Forum: F-16 Procedures

Hi,

Anyone know of any comparisons or figures available on the maintainance cost, tools and crew requirements of these jets?

I'm also looking for this on the F-35 and F-22.

F-16.net Sponsor

why would you wanna know that

All I can tell you is that I work on the F-22 with a #$(% ton of 15 guys (theres only two F-16 guys including myself the other is my DCC thank God) in the whole unit and we get to hear quite a bit of gripe from them when they talk to each other. From what I heard there are some ups and downs to both. On the 15 you have more specialized folk (not specs) working on the acft for you while 16s we pretty much did most of the stuff our selfs i.e. no hydraulic troops, no AR troops, and no Crash Recovery troops. Engines are better at being pulled and stuffed. F-15 is easier to trouble shoot because of fewer electrics. F-16s are easier to depanel. They say the 22 is small to the 15. Man they have no idea what small is. In the 22 I can stand in the nose wheel (I'm 5'10'') while the 16 I still had to kneel down. They said the AMAD (our ADG)on the 22 is bigger than the one on the 15. When me and the other 16 guy heard them talk about it we kinda just looked at each other and knew what the other one was thinking: they have no &$(#ing clue how $@(^ing small that thing is compared to an ADG. To be honest the 22 is closer to the 16 then it is the 15 and for that Im thankful. Course sometimes I wish I could go to the 16 again because the stupid jet doesn't break. And when it does break its usually specs. And when specs "repair" it they just reboot it and badda bing badda boom jet is "repaired". It can be frustrating at times because there is not much for us to do except small stuff. Hell let me tell you guys something. R2 a flight control actuator takes about 45 minutes total and thats including depanel, remove, install, ops check, put panel back on, clean up and sign off. Its beautiful yet frustrating. Kinda like being married I imagine.

We do have Crash Recovery Troops on the F-16....I augmented as one while I was in phase (responding to bird strikes were the best)!

The F-22 is it's own jet. It's CERTAINLY nothing like the F-15, but it isn't at all like the F-16 either...the only thing it remotely has in common is the fly by wire...and even that is light years different that that we had on the F-16! Likewise, the only thing that it shares with the F-15 is it has 2 engines, and two verts! Other than that it's totally different than any other plane we've ever had.

Your not going to find a maintenance cost for any jet. I could get you in the ballpark, but with a little research you could do that yourself. I could go all day about crew requirements and tools for both the F-22, F-16, and F-15, but why? They all require their own "support equipment" and they all require a vast assortment of locally manned and common hand tools totaling....a LOT of money.

afnsucks wrote:

All I can tell you is that I work on the F-22 with a #$(% ton of 15 guys (theres only two F-16 guys including myself the other is my DCC thank God) in the whole unit and we get to hear quite a bit of gripe from them when they talk to each other. From what I heard there are some ups and downs to both. On the 15 you have more specialized folk (not specs) working on the acft for you while 16s we pretty much did most of the stuff our selfs i.e. no hydraulic troops, no AR troops, and no Crash Recovery troops. Engines are better at being pulled and stuffed. F-15 is easier to trouble shoot because of fewer electrics. F-16s are easier to depanel. They say the 22 is small to the 15. Man they have no idea what small is. In the 22 I can stand in the nose wheel (I'm 5'10'') while the 16 I still had to kneel down. They said the AMAD (our ADG)on the 22 is bigger than the one on the 15. When me and the other 16 guy heard them talk about it we kinda just looked at each other and knew what the other one was thinking: they have no &$(#ing clue how $@(^ing small that thing is compared to an ADG. To be honest the 22 is closer to the 16 then it is the 15 and for that Im thankful. Course sometimes I wish I could go to the 16 again because the stupid jet doesn't break. And when it does break its usually specs. And when specs "repair" it they just reboot it and badda bing badda boom jet is "repaired". It can be frustrating at times because there is not much for us to do except small stuff. Hell let me tell you guys something. R2 a flight control actuator takes about 45 minutes total and thats including depanel, remove, install, ops check, put panel back on, clean up and sign off. Its beautiful yet frustrating. Kinda like being married I imagine.

45 mins for out and back in leak and ops ck on ANY F-16 ISA?!!?! You must be some kinda Chuck Norris deity, or Sgt Skillcraft. But I did hear from a prior 16 crew chief when I went to Langley last year, in order to pull a stab ISA on a 22 you have to pull the motor, which apparently is easier than the 15 or 16.

No damn it Im talking about the actuators on the 22. The 16's actuators were not fun. Hell the 22 has bigger flight controls and still the actuators are smaller. And yes I know we have Crash Recovery on the 16 Im saying it don't use them for our landing gear installation which 15s use them for. And I know the 22 is different than the 16 but it is more similar to the 16 than it is to the 15. Even the seat is from the 16.

The ACES II seat can be found in the F-15, F-16, A-10, F-18(I think) and probably other fighters out there. A/R does the rigging on F-15 flt controls, canopy, and landing gear, Crash recovery is just that, but they often are the A/R guys the majority of the time. And, yes the 22 is more like the 16 between fly-by-wire, LEFs and other little things.

The USAF fighters all use the ACES II seat. The Navy uses Martin-Baker seats exclusively for all its jets. Or at least as exclusively as I know about. I have no idea what the B-52, B-1 and B-2 use, but would not be surprised if they used ACES IIs too.

anyone ever take note how time consuming the eddy bolts are on that F-22. Make a damage repair to the inside nacelle bay panel from a thrown engine blade. Imaging the the time AOG this plane makes for OT pay.

F-15 weapons uses one safing pin for everything. The 16 has a whole bag full of different stuff. The gun is easier to remove and install in the 15. But the 16 is less work to load, easier on your back when lifting missiles because it's not as high up in the air.
Don't care so much for the bleed air blasting you under the centerline of the 16 but hey if it's cold out what the heck, no worries mate.
Other than that not much difference as far as load toad stuff.

That Bleed air I beleive your talking about if the ECS HTX overboard air duct. That's not so bad on the left side for one body like you say in the cooler times on most F-16's but you can ask a buddy to join you for the heat if you have a blk 60, it adds room on th right side for more!

The F-16 has the best man hour to flight hour ratio of these afore mentioned jets. The F-18 is nothing more than a compilation of F-4 and F-15 ( my opinion as I have worked them, and yes they have ACES II) I worked F-4s, easy to troubleshoot harder to fix as almost everything is neatly tucked away from view or touch! I have never worked F-15s but based on my experience with other McDonnell products I would much prefer to work the F-16.
The F-22 is another issue, aren't things supposed to get better faster easier? I've heard, through other guys I've worked with, whom I do honestly trust, have some not so good things to say about the F-22. This may have become influenced by the way BLockhead is handling the whole situation here at Hill. OOps did I actually type Blockhead, my mistake sorry Lockheed. The smartest thing this company ever did was to buy GD Fort Worth (F-16s).
This is my opinion and I like it!

Why would you want those figures (if they were available) what good would it possibly do you....just wondering, what's your motive here.

I love it, one post and I want everything...can I have a winning lottery number, I could sure put it to good use, since we are in an asking mode....

Do you have any idea what an undertaking that really is and do you really think someone here would break it down like that for you if they could...but sure...go ahead ask.

I would say good luck but that would be unrealistic too... amazing....sorry but this becomes a real joke after awhile.

Call the Pentagon...maybe someone there will not laugh, I cant help myself.

fireball
Posted: Dec 19, 2007 - 12:41 AM

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

The F-16 has the best man hour to flight hour ratio of these afore mentioned jets. The F-18 is nothing more than a compilation of F-4 and F-15 ( my opinion as I have worked them, and yes they have ACES II) I worked F-4s, easy to troubleshoot harder to fix as almost everything is neatly tucked away from view or touch! I have never worked F-15s but based on my experience with other McDonnell products I would much prefer to work the F-16.
The F-22 is another issue, aren't things supposed to get better faster easier? I've heard, through other guys I've worked with, whom I do honestly trust, have some not so good things to say about the F-22. This may have become influenced by the way BLockhead is handling the whole situation here at Hill. OOps did I actually type Blockhead, my mistake sorry Lockheed. The smartest thing this company ever did was to buy GD Fort Worth (F-16s).
This is my opinion and I like it!

Know what, ever since Lockheed bought the plant , guess how many fantastic "ZERO DEFECTS" F-16's got the title under their rule?

Wonder what the 15 Homo's are doing now that most of the fleet is grounded.

Forum: F-16 Procedures

F-16 vs. F-15 maintenance