FNG

Let us know what your connection is with the aircraft, tell us where you're from and what you like!
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

35_aoa

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 506
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2015, 04:03
  • Location: Virginia Beach, VA

Unread post28 Apr 2015, 04:15

Cool to find this place......lots of technical info which I intend to digest. Navy guy (F/A-18 background) about to start learning to fly the A/B Viper.......I guess that is block 10 & 15, or so says my manual, the "-1" or whatever it is called in AF land. Thanks for having me, looking forward to the data dump!
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4425
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post28 Apr 2015, 16:10

Welcome to the boards! It's always good to have more people with experience here.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline

basher54321

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1764
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2014, 15:43

Unread post28 Apr 2015, 18:03

35_aoa wrote:Cool to find this place......lots of technical info which I intend to digest. Navy guy (F/A-18 background) about to start learning to fly the A/B Viper.......I guess that is block 10 & 15, or so says my manual, the "-1" or whatever it is called in AF land. Thanks for having me, looking forward to the data dump!



Brilliant - welcome

Block 15 OCUs perhaps?

27317fa1171fd8e93867e5dbe967fd1e.jpg
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4425
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post28 Apr 2015, 18:27

ooooh wee! That looks like a good time right there.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline

35_aoa

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 506
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2015, 04:03
  • Location: Virginia Beach, VA

Unread post29 Apr 2015, 05:02

basher54321 wrote:Brilliant - welcome

Block 15 OCUs perhaps?


Yep, those are a couple of the exact ones. Being fairly ignorant at this point (I think I know what the FLCCs and EPU are at the moment), what is OCU?
Offline

basher54321

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1764
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2014, 15:43

Unread post29 Apr 2015, 17:30

Block 15 Operational Capability Upgrade - they were in production along side the C model in the 80s so have a few features of the C airframe.

A PW-220 was fitted and there were avionics/weapons capability upgrades.

jbgator on here says he flew them in the 90s and it was a "Horse" - the PW-220 provides more thrust over the PW-200.

The Fallon ones were supposed to be some of the very last produced and were originally for Pakistan but were held back for embargo reasons.

So a Navy Adversary pilot in a near clean F-16 - what rotten luck :P
Offline

35_aoa

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 506
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2015, 04:03
  • Location: Virginia Beach, VA

Unread post30 Apr 2015, 08:52

basher54321 wrote:
So a Navy Adversary pilot in a near clean F-16 - what rotten luck :P


Oh no complaints, very very excited for the opportunity. I have fought them a lot and it is always pretty impressive. With a Navy guy at the controls, the Viper is a pretty formidable sparring mate in BFM.......actually the CAF guys are normally pretty good too, much better than light grey Eagle folk.

And yes, our jets were from a litter of pre-embargo Pakistan jets.....think the rest of the batch went to Edwards for chase duties. 220 motors, though sadly not F-16N........my understanding is that those were big mouth C's?
Offline

basher54321

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1764
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2014, 15:43

Unread post30 Apr 2015, 18:05

35_aoa wrote:
Oh no complaints, very very excited for the opportunity. I have fought them a lot and it is always pretty impressive. With a Navy guy at the controls, the Viper is a pretty formidable sparring mate in BFM.......actually the CAF guys are normally pretty good too, much better than light grey Eagle folk.

And yes, our jets were from a litter of pre-embargo Pakistan jets.....think the rest of the batch went to Edwards for chase duties. 220 motors, though sadly not F-16N........my understanding is that those were big mouth C's?


Sorry for the tongue in cheek humour - not sure there are many better placements - and its good to see some comments from the Navy side so thanks for that.

On that note I suspect you will be doing BFM with F-35s during your time - so we expect lots of views of them in your gunsight :twisted:

The F-16N/TF-16N AFAIK were mainly small mouth/inlet from what I have seen - still with the GE-100 engine though but less airflow and less thrust probably.

This is the breakdown:
4 x F-16N Block 30B
8 x F-16N Block 30C
8 x F-16N Block 30D
2 x F-16N Block 30E
4 x TF-16N Block 30E


Here is a F-16N Block 30 E:


USNavy F-16N #163577 (AF #86-1695) of VF-45 in factory fresh markings at Luke AFB. [Photo by Kevin Patrick]


from http://www.f-16.net/aircraft-database/F-16/airframe-profile/2197

That's a F-16C Block 30J+ in 2014 with Big mouth:


USAF F-16C block 30 #87-0340 from the 124th FS arrives at Kandahar AB on February 16th, 2012. [USAF photo by SSgt. Heather Skinkle]


The Block 15s you are flying should hopefully be relatively light so could even be better in some aspects.

Also if you look at the service period the A's probably have already lasted a lot longer:

F-16N USN service period = 1987 to 1995
F-16A USN service period = 2003 to present

Ns were retired early for a few reasons if interested- see 3rd post up from John Williams:
http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=24886&start=195
Offline

35_aoa

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 506
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2015, 04:03
  • Location: Virginia Beach, VA

Unread post03 May 2015, 07:12

Thanks for the great info! Now back to -1 perusal. I did enjoy the cartoon in the first couple pages of a guy dashing up to the pilot climbing up the ladder, running a manual out to him with the quote "before you go flying, read this!" lol Not sure why but it made me laugh
Offline

basher54321

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1764
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2014, 15:43

Unread post03 May 2015, 14:18

35_aoa wrote:Thanks for the great info! Now back to -1 perusal. I did enjoy the cartoon in the first couple pages of a guy dashing up to the pilot climbing up the ladder, running a manual out to him with the quote "before you go flying, read this!" lol Not sure why but it made me laugh



You're welcome - have fun

ReadThis.JPG
Offline

jbgator

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 154
  • Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 01:31
  • Location: VA

Unread post23 May 2015, 19:28

35 AOA,

Wanted to respond to some of your comments in other threads and decided to consolidate them here. As I recall N model was a small lip jet. In and of itself that is not necessarily a limitation. The big lip is a little heavier and more drag. There are certain parts of the envelope where the extra airflow helps, but not everywhere. The A-model was a lot lighter and the 220 is a vast improvement over the -200 motor. I flew Singapore A models with 220 in 1987-1989 then back to 200 motor jets. In 1991 we replaced our 200s with 220s and flew lots of mixed engine flights for a while where we could compare performance. Eye opening the difference. You could do anything you wanted with the 220 throttle, the 200 occasionally shot flames out the front if you weren't careful. The 220 had significantly lower fuel flow and RPM flying right next to a 200, the burner lit faster and the nozzle programmed better. I flew Functional Check Flights (FCF) in both jets and used to snap the 220 throttle from idle to MAX on takeoff to watch the burner light passing about 70-80% RPM. No use doing that with a 200 even if you weren't afraid of a bang because the 200 had to stabilize at Mil before it would light anyway. So you have a good jet there that has benefitted from lots of improvements over time. By the way, lots of time on FCFs at Mach 2 and USAF does not have any restrictions below the KCAS red line for the Jet and 50K feet (Clean A-model will go to 52K in Mil power, no zoom...proven by self...but the ECS/cabin pressure can often be a problem...for me, when it shut down at 52K, I thought the motor had quit...JB came down fast)

I have asked Lockheed/GD folks about the later production A models like you are flying and the Singapore jets I flew. Much of the weight growth came in the C-model as they beefed them up for heavier expectations (TGPs, Nav Pods, heavier gross weights, lessons learned from A-model wear, etc.) The landing gear is heavier to provide the greater gross weight and the brakes and tires were rated higher. I suspect these components were standard to all production airplanes when the later A-models were built and hence would expect those A-models to be heavier than Blk 1/5/10 and even early Blk 15. The only response I got at the FW plant was "we have dial a jet here, an A-model is an A-model...." Not satisfactory answer in my mind. I doubt they get different bulkheads, wings, landing gear, etc. than the C-models being built right next in line but what do I know? The jets also got heavier over time as stiffeners were added. I last flew the Blk 15 with a 220 motor in 1997 when we converted to Blk 32 (C-model 220 motor). I did not detect significant differences in performance and I flew both A and C models for several months that year. In 2000 we traded our Blk 32s for big lip Blk 30s....now that was noticeable.....

AOA indexers....those flashing lights to the left of the HUD designed as a distraction? Don't know anyone that ever discussed paying attention to them. FPM and AOA bracket, what more do you need? I didn't look at the AOA indexer in the T-38 or F-4 either. Flew Airspeed in the T-38. The F-4 had a nice AOA tone but mostly flew A/S in that too. Was hard to go back to no HUD and FPM as I flew the F-4 after I had ~1400 hours and 7 years flying the Viper. Only flew the Phantom for 1 year and 168 hours before back to the Viper.

I flew a lot against A-D Hornets but never a SH. I was glad to be in a Viper. But none of us ever really got to go to war like that did we? So in terms of TGP, Data Link, Displays, weapons, etc for A/G missions I don't really think there is that much difference but I don't really know anything about the SH.

It is good some Navy folks get exposed to the Viper. I wish USAF used the Hornet as an adversary jet instead of F-16. It is different enough to make it more realistic. I used to say the USAF Aggressors should do adversary for USN and vice versa. There is enough cultural difference there to make them unpredictable. Even though they get good training for the role, in the end, the Aggressors are just a USAF Viper or Eagle driver. sort of predictable.

Have fun....I know you will.

JB
Offline

35_aoa

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 506
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2015, 04:03
  • Location: Virginia Beach, VA

Unread post23 May 2015, 20:21

JB,

Wow, thanks for all the awesome info. I always like to hear the historical perspective on things, which is a cool thing about this site.

As for USAF using the -18 as an adversary (or aggressor in your speak), I think that could be interesting. It certainly fights a little differently, as I'm sure you know. My guess is that the acquisition process was just a lot easier for us, with the F-16 being so widely proliferated and comparatively cheap. The Pak A/B buy was an incredible value.
Offline

jbgator

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 154
  • Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 01:31
  • Location: VA

Unread post23 May 2015, 21:49

Actually I never expected USAF to acquire Hornets, just negotiate a deal with USN to do adversary stuff. Win-Win to me. Navy buys and maintains logistics for Hornets, USAF buys and maintains Logistics for Vipers. Navy/Marine pilots with their slight twist on aviating (A nice way of saying sub standard, takeoff and landing focused, Carrier landing, tail hook obsessed....now you know I am joking right? Good friend of mine was a Tomcat toad, Navy exchange to USAF Vipers, transfer to USAF Reserve in Vipers with me, Now G.O. in USAFR) provide enough unpredictability to make the Adversary/Aggressor role more realistic. Somehow we never polished the polo shirted/flight suit stuff off him. There is nothing more valuable than the USAF/USN/USMC exchange program. I would encourage you to pursue it.

I have flown with Dutch, German, RAF, Australian, Canadian, Danish, Norwegian, and Netherlands exchange pilots, Thai, Singapore, and California (Joking) foreign students, and USMC/USN exchange pilots and students. I learned a lot from them, probably more than they learned from me. The biggest thing is someone who thinks outside of your container. Group think is powerful. The Navy has the advantage of the Marines who don't think like anyone else, USAF has no such advantage.

Back to a previous point, I remembered that, if you ever got in a USAF Viper, you would find the AOA indexer light intensity knob in the full-off position. Useless piece of hardware blocking forward visibility. Especially if it flared up on approach at night with Noggs. So I learned to verify it was off at night.

Years after he had transitioned to the Viper I flew from Hawaii to Hill AFB in the pit of an F-16D on an A/C delivery with my Navy friend and he still rowed the jet to landing (my description of constant power manipulation by USN pilots I trained). Hope you figure out how to set the power, small corrections, and flare to a smooth touchdown. It is a special feeling when you've flown the Viper enough not to bounce every time you try to land. When you get it you will probably be ruined for return to the Hornet.

JB
Offline

35_aoa

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 506
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2015, 04:03
  • Location: Virginia Beach, VA

Unread post24 May 2015, 03:43

JB

haha that is funny you mentioned that......exactly where I am at, or where I'm trying to get away from now :) My first couple of approach turns, you guessed it, I was sawing the throttle like you do in a Hornet......except the thing has so much power and is so slick (even with speedbrakes out) that you just accelerate to like 200 knots in the process. Completely different animal in the landing pattern. It honestly flies much more like the family V35 Bonanza than it does any Navy jet I've flown. I think having a background in civilian flying has helped me in that respect. While it has been a good 13-14 years since I have done much flaring to land (aside from a brief stint in T-34's slightly more recently), it does come back pretty quickly, and the thing really does fly like a light single IMHO as soon as you start the flare. We still fly the "Navy pattern", but I've learned to just flick out the boards to 60 deg for a couple seconds rolling out on final to bleed some of the knots I was holding onto in the approach turn, then set the power at like 79% (78% if I'm below a 5.0 or so) and not touch it until I'm in the flare. I think there are a couple schools of thought.....those who land fast at like 8-9 AoA, and those who fly 11 and hit 13 in the flare. Second method has bought me all of my "no bounce" landings, as well as a very tiny goose of the throttle just before touchdown prior to coming to idle. The more "on speed" approach method also seems to make aerobraking and just generally comfortably setting the nose down much more manageable. I full stopped the other day on a wet runway right after a storm, and it was really surprising how well it behaved......the Hornet is bad, actually real bad on a wet runway (we actually will take a trap if there is 1/4" or more of water)......my scariest landing, day/night/boat/ashore was during a thunderstorm landing at miramar in the middle of the afternoon. 15-20 knot crosswind which only makes the directional control problems of the Hornet more scary. Immediately started a hard right drift towards the side of the runway, remembered a friend who had recently departed the runway and destroyed a jet going offroading across taxiway P and through a ditch, and just sat on my hands (or took my feet off the pedals), let it do its thing with really small corrections to stay away from the extremes, and it finally stopped, seat cushion well into my behind. Nothing like that in the Viper, just a nice smooth honest airplane that had a whole lot of rudder authority to keep tracking and a wheelbase that doesn't lend itself to 360's or cartwheels. That being said, in normal conditions, you can be a lot less careful landing an -18 and you still won't break it. I'm still pretty cautious in the Viper, which I think is why a lot of guys land fast......better to roll out on a 12-14k ft runway a little longer, than scrape the speedbrakes and/or tailpipe overdoing it in the flare. And I have probably fully substantiated your "Navy only cares about landing" notion at this point :P

As for the exchange, I definitely considered it. The "career killer" aspect kind of pushed me away a little, and mostly I just wanted to come out here which was the big reason I didn't do it. However, I've known some guys to do it, and it sounds very cool.
Offline

jbgator

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 154
  • Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 01:31
  • Location: VA

Unread post24 May 2015, 14:52

Sounds like you're getting the hang of it. 11 AOA flare to 12-13 is the way to go. I never let a student keep landing fast. OK for you guys as you will never fly heavy but when you come back with missiles, tanks, ECM pod, and unexpended bombs to a wet runway you find the jet not so docile or easy to stop, even on 10K runway. I taught sight picture in the flare (too many focused on the AOA staple which can be a little off in ground effect and causes tunnel vision in the flare). I had them set 12.5 on the pitch ladder in the aerobrake and made them memorize the sight picture. Told them that was how much they get to flare. If that wasn't enough they needed to hold what they got and accept the bounce. I never scraped a tail or had a stud who did. Also watch big roll corrections in close as the jet rolls by dumping lift (raises flapperons) and differential tail causing sink rates and possible slab strikes as they dip trailing edge real low to cause roll. Told them to ride through jet wash or go around.

For power management I used to demo a landing from the RCP in a B-model. Power on initial to hold 300 KCAS (1800' pattern altitude) and never touch it again through touchdown. Speed brakes in the break to arrive at roll-off at 200 KCAS, as you said...fan the boards as required to control speed on final. I succeeded a couple of times but, even if I had to do one power adjustment, it usually got the point across. Doing lots of SFOs to T&G helped understand the point too and I found my RCP landings were often better than FCP as a result.

Nice thing about landing on 8-10K non-moving runways was, once qualified to land the jet, we never spent anymore time talking about it. In the training squadron or operational we talked tactics, not landing techniques. I understand why you need to do it in the Navy and have utmost respect for the difficulty, I'm just happy I didn't have to spend time on it and the scariest part of my combat missions was not the night landing at the end. My buddy took me out to the TR in the Gulf to watch some CQ years ago (He was an O-6 by then and knew the CAG). Flew from Key West to the boat on a COD, spent the day, and returned that evening. Was really cool. The trap was less than I expected and the CAT shot really got my attention. We had lunch, spent a recovery on the LSO platform, and hung out with the CAG in his special little sky box (terminology?) watching the rest of the deck dance and launches. Impressive watching that massive, multi-engine, airplane come aboard from the LSO platform (not the COD/E-2, the Tomcat). I call all my F-15 pilot friends the same thing: "Large multi engine aircraft pilots."

Assume you have your 9G pin now. Expect you will humiliate your Hornet buddies in BFM and, as always, know you will have fun.

JB
Next

Return to Introduce Yourself

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests