Forum: F-16.net feedback

Hi all,

I could never understand why there is no special area for the F16-Avionic Systems in the F16.NET Crying or Very sad

Avionics is an important area that includes all the communication, flight control, navigation, radar, warfare and electrical systems.

Idea

When we can find a forum area like the "F-16 Armament & Stores", i thought was a great idea to include a new area "F-16 Avionics Systems" as well. Subjects would be better organized.

Wink

Most differences, upgrades and improvements between F16 fleets are within the Avionics Systems.

Idea

Remember that most of the Avionics are unclassified systems and therefore some issues can be posted.

Thanks

F-16.net Sponsor

I think that such a forum would be divisive.

Best Regards,

Even though the a majority systems are not classified, the intricacies of those systems are and what exactly they do are classified. They may not be classified SECRET but deffinitely FOUO. So if you have no official business knowing, then you don't need the info. As a Viper avionics technician, I think we should leave the limited discussion of avionics to the other boards and not create an open, in depth board about them.

Great Idea. I think most of the avionics people will be able to resist discussing any sensitive or classified system functions. I've seen over the counter F-16 flight SIMs that had more information than many avionics troops would know about.

Mr. Sambor, how, exactly would this be divisive? This board has a forum for crew chiefs. Why not a forum for avionics? Maybe former or present avionics people would like to keep in touch.

Dude just because you can buy something over the counter like that does not mean that we are authorized to talk about it here. People just DO NOT get this. Yes it is out there for you to find on Google and what ever other search engines you are using. That still DOES NOT give justification for someone IN UNIFORM to divulge that info to someone that does not need to know. Just because someone has a curiosity about a system does not give them the need to know. Civilians can talk about as much as they want until that classified threshhold has been reached. Then you can expect a knock on your door and a new room mate. It is not beneficial to argue about this but I'm sure people will. It will only be a matter of time until someone starts asking about classified systems/info. I've seen it on here before (someone asking how IFF works) and luckily I can't say that I've ever seen classified info on here.....yet. As for the Viper, I'm done with that jet and have moved on to the Raptor.

Read my post again. I said most avionics types will know enough not to discuss that sort of info.

As far as what is in the public domain...again we're back to people having the discretion not to discuss details. I get it. Thanks.

Do you really think the former F-16 pilot who wrote the manual for the Microsoft F-16 Sim did not have his work reviewed by the AF prior to publishing? His name and his introduction was in the front of the manual. While the displays are accurate in the SIM there are many things that are not. I won't discuss them here.

You do realize that some of the IFF is commercial, right?

There is NOT a forum for Crew Chiefs, there is an area where Crew Chiefs can enter profile information. I would not object to such an area for Specs, but I think a forum devoted to Avionics would rev up that stupid "we're better than you" crap that we see from time to time here.

But I don't run this board, and would certainly yield to the majority who think it would be a good idea. I talked to the guy who suggested it the other day, and explained my position. He didn't agree. So there you have it. We don't agree, but we're still interested in F-16s, and if people want it, then that's fine with me.

Best Regards,

Yes I realize IFF has some commercial overlaps, i've worked the system a hundred times. I wasn't talking about that part of it. There was a very specific question posted on here about other aspects of that system pertaining to DoD usage. I suspect with a dedicated avionics forum, there will be more questions like this. Like you said, most pointyheads will know not to respond but there are still a few out there that might. Just trying to avert a disclosure of sensitive info by opening a pathway for ease of information flow, that's all.

I never understood why the block 85 viper didn't incorporate the ARN 6 radio compass Smile

.......Seriously While it is amazing to look back at the evolution of the Avionics systems, I see no benifit to an avionics discussion in this forum. I think we should have a discusssion such as that on the AFKN website avionics cop. which means you would have to have a .mil adderess to access it, and they would probably be weapons system specific. IMHO Guiness

Hi all

Well, I rest my case here. Never was the case to be divisive. If we could ever be focus over the purpose of this forum, then we would not be divisive anyhow. But … “Joe” ... Buddy, I perfectly understand your point of view. You may be right.
In so many ways i have seen posts here explaining all sorts of systems, and I have nothing against it as long as used for general knowledgement
Example: http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-9817.html (here all about Landing Gear Theory Operation)

This post intention was to... suppose to share avionics news, experiences or whatever avionics related within the classification restriction limits, like ANYOTHER system in the aircraft.
Everybody that works with restricted information should know what is or not classified for public domain. Besides, this forum is moderated with responsible staff.
This site is an information point for all F-16 users. Why not a specific avionics discussion?

Just two examples from the manufactures:
AN/APG-68(V) 9 - http://www.es.northropgrumman.com/ASD/b ... /APG68.pdf
ECM pod AN/ALQ-131(V) - http://www.es.northropgrumman.com/ASD/b ... ALQ131.pdf

About many aircraft related there is some Technical Legal information available:
http://www.dtic.mil/
http://stinet.dtic.mil/

As we know, general system information was never about “Crypto Keys” or “Mode 4” or whatever classified. I think we should use commun sense. Please do not overreact about classified information
I am done with this post.

Regards to all

Mr X
Don't give up so easily. the poll is 9 to 7 for your idea. I don't agree with Joe about the divisive issue. I just don't really understand what you want to do. Perhaps if you gave a sample topic. Like what is the value of an array vs an antenna ? Is electronically scanned array vs a mechanically scanned antenna more efficient ? Are these the type topics you are interested in ? or are you talking about troubleshooting issues like brown out causes ? or is it a combination of all the above ?
Or do you want to talk about electronic pricipals and their progression for example" What really blows my mind is the fact we can convert information from digital to fiber optic format transmit it over a fiber optic buss and reconvert the same information back to a digital format then process it, more efficiently than keeping the information in a digital format transmitting it over a digital bus and processing it." In my simple mind it seems like the more information is converted the more possibilities there are for corruption.

Mr X
Don't give up so easily. the poll is 9 to 7 for your idea. I don't agree with Joe about the divisive issue. I just don't really understand what you want to do. Perhaps if you gave a sample topic. Like what is the value of an array vs an antenna ? Is electronically scanned array vs a mechanically scanned antenna more efficient ? Are these the type topics you are interested in ? or are you talking about troubleshooting issues like brown out causes ? or is it a combination of all the above ?
Or do you want to talk about electronic pricipals and their progression for example" What really blows my mind is the fact we can convert information from digital to fiber optic format transmit it over a fiber optic buss and reconvert the same information back to a digital format then process it, more efficiently than keeping the information in a digital format transmitting it over a digital bus and processing it." In my simple mind it seems like the more information is converted the more possibilities there are for corruption.

LJDAUER, thanks for your reply Exclamation

Yes, actually all the points you mentioned are applicable.
Relating to trouble shooting... why not. Just as i said before, use the : common sense regarding to the system classification.
Mainly, Fault Isolation starts with ideas.

The FI is no more than a guidance manual. Eventually your own skills will help you to find the right way, the right drawing or the right schematic you need.

Further more...

Ex: Search the entire forum and there u see the lack of information here.
-Try to search something about the RADA FACE system, FMU capabilities and Loads /Environment Spectra Survey (L/ESS) for the F-16.. which is a wonderful system
-Try to search something about the MBFI I/II, which the best fault isolation to the MUX BUS
-Try to search something about the EDNA/VIPER improvements, which can do so much beyond
-Try to search something about the ABS, which is the the Advance break system
-Try to search something about boresighting the aircraft... techniques, or evan the latest wired long HMCS Boresight
-Try to search something about Arching cause/effect
-Try to search something about Digital AVTR

Question.... are not these things some of "Everyday Avionics Work" ? Razz

-Then why aren't they here for normal discussion? maybe there was never the right place to post these subjects Idea

Actually many more subjects are spread out everywhere in the forum. Maintenance feedback has always passed from generations, and a lot of experiences can be share here in a single place for better identification

That was my idea
CYA

PS: It was never about giving up. I just suggested and seriously i didn't see much of agreement here, so i guess it is fine the way it is Shocked

Hi Mr.X, thank you for the suggestion and also thanks to all other for their argumentation. We've looked into this and decided to keep things as they are; i.e. no specialized Avionics Forum.

This should not withhold you from discussing avionics though!

Mr. X could even start Avionics.net.........

Purple

Forum: F-16.net feedback

Proposal - New Forum listing for Avionics