F-16 vs. other teen series fighters in low lvl race..

Agreed, it will never be a fair fight but how would the F-16 match up against the ... ?
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

Patriot

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 486
  • Joined: 02 Sep 2006, 17:48
  • Location: Poland / UK

Unread post17 Feb 2018, 23:06

If that would have happen in reality.. would the results be the same? :mrgreen:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cf3vDePp4gk
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3349
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 2

Unread post18 Feb 2018, 14:48

Ridiculous, LOL

Why on earth would you load each aircraft down with EFT''s in such a "drag race"... especially over just 100 miles? The only factually accurate detail would be the F-18 coming in last. If they were all clean and flying their most powerful engines, I'd take the F-16 (GE big mouth) followed by the F-15 then F-14.

Would be interested to hear other's opinions though...
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

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

Unread post18 Feb 2018, 14:52

Well mixelflic, from two different reports GE powered Cats accelerated through 1.35 on the deck and went fast enough to rip off maintenance panels. I think I would take an A+ Tomcat for this race.
"Spurts"

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

Patriot

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 486
  • Joined: 02 Sep 2006, 17:48
  • Location: Poland / UK

Unread post18 Feb 2018, 15:10

From what I know the F-16 has the biggest t/w ratio and the smallest frontal cross section (thus drag) of them all... so it should accelerate quickest and be 1st... question for how long? The F-16 has issues: canopy speed limit and fixed inlet - both things doesnt support flying Mach 1.2+ at low level :roll:
Offline

basher54321

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

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

Unread post18 Feb 2018, 16:08

The GE F-16s easily go through the 800KCAS limit in level flight - the flutter limit is over 900KCAS and it has been over 870KCAS on the deck apparently - but like in the F-14 case the pilot should never have been there outside of some emergency (in which case unlikely to have drop tanks).

With drop tanks and ignoring any tank limits for the benefit of a computer game - those jets probably hit a wall around M1.0 anyway - however the F-14 with only 2 small tanks could have benefited here from less relative drag.
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

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

Unread post18 Feb 2018, 16:24

Right, the 68 degree wing sweep will do wonders for the wave drag.
"Spurts"

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

hummingbird

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 64
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2017, 04:54

Unread post18 Feb 2018, 21:47

Also keep in mind that the F-16's canopy apparently wasn't able to withstand the friction heat generated at speeds above M 1.2 at SL or M 2 at altitude. I believe a similar issue is causing the speed limit for the F-35.
Offline

basher54321

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

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

Unread post18 Feb 2018, 22:52

The 800KCAS on the canopy is a test limit - e.g. it was tested to that speed only because that was the requirement of the USAF Structural design criteria report etc - what happens when you go through the limits is not always known which is why it is stupid for a pilot to just risk it for no good reason - but the fact that is a test limit would explain how these pilots (Including Joe Bill Dryden) have gone well over 800KCAS on the deck without the canopy melting (AFAIK).
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

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

Unread post19 Feb 2018, 01:04

And other pilots died as a direct result of exceeding the 800KCAS limit.
"Spurts"

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

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3349
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 2

Unread post19 Feb 2018, 16:18

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:Well mixelflic, from two different reports GE powered Cats accelerated through 1.35 on the deck and went fast enough to rip off maintenance panels. I think I would take an A+ Tomcat for this race.


Good to know. Thanks!

I love the Cat but they should have re-engined the entire fleet. Sad to see it fly into its 3rd decade of service in some cases with the dreaded TF-30. But the 110 motors allowed its potential to be realized, particularly acceleration, time on station and in the vertical. A clean 'Cat with F-110's in a drag race would be a sight to behold. Or even carrying 4 semi recessed sparrows.

I think a prototype hit Mach 2.6, if memory serves? The great irony is that was a TF-30 powered bird and the top speed of the GE powered F-110's was a bit less. In all other respects though, it was much superior. What was really telling was the non afterburning cat shots. Apparently, the GE motors were so powerful that if one engine quit the asymetrical thrust was so great, recovery was impossible...
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

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

Unread post19 Feb 2018, 17:34

mixelflick wrote:I think a prototype hit Mach 2.6, if memory serves? The great irony is that was a TF-30 powered bird and the top speed of the GE powered F-110's was a bit less.
IIRC the GE powered birds ended up having a fixed inlet. In an effort to save weight and maintenance they "fixed" the glove vanes and the inlets. In this regard, the TF-30 birds would have better pressure recovery at high mach speeds. Again, IIRC.

Also, I'm wondering if it was a placard limit. I came across a NATOPS document that shows D model top speed with 8 missiles (4 Phoenix) was 1.88, same as clean.
"Spurts"

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

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7698
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post19 Feb 2018, 18:07

Not teen series jets but I expect the F-111 and Tornado would be contenders down low.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

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

Unread post19 Feb 2018, 20:23

F-104 with the J79-GE-19.
"Spurts"

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

tailgate

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 139
  • Joined: 19 Aug 2017, 02:46

Unread post20 Feb 2018, 01:26

I know F-111E’s could really tear it up down low......BTW.....at Bitburg, we tried to run an intercept on an RF-4C that was down low......we didn’t catch him.......just sayin.......
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7698
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post20 Feb 2018, 01:30

MiG 23 also.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Next

Return to F-16 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests