F-16 Block Versions and Software Tapes

Feel free to discuss anything here - as long as it is F-16 related.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

basher54321

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1413
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2014, 15:43

Unread post07 Jun 2018, 12:39

Yes not really helping things - because technically it can only become an MLU after an actual MLU in which case Block 20 MLU would be correct for the ROC jets ;) - and the hodgepodge of EPAF jets still remain as Block 10 MLU etc



In a similar manner a block 40 CCIP is an upgraded Block 40. It has more capabilty over the baseline and has a lot of similarities to Block 50 CCIP but doesnt become referred to as Block 50.

to add - as you mention the block 20 upgrade to F-16V - although that essentially is the MLU maybe Block 20 MLUV is better - or suggestions on a postcard.
Offline

MVSGas

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 128
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2005, 09:12

Unread post07 Jun 2018, 17:43

I going to need to right this down basher, break it down for me.
Ok so F-16A block 15 are MLU not block 20. Do we include all MLU or specific country? Which update do we include MLU?
Pacer spark, Pacer SLIP, Pacer AMSTEL, Pacer ICSS, etc?
Does it matter is LM, TAI, Fokker or Sabca made the update/upgrade?

An then you want USAF updated block 40/42 to be block 50/52 after CCIP? Ok but after Falcon STAR and Falcon up, do we call them Block 40/42 MLU? Now after they get SLEP, do we call the USAF Block 40 End of life Update (EOLU)?
Offline

basher54321

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1413
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2014, 15:43

Unread post07 Jun 2018, 18:09

The database already has some of that information in it MVS:

http://www.f-16.net/aircraft-database/F ... ofile/189/

  • Country
  • Block
  • Manufacturer
  • Dates

So yes you could potentially do it however the admins probably don't have the time and a lot of specific update information is unavailable I imagine.

However if an aircraft is listed in there with the wrong block or other information then generally it can help to point that out.

What do you want to talk about next MVS - the actual speed limiting factor on an F-16 or why the F-16 didn't have Sparrows from the off :D
Offline

MVSGas

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 128
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2005, 09:12

Unread post07 Jun 2018, 18:18

Any F-16 topic is fine, but there is so much about this one you have not told me.
So, 78-0189: Would that be block 10 MLU or Partial MLU?
Offline
User avatar

Bjorn

F-16.net Editor

F-16.net Editor

  • Posts: 1764
  • Joined: 27 May 2003, 18:56

Unread post07 Jun 2018, 19:54

To end the block discussion. We decided to refer to MLU jets as block 20 MLU already back in 1998 guys. That's 20 years ago! Why did we do this? Because at that time we thought that only later block 15 or block 15OCU jets would be upgraded and they would all be brought on the same standard. Down the road we discovered what has been discussed. But we are not going to refer to block 10MLU or block 15MLU. The difference between the EPAF jets and RoCAF is indeed referred to as plain block 20 for the Taiwanese and block 20MLU for the EPAF countries (and later others who upgraded older jets).

We have been recently discussing on indeed entering another designation for block 40/42/50/52 jets who have been going through the CCIP program (for at least the block 50/52 jets we know which ones are updated). And are also thinking about entering the older block 30/32 jets who have been updated in some kind of way. But some research has to be done on that one.

More recently the whole block 70/72 or F-16V discussion has been included in that. What is certain is that new-build airframes will be referred to as block 70/72. We might call the upgraded airframes block 70/72V to als mark the difference there. But we haven't decided on that one.

Greets,
Bjorn Claes
F-16.net Editor
Photo Library Admin
Aircraft Database Admin
Offline

basher54321

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1413
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2014, 15:43

Unread post07 Jun 2018, 20:24

MVSGas wrote:Any F-16 topic is fine, but there is so much about this one you have not told me.
So, 78-0189: Would that be block 10 MLU or Partial MLU?

Unable to find any recent photos however it looks like it has a Block 10 inlet with data probe, small tail and will take confident punt at no beer cans on the wings so looks very much like a Block 10 with AIFF.
As of 2016 it looks like there was only three Danish F-16A Block 10s left in service (apparently).

Partial MLU?

Structural
Only requirement for MLU AFAIK appears to be mods to extend life time (PACER SLIP) no requirement to change wings or inlets etc.

Engine
That must be a PW-200 because they did not purchase PW-220Es until 2013.

Software
Apparently these were left at an older Tape 4.3 in 2016 unlike the rest of the Danish fleet.
Offline

basher54321

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1413
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2014, 15:43

Unread post07 Jun 2018, 20:27

Bjorn wrote:To end the block discussion. We decided to refer to MLU jets as block 20 MLU already back in 1998 guys. That's 20 years ago! Why did we do this? Because at that time we thought that only later block 15 or block 15OCU jets would be upgraded and they would all be brought on the same standard. Down the road we discovered what has been discussed. But we are not going to refer to block 10MLU or block 15MLU. The difference between the EPAF jets and RoCAF is indeed referred to as plain block 20 for the Taiwanese and block 20MLU for the EPAF countries (and later others who upgraded older jets).


Many thanks for the clarification Bjorn :beer:
Offline

Boman

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1384
  • Joined: 08 Jul 2004, 19:22
  • Location: Norway

Unread post08 Jun 2018, 15:44

One musn't forget that all aircraft go through developement through its lifetime, so also with the F-16.

Some of these updates have in the past been captured in the A/B/C/D etc. designation, however many "smaller" mod's are captured in the block updates.
Of these, the change of the small- to larger tailplanes from Block 1/5/10 to 15 is one example.

All the MLU's are denoted by AM/BM as the official designation, same with CCIP'ed F-16CM/DMs which are essentially block 40/42/50/52's. This is seen in the stenciling below the cockpit of upgraded aircraft.
Formally though, only the ROCAF Vipers are block 20's.

I believe it now is standard US policy to use the A, B, C designation to differenciate between various types of the same aircraft, ie F-35A/B/C, while the block in today's hightech world refers to the software updates an aircraft have gone through. This because the use of A/B/C/D don't correctly capture the current mod's of anyone aircraft, and the biggest updates these days are in software rather than hardware.
Offline
User avatar

Bjorn

F-16.net Editor

F-16.net Editor

  • Posts: 1764
  • Joined: 27 May 2003, 18:56

Unread post08 Jun 2018, 15:51

Niels, that's absolutely correct. But for us it is impossible to capture all those upgrades. In the future, with the F-35, it will even be harder and most probable no blocks will be present in our database since we won't know (after initial delivery) to which block they are upgraded.

Greets,
Bjorn Claes
F-16.net Editor
Photo Library Admin
Aircraft Database Admin
Offline

MVSGas

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 128
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2005, 09:12

Unread post08 Jun 2018, 17:41

Bjorn,
Thank for the info. I think the database is fine the way it is. It would be impossible to follow each specific update.

basher54321,
Again, AFAIK, MLU is not a black and white update. Is not item A through D. Each country did theirs differently. So unless you have access to each aircraft jacked files and can tell me all ECP/TCTO they receive and when, we have no idea what updates they went through while undergoing MLU.

Additionally, again AFAIK (I am not expert on any of this) F100-PW-220E are updated F100-PW-100/200, not newly bought engines.

Finally, about the tapes, they would have a TCTO/ECP number to them. You would need specifics on what aircraft got updated when.

Have you ever seen a F-16 Technical Manual (or Tech Order /T.O) Typically on the front of the books they list the TCTO/ECP that are relevant to that specific TO. They also list the specific serial numbers of they aircraft that manual applies to.
here is a F-16A-1 for example
http://www.avialogs.com/viewer/avialogs ... p?id=15535
On page vi the ECP/TCTO start. You can see they have codes for each country. Some have specific aircraft tail numbers.

So updates are not black and white, you would have to know specifics on each aircraft.
Offline

basher54321

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1413
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2014, 15:43

Unread post08 Jun 2018, 20:27

Thankyou MVS I did kind of mention above I somewhat doubt the information is available to do it to that level of granularity.

Denmark purchased 50 used PW-220E sorry missed that part out - so will have to assume used PW-200s with the PW-220E upgrade kit.

All remaining Danish Block 10s are at MLU Tape 4.3 it states.

The Lock Mart MLU Tape manuals with all the features also have an ECP number probably related but cant really list the detail on here.


I don't know if there is a language barrier here but you do realise that when I mentioned the CCIP (F-16CM) mod it was because it is a publicly known major milestone just like MLU (F-16AM). Both incorporate various blocks of aircraft and both CCIP and MLU are significantly different in capability to the original blocks they started life as.
Offline

Boman

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1384
  • Joined: 08 Jul 2004, 19:22
  • Location: Norway

Unread post08 Jun 2018, 20:35

The MLU program is from the outset a generic program, so all MLU updated aircraft are equal. So also the CCIP program, which is directed at the block 40/42/50/52's. After a couple of upgrades, the MLU and CCIP merged, but I don't know exactly from which update-version (believe maybe 2.0 or 3.0 or thereabout?)
EDIT: Ofcourse some elements of the CCIP program has not been exported to all customers of the F-16, but most are)

The whole point of the MLU program was to exchange the analoge computers in the F-16A/B's with digital computers, exactly to allow further upgrades with minimal hardware upgrades.

While some nations have "stopped" on ie MLU 5.1 others are at ie MLU 7.1. So yes, they are different however the 5.1 update is equal across those who have completed it. (5.1 used as example only!)

The main driver here is each nations ability to fund updates, and not atleast the priority they give to updates. This again is tied to how long each nation plans on using the F-16 compared to bying new fighters like the F-35.

As an anecdote, the block designation actually started back in the early 1940's with the P-40 Warhawk.

Bjørn: I fully support that you and the other mod's wouldn't be able to follow the block updates of the F-35 series. In the end it probably doesn't matter in the end - except for the biggest nerds among us (me included 8) )
Offline
User avatar

Bjorn

F-16.net Editor

F-16.net Editor

  • Posts: 1764
  • Joined: 27 May 2003, 18:56

Unread post09 Jun 2018, 07:17

Niels,

What you say about the merger tapes is correct . But now they are driving apart again. This is due to the phasing out of the F-16 with the most EPAF countries in the coming years. So up until M6 they were equal, but the 'final' EPAF tape now is M6.5, while the US refers to it as M7. This is pure politics and has nothing to do with the features of the tape. Most probably the US will continue on the same line with an M8 and even further to follow since their upgraded F-16s will go to the 2040's. What will happen with the upgraded A/B models (for example Portugal who is also flying longer with the F-16) is to be seen.

Greets,
Bjorn Claes
F-16.net Editor
Photo Library Admin
Aircraft Database Admin
Offline

Boman

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1384
  • Joined: 08 Jul 2004, 19:22
  • Location: Norway

Unread post09 Jun 2018, 21:07

Thanks Bjørn

If I'm not mistaken Portugal is one country that have so far only upgraded to MLU 5.1, atleast the ones sold to Romania are to this standard.
A bit surprising that updates for the EPAF are not continuing, given that there will still be plenty of them flying in the years to come? After all, not all EPAF nations will transition to the F-35 (yet)?
Offline
User avatar

Bjorn

F-16.net Editor

F-16.net Editor

  • Posts: 1764
  • Joined: 27 May 2003, 18:56

Unread post10 Jun 2018, 08:04

Well, it's kind of normal. In the original MLU update plan (back in the nineties) it was intended to do 5 round of updates (up to an M5). Down the road (with more development on the F-16 platform in general) new demands for those aircraft were stipulated which made the F-16 program office and all EPAF partners decide to go for a 6th update (M6). By the time this was tested it was 2011-2012. Most EPAF countries had decided by then that their fleet would be replaced by the F-35 in the 2018-2023 timeframe.

But development continued and so an M7 was constructed. No problem for USAF, but the EPAF partners (and specifically the Netherlands and Norway) didn't want to go there. So to make it possible for those countries to do these updates it was decided to call them M6.5 so it could be 'sold' to the politicians as minor update in the M6 stack on which the budget could be foreseen without any major discussion.

The only countries in Europe to keep flying the older F-16s are only Portugal and Romania (for now). Belgium will probably decide very soon on its successor (finally), so they fall in the same category of the Netherlands, Norway and Denmark. I think Portugal is now upgrading their own planes to M6.5. The reason why the Romanian ones or on M5.1 is because this order dates from before the M6 update cycle for the Portuguese aircraft. But I presume the Romanians will update to M6.5 in the future as well. But what will happen afterwards is yet to be seen. Those two countries will fly those aircraft for another 20 years. That's a long time without any updates. But on the other hand. The older F-16s have been updated to a point in which not a lot of more capabilities can be added. If you want to keep them up-to-date you have to start with some major updates like replacing the radar with an AESA version and some other major updates. Then were not talking about a continuation of the MLU stack no more, but something in the neighborhood of a SLEP with F-16V block 72 kind of thing I think.

Greets,
Bjorn Claes
F-16.net Editor
Photo Library Admin
Aircraft Database Admin
Previous

Return to General F-16 forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests