| Author |
Message |
|
azevedo
|
 Posted: Aug 19, 2010 - 05:23 PM
|
 
|
|
Newbie
Joined: Dec 30, 2009 - 04:47 PM
Posts: 7
Location: Brazil
Status: Offline
|
| The F-16D block 30/40 in israeli service can carry cft too ? |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Sponsor
|
 Posted: May 25, 2013 - 7:40 PM
|
|
|
F-16.net Sponsor
|
|
|
|
|
|
elguapo
|
|
Posted: Aug 20, 2010 - 02:49 AM
|
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: Jun 01, 2006 - 03:32 AM
Posts: 87
Status: Offline
|
|
Quote:
afnsucks wrote:
Is it just me or do F-16s with CFTs seem sexier?
try working them for a day.......they suck. Imagine every panel accessed where the CFT's Lie. You have to defuel and bring a crane out every time maintenance needs to be done.
Turnaround frustrations, not to mention that the wear and tear on the dry bay fixtures. All in all, crew chiefs were boned again by these.
MUG is right, Seat dreamer and afnsucks, You guys would have a different opinion if you had to crew a jet with CFT's. Who cares about astetics. From a maintenance point of view they are a pain in the A$$!! We won't miss CFT's when the block 60's leave. 
Regards, El Guapo |
_________________
C-141A, Learjets 25, 35, & 51, A-7D, F16 Blocks 10, 15, 25, 32, 42 and Block 60 Flight Chief.
|
|
|
|
|
|
timt
|
|
Posted: Aug 21, 2010 - 03:13 AM
|
|
|
Newbie
Joined: May 03, 2010 - 08:47 PM
Posts: 5
Location: Tucson Arizona
Status: Offline
|
|
Quote:
For the record: Single seat vipers also can be modified to carry the CFT's. The test airframe at Eglin was actually a single seat block 40.
I knew the DCC of that Aircraft, worked with him in Iraq- He claimed the aircraft was an over-G Nightmare, Sucked to be him i suppose, no one enjoys over-g inspections.
Tyler |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VarkVet
|
|
Posted: Aug 21, 2010 - 10:20 PM
|
|
|
Elite 1K
Joined: Oct 30, 2006 - 04:31 AM
Posts: 1442
Status: Offline
|
afnsucks wrote:
Is it just me or do F-16s with CFTs seem sexier?
try working them for a day.......they suck. Imagine every panel accessed where the CFT's Lie. You have to defuel and bring a crane out every time maintenance needs to be done.
Turnaround frustrations, not to mention that the wear and tear on the dry bay fixtures. All in all, crew chiefs were boned again by these.
MUG is right, Seat dreamer and afnsucks, You guys would have a different opinion if you had to crew a jet with CFT's. Who cares about astetics. From a maintenance point of view they are a pain in the A$$!! We won't miss CFT's when the block 60's leave.
Regards, El Guapo
For the record: Single seat vipers also can be modified to carry the CFT's. The test airframe at Eglin was actually a single seat block 40.
I knew the DCC of that Aircraft, worked with him in Iraq- He claimed the aircraft was an over-G Nightmare, Sucked to be him i suppose, no one enjoys over-g inspections.
Tyler
So who is affraid of work? please raise your hand! 
Kinda makes the day go by faster working the Viper? |
_________________
My eyes have seen the glory of the Lord and the esthetics of the Flightline
|
|
|
|
|
|
plant#4
|
|
Posted: Aug 30, 2010 - 06:03 AM
|
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: Mar 12, 2009 - 10:32 AM
Posts: 36
Location: Fort Worth
Status: Offline
|
|
timt wrote:
Quote:
For the record: Single seat vipers also can be modified to carry the CFT's. The test airframe at Eglin was actually a single seat block 40.
I knew the DCC of that Aircraft, worked with him in Iraq- He claimed the aircraft was an over-G Nightmare, Sucked to be him i suppose, no one enjoys over-g inspections.
Tyler
LOL for the real record....That aircraft at Eglin only carried a mock-up of the CFTs for flight charistics study. They were made of plywood, aluminum, and styrofoam. That aircraft never had fuel in those "tanks". Only the block 52 +'s and higher can carry CFT's. All single seat and two seat 52 +'s and higher, can carry the CFTs, with no modications.
USAF will never have CFT's untill they buy new F-16's of the "plus" variety, or higher. This is not an upgradeable feature.
Cheers, Plant #4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Search
Register
Private Messages
Forum Guidelines
