Lockheed Martin announces new F-16V

Discussions about F-16.net news articles. A topic is created automatically whenever someone posts a comment in the F-16 News section.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

Patriot

Senior member

Senior member

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

Unread post16 Feb 2012, 10:21

First of all GREAT NEWS! Viper legacy continues strong. :D

I'm wondering.. do we deal with another Block production or is it just a retrofit extensive avionics package option for living birds... And is that "V" designation stands for Viper or it is more Roman "five" letter referring and emphasizing to the 5th gen fighters capabilities included in the V-Viper variant?

Can't wait to see another incarnation of the most iconic fighter ever! 8)

<a href="http://www.f-16.net/news_article4521.html">Lockheed Martin announces new F-16V(iper) at Singapore Air Show</a>
Offline

fiskerwad

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 753
  • Joined: 13 Nov 2004, 19:43
  • Location: 76101

Unread post16 Feb 2012, 16:02

So, a Block 60 avionics package (from 2003) added to an existing airframe but no GE-132 engine. And doesn't the UAE hold all the rights to a Block 60 configuration? Does LM even get any of the upgrade work or will that be done in Singapore? So many questions.
fisk
Mipple?
Offline

discofishing

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1421
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2008, 22:15
  • Location: USA

Unread post18 Feb 2012, 22:51

This sounds like a next generation MLU (NG-MLU?). Are there certain blocks this applies to, or can any F-16 be turned into an F-16V? Like fiskerwad, I have many questions.
Offline
User avatar

LinkF16SimDude

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2496
  • Joined: 31 Jan 2004, 19:18
  • Location: SW Tenn.

Unread post21 Feb 2012, 08:42

discofishing wrote:Are there certain blocks this applies to, or can any F-16 be turned into an F-16V?
As far as USAF is concerned I wouldn't think they'd do it on anything before B4X. B25s are pretty much done and the B3Xs are gettin' long in the tooth even with their recent mod work. For the foreign users it may be a different story. You could maybe do an "a la carte" mod installing only certain pieces of the kit to fit your needs, like the AESA or the updated cockpit.

fiskerwad wrote:So, a Block 60 avionics package (from 2003) added to an existing airframe but no GE-132 engine. And doesn't the UAE hold all the rights to a Block 60 configuration?
Yes, the UAE holds the rights to the specific B60 package and if you wanted to mod a jet to the exact B60 specs they'd have something to say about it. But I suspect the "V" mod will be an adaptation, not a replication, of the B60 architecture and will use modern 2012 era components, not 2003-vintage systems. So LockMart has some wiggle room there. Sure...the cockpit layout may resemble a B60 but the innards will be where the differences lie.

It's been discussed on this board in the past regarding the difficulties of putting the -132 motor in a legacy jet. But I've seen nothing that suggests a USAF B4X or B5X modded to a V config would require a bigger motor anyhow. If anything, the old jets will get newer, lighter, hardware. Aren't the AESA radar sets substantially lighter than the mechanically driven ones? The B60 style LCD MFDs are a great deal lighter than the currently installed CRT units. So the motors already installed will prolly suffice. I'd also think the CCIP'd airframes already have some upgradeability designed in (plumbing, wiring routes, etc.).
Offline

discofishing

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1421
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2008, 22:15
  • Location: USA

Unread post26 Feb 2012, 01:07

If Taiwan cannot get new F-16Cs, then maybe they should upgrade to F-16V standard.
Offline

geogen

Banned

  • Posts: 3123
  • Joined: 11 Mar 2008, 15:28
  • Location: 45 km offshore, New England

Unread post26 Feb 2012, 03:20

Most likely the latest delivery F-16 blocks, such as Poland's, could be upgraded to this config.

As far as LM finally trying to market something actually 'next gen' in the F-16 sphere... more power to them, even if it's a bit late on the strategic business plan making side. But this should have been officially proposed as a lower-grade option to the F-35 at least 2-3 years ago imho, instead of being a mere delayed response to the Super Hornet's International roadmap proposal.

If anything else, I salute this F-16V as a good option, even if I'd personally want to push it up a couple levels higher as envisaged in an F-16 sim Youtube vid I made a couple years back under the designation 'AT-16V' ...per 'Advanced Tactical' -16... :thumb:
The Super-Viper has not yet begun to concede.
Offline

Scorpion1alpha

F-16.net Moderator

F-16.net Moderator

  • Posts: 1625
  • Joined: 21 Oct 2005, 00:47

Unread post26 Feb 2012, 09:50

discofishing wrote:If Taiwan cannot get new F-16Cs, then maybe they should upgrade to F-16V standard.


With this current administration, I doubt they will.

They won't sell Taiwan the high block Vipers, but are willing to sell upgrades for their existing F-16s. But the latest "upgrades" as represented by the F-16"V"? That's why I doubt it.
I'm watching...
Offline
User avatar

KamenRiderBlade

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2635
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2012, 02:20
  • Location: USA

Unread post01 Feb 2013, 09:38

I really wish they would add in a Diverterless supersonic inlet as part of the V package

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diverterle ... onic_inlet

Along with the Multi-Axis thrust vector capable engines

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dy ... F-16_VISTA

That would give the F-16 the edge it needs IMO.

Also add in the Dorsal Spine option from the Israeli F-16 variant along with Conformal fuel tank option.
Offline

neurotech

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2346
  • Joined: 09 May 2012, 21:34

Unread post01 Feb 2013, 22:58

kamenriderblade wrote:I really wish they would add in a Diverterless supersonic inlet as part of the V package

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diverterle ... onic_inlet

Along with the Multi-Axis thrust vector capable engines

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dy ... F-16_VISTA

That would give the F-16 the edge it needs IMO.

Also add in the Dorsal Spine option from the Israeli F-16 variant along with Conformal fuel tank option.

The problem with doing DSIs in production F-16s is that it would require extensive flight testing. The F-16 DSI demo, was only a proof of concept, and significantly more work, and flight testing, before being ready for production.

Thrust vectoring alone isn't the answer, they'd have to upgrade the engine to provide additional "excess" thrust to make it happen. IF they are going to do a TV upgrade, it'll be to the F-35, not the F-16.
Offline
User avatar

KamenRiderBlade

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2635
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2012, 02:20
  • Location: USA

Unread post02 Feb 2013, 03:49

I can't disagree with you neurotech cause that's what I think will happen down the line.

But you know those Viper pilots would kill for a chance to have a MATV engine installed if given the option.

Return to F-16 News

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests