew Naruto style it might not.

wrightwing · by **wrightwing** » 22 Aug 2019, 16:03

Except in the real world, we have laws of physics, etc... that don't exist in anime.

Patriot · by **Patriot** » 23 Aug 2019, 10:55

Does F-22 has any similar speed limitation due to having frameless bubble canopy?

basher54321 · by **basher54321** » 23 Aug 2019, 12:24

Patriot wrote:Does F-22 has any similar speed limitation due to having frameless bubble canopy?

Not seen in public domain info

The F-16 is not speed limited by its canopy in that way as Jwill has mentioned before - even the person who quoted as such had taken f-16s way past the limits.