F-16CJ vs F-16CG

Unread postPosted: 20 Dec 2003, 19:24
by Cash
What are the major external visual differences between these two types of F-16's?

Unread postPosted: 20 Dec 2003, 20:27
by habu2
Virtually none. You might see stiffener plates on the backs of some Blk 40/42s (CG) and not on 50/52s (CJ), but I rely on the shape of the HUD (WAR vs WAC) to distinguish between them. This of course assumes you don't have or can't look up the serial number to tell...

If they are carrying pods on the inlets stations (5L and/or 5R) you might be able to tell. If the jet has both LANTIRN pods on at the same time it is a CG but if it only has the targeting pod then you can't be sure because it might be the LITENING II instead of LANTIRN, and both CG and CJ can use LITENING II. If the jet has the HTS on 5R then it is a CJ, as this pod is exclusive to the CJ at this time.

Unread postPosted: 20 Dec 2003, 23:30
by mark
The stiffener plates you are refering to will be installed on most USAF F-16's, the block 40/42's were just the first to get them.

Unread postPosted: 21 Dec 2003, 02:17
by habu2
mark, what was the name of the program that added the plates, was that Falcon Up? Are the 50/52s scheduled to get the plates too?

Unread postPosted: 21 Dec 2003, 04:28
by mark
Yep... it was a small part of Falcon Up. There was a lot more to the TCTO than the beefup plates. It involved a heavier duty battery mod, back up fittings for the fwd skate mount, different longerons that run through the F-1 fuel cell and into the F-2 tank area etc. The block 30/32's are undergoing this now.

I will have to check with the guys I know in the depot hangar on monday and see what the time frame is for the 50/52's. I do know that the 50/52's are having the MMC mod done to them along with a few other stuctural items.

Unread postPosted: 22 Dec 2003, 18:10
by elp
On the CJ's, Someday it will be HTS pod on one side of the Intake ( as it is now ) and the new SNIPER will also be one of the pods you start seeing on the other side.

Unread postPosted: 22 Dec 2003, 18:19
by mark
Ok..., the "official/unofficial" word about the beefup plates on the 50/52's from the structure guys I know is: "I dont think so"... LOL

Unread postPosted: 22 Dec 2003, 20:41
by habu2
mark, that is kind of what I was thinking. After the problems were found in the heavier 40/42s in the field, changes were probably made in the 50/52s design before they were produced. The 40/42s already in the field were 'fixed' with the beef-up plates.

Unread postPosted: 24 Dec 2003, 01:30
by Rigamortis
The block 50/52 had the beefups built in to them in the factory. This was what I was told by an engineer at Eddies, that is why you wont see the plates in the 50/52.

Rigo

Unread postPosted: 24 Dec 2003, 20:11
by Tuff
Rigamortis wrote:The block 50/52 had the beefups built in to them in the factory. This was what I was told by an engineer at Eddies, that is why you wont see the plates in the 50/52.

Rigo


I believe that is TCTO 2060

Unread postPosted: 25 Dec 2003, 20:07
by ViperEnforcer
I am pretty sure that the Block 40 scab plating is only a block 40 thing. Both Block 40 and 42's were the first heavy weight Vipes, thus the increased load capabilty put a bit more strain on the aircraft. We did some initial strain test on that specific issue here at Edwards in the early 90's, which continued on when I got there in 95. By the time all the block 40/42's were beefed up, the block 50's had the airframe internally strengthend on the production line. I have yet to see or here of block 30's, or any other block (other than 40/42) getting the same beef up plates. Just the wing and dorsal tail nase plating is all I've seen.


Mike

Unread postPosted: 25 Dec 2003, 20:13
by ViperEnforcer
Tuff wrote:
Rigamortis wrote:The block 50/52 had the beefups built in to them in the factory. This was what I was told by an engineer at Eddies, that is why you wont see the plates in the 50/52.

Rigo


I believe that is TCTO 2060


Hey, Is this Rig as in Rigalosi??!! If so, then yo dude, It's Mike Valdez. Merry X mas. The Rigamortis caught my attention, then the Eddie's thing.

Still working Phase dock, or moved on?

Man, I am still trying to figure out this new JET. I hope to get a grip before to long.

Email me, I have your TENAX, but need your address to send.


Mike

Unread postPosted: 26 Dec 2003, 08:40
by Habu
Hey Mike, glad you made it over here. Take some time to browse the forums, and of course, the rest of the site. The mods and the webbie here have done otustanding job, and I think you'll agree. ;) Welcome aboard!
I'm a big post whore here too, as you can tell
<----
:D

Unread postPosted: 28 Dec 2003, 19:42
by habu2
ViperEnforcer, hey it's habu2 as in Greg D - we traded info on the lizard CAS sernos a couple of years ago, remember? (ok everybody sing "its a small small small small world"...) :mrgreen:

Unread postPosted: 28 Dec 2003, 23:47
by ViperEnforcer
Oh yeah, I remember that. Some good info was had. Plus I've been pushing Bob to knock out a sheet for the CAS F-16C program. After all, it should be pretty easy, all black data!

Mike

Unread postPosted: 29 Dec 2003, 23:38
by _Big_Mac_
I thought F-16CJs had IFF antenna cases mounted just in front of the canopy. Also from what I know they're empty (not connected to anything) because there is no IFF used on F-16s (at least on American). They look like 4 slicers as seen on this picture:

LMTAS worker applying the 'Rescue' coat on this Israeli viper [LMTAS photo]

(Only two are visible)

Unread postPosted: 29 Dec 2003, 23:41
by ViperSpike
They're not empty, and IFF is used on -every- US Armed Forces aircraft. With maybe a couple of minor exceptions.

IFF on F-16CG

Unread postPosted: 30 Dec 2003, 12:14
by Wildcat
EVERY NATO nation uses compatible IFF on its aircraft, even if modern Rules of Engagement often oblige fighter pilots to see their target before shooting.

Unread postPosted: 30 Dec 2003, 14:36
by _Big_Mac_
I know many European NATO countries use IFFs but I've heard that most of the American F-16s don't. It was never clear to me why.

The IFF antenna cases were mounted on Block 50/52s first, earlier -16s were not equipped with them, even Blocks 40/42. So it would be possible to start mounting IFFs only on US F-16-50/52 and most of USAF is still using older Blocks.
However those cases were also mounted on European MLUs (USA never upgraded their F-16s to MLU).

So IFFs can be mounted only on Blocks 50/52 and MLUs. The question is if they actualy were used everywhere. I've heard that most MLU countries had also bought APX-113.

In USA only some F-16s were issued with IFFs.

At least that's what I know, I'll try to confirm that on ACIG later.

Unread postPosted: 30 Dec 2003, 14:52
by F-16Pointy
All US F-16's have an IFF system on-board! To that matter as Wildcat said all NATO aircraft use an IFF system. The antennas you see are not IFF and I will leave those at that. In early block models I believe those were the ADF antennas. I have worked block 40's for 7 years and they came with IFF from the factory. The patriot missle systems use IFF to identify friendly aircraft. Would be alot of F-16's in the dirt if they didnt have it.

F-16 IFF

Unread postPosted: 30 Dec 2003, 16:36
by Wildcat
Right, without IFF the allied SAM units and missile warships in Iraq would have spent most of their time automatically downing coalition aircraft! :?
Big Mac, you're right about the antennas you describe: these were not used on previous blocks. But it does not mean the older Blocks did not have IFF, it only means that they used other kind of antennas fitted elsewhere in the aircraft (sabre-antennas under the nose, if my memory is good, I'm not sure).

Unread postPosted: 30 Dec 2003, 18:13
by _Big_Mac_
Oh, I remember now what I've read more specifically.

It said that F-16s had IFF _transmitters_ so that other friendly a/c could identify them but they didn't have receivers so they could ID other planes.

It sounds even stranger. Why would they give them transmitters and no receivers? That does not make much sense to me but that's what I've heard. I've asked that question on ACIG.org and I'm waiting for a reply. Probably you're right.

Unread postPosted: 30 Dec 2003, 18:38
by habu2
The antenna in question (bird slicers on the nose of USAF CJs) are part of the CCIP mod. CJs w/o the IFF slicers haven't been thruough CCIP yet, those with them have. Eventually all USAF 50/52 then all 40/42s are planned to go through CCIP. The CCIP upgrade is the rough equivalent to the MLU program for the older Blk 10/15 FMS aircraft.

Unread postPosted: 30 Dec 2003, 20:41
by VprWzl
Big Mac,

The antennaes on the nose are IFF interrogators. All USAF F-16s have Mode 1,2,3,C, and 4 IFF transponders which reply to things like ATC or a Patriot battery. The interrogators allow the USAF F-16 to get IFF info from other aircraft now.

The only USAF F-16 which had it prior to the CCIP mod was the Block 15 ADF version. No other blocks had it, although it obviously has been available. The MLU update added it to the European jets, and it also has been exported to many other nations and in other blocks.

As to why the USAF versions didn't get it 'til now - that's debatable. Some say it was because the F-15C community didn't want us to get that air-air capability, others say it was simply a matter of money. I don't have that answer.

Unread postPosted: 30 Dec 2003, 22:14
by _Big_Mac_
Yes, that's exactly what I've heard.

F-16 had transmitters so Patriots could see them but no interrogators until CCIP.
I also remembered that about Bl 15 ADF but wasn't sure.

F616 IFF

Unread postPosted: 01 Jan 2004, 14:57
by Wildcat
Big Mac, if you only wanted to speak about IFF interrogators when you wrote that older Blocks (except ADF) had no IFF, so you were right. Like you, I cannot find any really logical reason for that. I have to suppose the USAF thought that the air combat should be the arena of the F-15 only.

Unread postPosted: 31 May 2004, 02:53
by diamond1
habu2 wrote:If they are carrying pods on the inlets stations (5L and/or 5R) you might be able to tell. If the jet has both LANTIRN pods on at the same time it is a CG but if it only has the targeting pod then you can't be sure because it might be the LITENING II instead of LANTIRN, and both CG and CJ can use LITENING II.


If you've seen photos of the ANG Blk42 CGs in combat load you would notice they only use the TIRN pod of the LANTIRN system.

See Code One Online — Ken Murray Photo Gallery
http://www.codeonemagazine.com/archives ... ray_2.html (linking is legal?)

At first our jets were said to not have the power to push both pods with a full combat load. (USAF only uses Blk 42s for training duty.) Now that the -229s are going in, maybe we'll see the LAN pods!?

Then again with the '05 BRAC we may be working at the USPS?

Unread postPosted: 31 May 2004, 05:00
by habu2
Well after CUPID and CCIP added LANTIRN/LITENING/??? capability to everything from Block 25 up you can't automatically say that a pod-carrying bird is a CG...

Unread postPosted: 31 May 2004, 05:09
by diamond1
Was just pointing out that a single pod does not rule out the CGs. Even if Blk40s cary both, most often Blk42s do not.

Unread postPosted: 23 Jul 2005, 21:07
by CAG
Janes Defense wrote:AIRCRAFT IDENTIFICATION AND SAFETY OF FLIGHT (SOF) SYSTEMS,United States

Date Posted: 14-Mar-2005


Jane's Avionics

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AN/APX-113(V) Combined Interrogator/Transponder (CIT)

Type

Identification Friend-or-Foe (IFF) system.

Description

The AN/APX-113(V) Combined Interrogator/Transponder (CIT) is a complete Mk XII identification system which includes crypto computers. It consists of one unit and incorporates growth for the next generation of IFF and combat aircraft identification equipment. The AN/APX-113(V) provides both interrogation and IFF responses on IFF Mode XII Modes 1, 2, 3/A, 4, C and S Level 3.
The multiple antenna configurations feature electronic or mechanical scan. The system features Ada software and a MIL-STD-1553 bus interface.

Specifications

Dimensions:
(combined interrogator/transponder) 209.8 × 152.4 × 368.3 mm
(beam-forming network) 165.1 × 212.9 × 101.6 mm
(fuselage-mounted antenna elements) 39.4 × 82.6 × 332.7 mm
(lower interrogator antenna) 15.2 × 431.8 × 355.6 m
Weight:
(combined interrogator/transponder) 14.52 kg
(beam-forming network) 4.54 kg
(fuselage-mounted antenna elements) 0.23 kg
Power supply: 28 V DC, 200 W
Range: 185 km
Coverage:
(azimuth) ±60º
(elevation) ±60º
Accuracy:
(range) 500 ft
(azimuth) ±2º
In-beam targets: 32
Reliability: 1,600 h MTBF

Operational status

Developed specifically for F-16 Falcon. Fitted to F-16 Block 16 A/B MLU, Block 20 A/B. Also fitted to ASW/surveillance helicopters and the Japanese FS-X fighter.
The US Air Force intends to retrofit the AN/APX-113 to its F-16 Block 50/52 aircraft. This installation is designated the Advanced Identification Friend or Foe (AIFF) system. AIFF flight trials commenced in 2001, with aircraft installation starting in July 2002.
BAE Systems (Rochester, UK) was selected to supply Successor Identification Friend or Foe (SIFF) systems for retrofit on UK Royal Navy Sea Harrier F/A Mk 2 aircraft, required to upgrade IFF Mk Xa to Mk XII Modes 1,2 3/A, C and S level 2. Development work, based on the AN/APX-113 system, was completed during 2000, with full-scale production beginning later that year.

Contractor

BAE Systems North America,Greenlawn.

Image

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2005 Jane's Information Group Edward Downs

*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. It is being made available without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance their understanding of arms trade activities, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml