It wasn't that it was "no good" it just wasn't needed for extra capture area. The PW-229 still conformed to the original specification of the F-16A's inlet area. GE was allowed to "cheat" (so to say) when they were given the big-mouth to improve the "installed performance" of their engines. The 2 engines were suppose to be "common" but this important airframe modification quickly followed the GE contract.
The PW-229 will make as much thrust as the GE-129 with a smaller inlet. It works more with pressure/temperature than with mass flow. The added capture area of the VISTA airframe would not hinder the PW-229 as the engine's Compressor Inlet Variable Vanes would restrict "excess" airflow at the fan face.
The larger inlet does cause a bit more drag, which is why the PW powered Vipers have never gotten the larger inlets; wasted drag for un-needed airflow.
PW had the PYBBN "Pitch-Yaw Balanced Beam Nozzle" Project in the mid 1990's that had the same vector capabilities as the GE vector nozzle. The VISTA was the perfect test-bed for their project as well. (Search this site for "Vectoring")
Yes the NF-16D did fly almost as long with the GE as the PW nozzle. The majority of flights used standard nozzles, either the GE-129 or PW-229. Even the "vector" nozzles looked very similar to their respective OEM standard nozzles.
The key to identifying you're decals is the GE or PW emblem on the dorsal spine. If it has GE use a GE-129 nozzle. If the PW eagle is on the spine, use a PW-229 nozzle for an example.
Seems they both disappeared when the Raptor started to run into funding problems? Imagine new generation F-16s with PW-232 or GE-132 engines AND thrust vectoring!? WOW!
Keep those motors turnin...
