| Author |
Message |
|
SixerViper
|
Posted: Mar 22, 2008 - 05:27 PM
|
|
|
Senior member

Joined: Jun 05, 2007 - 09:32 PM
Posts: 442
Status: Offline
|
|
Guysmiley wrote:
Quote:
For amorphous reasons, the A- and WMUX buses on the jets seem to work better with the AIM-120s on 1 & 9 and the AIM-7s on 2 & 8. I never could figure out why that was, but it worked, so who was I to argue?
Did you mean AIM-9s on stations 2 & 8? I've never heard of AIM-7s on anything but 3 & 7.
Y'all caught me on that one--should have been AIM-9s. Good catch! Gotta do something about these phat phingers... |
_________________ F-106A/B '69-'73
F-105D/F '73-'81
A-7D/K '81-'91
F-16C/D '91-'05
SCUBA bum '05-Present
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Sponsor
|
Posted: Jun 19, 2013 - 2:35 AM
|
|
|
F-16.net Sponsor
|
|
|
|
 |
|
F16guy
|
Posted: Mar 22, 2008 - 10:00 PM
|
|
|
Senior member

Joined: Apr 22, 2004 - 03:08 PM
Posts: 366
Status: Offline
|
| Depending on wing design, a lot of aircraft develop flutter problems with different air loads imposed by external stores carried at different stations on the wing. The F-16 has flutter problems with 9 Mikes on 1/9 and other stores on the inner stations. This in turn limits max speed. Flutter is greatly reduced with a heavier weight out at the end. If you've never experienced flutter it is incredible. The nearest thing is like driving over road with speed bumps placed every meter. You look out at the wings and the missiles are moving up and down one foot or more each direction, you can't see the information in the HUD because it is shaking too much and you pray to God the wings stay on. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
AfterburnerDecalsScott
|
Posted: Mar 22, 2008 - 10:26 PM
|
|
|
Elite 1K

Joined: May 10, 2005 - 07:45 PM
Posts: 1246
Status: Offline
|
| Do the 129s make any difference as opposed to the early sidewinder rails? I notice all the demos....T-birds and the single ships, fly with the 210 rails instead of the 129s. |
_________________ More people have died driving with Ted Kennedy than hunting with Dick Cheney.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
VarkVet
|
Posted: Mar 22, 2008 - 11:26 PM
|
|
|
Elite 1K

Joined: Oct 30, 2006 - 04:31 AM
Posts: 1443
Status: Offline
|
|
F16guy wrote:
The F-16 has flutter problems with 9 Mikes on 1/9 and other stores on the inner stations.
You mean like this?
http://www.tps06a.com/Videos/videoLCO.htm |
_________________ My eyes have seen the glory of the Lord and the esthetics of the Flightline
|
|
|
|
 |
|
F16guy
|
Posted: Mar 24, 2008 - 08:28 AM
|
|
|
Senior member

Joined: Apr 22, 2004 - 03:08 PM
Posts: 366
Status: Offline
|
| Oh that's nothing. The Config looks just right to cause it - 2000 pounders, wing tanks, 9 mikes. The wing was definetly shaking but not near as much as I've seen. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
scorpio110367
|
Posted: Mar 31, 2008 - 03:26 AM
|
|
|
Enthusiast

Joined: Aug 01, 2005 - 12:00 AM
Posts: 96
Status: Offline
|
| This acft is the first acft in the USAF inventory that is NOT aerodynamically stable, 174wepsw is right to counter the unstable platform, more mass is needed, thus we load 120's on 1 and 9. If you have ever been on an F-16 incentive ride, the acft will climb when you disengage from the stickgrip, on a aerodynamically stable acft, like a T-37B "tweet", if you disengage from the stickgrip, the acft will nose dive. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
ptplauthor
|
Posted: Jan 16, 2009 - 03:48 AM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran

Joined: Nov 02, 2008 - 12:09 AM
Posts: 732
Location: Titletown, USA
Status: Offline
|
I'm sorry to resurrect this thread, but I was curious--I just noticed a picture I have of a four-ship from the WI ANG with AMRAAMs on the #9 station and a 'winder on station 1 of jet s/n 87300--i can only guess on the s/ns of two others 87288 and 87289.
But my question only deals with 300--can a 'winder and Slammer be put on the two stations simultaneously? Isn't there some sort of software glitch that should prevent this? |
_________________ Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|