Forum: General F-16 forum

It looks like the USAF is taking the first steps towards coming to terms with the fact that they are not going to be buying enough F-35A's fast enough, to maintain their minimum fleet strength between now and the scheduled retirement for the F-16C. They have reportedly shipped a Block 50 F-16C to Lockheed Martin to undergo structural fatigue tests, in an effort to examine structural life extension options:
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... -usaf.html

According to the article, the USAF is currently projecting that they could drop to as few as 1,800 fighters - 10% below the 2,000 aircraft minimum that Air Force planners have been proposing - sometime between now and 2030. The proposed structural upgrade program would affect approximately 300 F-16C's, extending their service life from 8,000 to up to 12,000 hours. Any structural upgrade program would also presumably be coupled with an avionics upgrade program, likely to include AESA radars.

According to a study submitted by the USAF to Congress earlier this year, upgrading these F-16C's would cost ~80% less than buying all new F-16's for the Air Force.

Personally, I believe that it's about time that the USAF came to terms with what is likely an inevitable upgrade requirement. Most of us know that a downturn in defense spending is eventually going to strike. Nonetheless, however "shocking" the USAF upgrade requirements might be to some, they are going to pale compared to the gaps we will likely face in Naval aviation in the not too distant future. They're wearing those airframes out faster than we can replace them - and the F-35C was intended to replace the F/A-18C/D's, not the F/A-18E/F's. The Air Force had better get their upgrade plans on the books before the Navy comes knocking for more money.

F-16.net Sponsor

wise decision in this difficult time!
could really the F16 reach the 12000h?

What blows me away is how long the F-16 has gone without a moving map display.

Enthusiast Joined: Apr 20, 2005 - 03:38 PM Posts: 74

Padon me beeing stupid and all.. but why the h'ell don't they cut the loss of the F-35 and continue with F-16's..

I just cant wrap my head arround it.. just think.. the F-35 has been in development for going on a good 15 years. Congress is not to willing to foot the bill anymore and the developmentcost is spiraling. And to make matters vorse how about exports.. I guess as costs are spiraling into the wild blue yander potential customers are starting to look elswere for fighters.

The F-16's are getting old no doubdt about that, but that's the design.. the jet itself is stil beeing developed and adapted to new scenarios. Lets face it there is no such thing as an unlimited budget anymore. L/M has the production line for F-16 still open and the USAF could order a batch of fighters at a relative low cost compared to the F-35, and most important a very short deliverytime compared to the F-35. Both spares and infrastructure is already there.

The current vipers in USAF service is getting old faster than anticipated and with the F-35 taking longer to get into service a gap will be there. A batch of new "fresh" vipers will enable for the ones with most hours can be withdrawn.

discofishing wrote:

What blows me away is how long the F-16 has gone without a moving map display.

I dont know how US vipers but our Polish already have it Razz

Have any pictures of this? As far as I know, the only F-16s with with full color moving map displays are the Block 60s and the the F-16As Netz in the IAF that have been upgraded with the ACE (if that even happened). Not sure about Singapore's Falcon ONE upgrade proposal.

discofishing wrote:

Have any pictures of this? As far as I know, the only F-16s with with full color moving map displays are the Block 60s and the the F-16As Netz in the IAF that have been upgraded with the ACE (if that even happened). Not sure about Singapore's Falcon ONE upgrade proposal.

orion wrote:

discofishing wrote:

Have any pictures of this? As far as I know, the only F-16s with with full color moving map displays are the Block 60s and the the F-16As Netz in the IAF that have been upgraded with the ACE (if that even happened). Not sure about Singapore's Falcon ONE upgrade proposal.

That's cool. Thanks for sharing. Anymore pictures of this nature? I don't understand why the USAF and the EPAF nations have pushed for this.

From DoDBuzz, last month:

Read more: http://www.dodbuzz.com/2010/11/04/air-f ... z17bleotn6

Quote:

Lt. Gen. Philip Breedlove, chief of Air Force operations, plans and requirements:

“We’re not going to do a blanket upgrade,” Breedlove said. Instead, the service will inspect its Block 40 and 50 F-16s “on an almost tail by tail basis” to decide what structural refurbishments the jets will need along with which planes will get communications, navigation and even radar updates, the three-star said. “Almost all” of the planes will need at least some structural modifications to keep them flying to their “economic service lives,”

Whodda thunk 12k hrs on an F-16 is considered the "economic service life". Hats off to the VIPer!! Of course DoD notes that minor qualifier after informing Congress back in the 90s the jet is getting old and needs to be replaced Very Happy

Regardless of what the true SLEP + MLU cost will eventually total though, a new-build plan B is definitely out of political question as long as the 'stay-the-F-35-course-policy-at-any-cost' remains the going plan.

And unfortunately, this 2025-2030 Tac-air force structure of '1,800 jets' would seem to be a place-holder number... by default of staying with plan (which will include far fewer F-35 buys than officially still estimated). imho.

God speed USAF tacair recapitalization.

Salute!

Two things really bugged us from the A-7D community when we got to the F-16 - no map and no radar altimeter.

OTOH, when we saw the tiny instrument panel we understood why no map. We didn't have the neat flat panel plasma displays yet, and area was limited. Further, several influential folks demanded we have fairly large steam gauges for basic instruments and didn't want us to rely upon the HUD.

The radar altimeter was a travesty. As with the AMRAAM BVR capability, USAF and we were holding out for the new, cosmic radar altimeter that worked all the way up to 40,000 friggin' feet! Sheesh. We didn't need to know were were at 26,762 feet above the ground. We needed to know we were 200 feet in bad weather. So we lost at least two at Hill that would have been saved with the old meter and a small gauge someplace on the panel.

Only way we could have had a map was a multi-function REO that we could switch back and forth for map or radar. And it would have required a computer-generated display and a computer with a gigabyte of memory. The A-7D map used actual 35mm film and a big projection system. See my article in Fighter Weapons Review:

http://sluf.org/misc_pages/fwr_winter_1973.pdf

And we had that thing from about 1970 or so!!!

Technology improved, except for aerodynamics and motors, at a rapid pace in the 80's. So new displays and really cosmic computers and available memory got cheaper and easier to integrate. Only aero thing I saw in the 80's and 90's was low-observable stuff.

We used to sit around in the Cockpit Review Team meetings and negotiate the memory for the Fire Control Computer. I'm talking about a fight over a few hundred bytes, not megabytes. So we had trade-offs. I'll give you 500K for the Penguin if we can have 475 bytes for the AMRAAM. And all of us were willing to give up the RAM for the HUD energy maneuverability display, heh heh.

By 1990 we had ruggedized CD drives with 500 megabytes ( don't laugh, but we were really moving along). We had flash memory and data carts for our nav mission. We even started to get a digital FLCS ( scary, but sucker works). Another few years and we had gigabyte memories and much faster, more reliable computer chips. Standardization of system interfaces also made it easier to add new things. The bottomline was a really great aero design that could gain immense operational capabilities and make maintenance/upgrades easier without developing a whole new platform.

The structural work for the Viper life extension won't be cheap, but it will be lots cheaper than the F-35 problems. And besides, the F-16 is the last really good-looking jet for the Thunderbirds!!!!

Gums sends...

MCRT!
Now I REALLY have a headache! haha
Thanks Gums for stirring the memories of 32 KILOBYTES of core memory and the near fistfights it caused. haha
Salute!
fisk

So, Gums, just for the record, the Block 30 finally got moving map with our last OFP update. Only took 25 years to catch up with the SLUF. Still nothing for the 40/50s.

Its useful, but not earthshattering.

discofishing=> No, i found only this one in web.

Quote:

So, Gums, just for the record, the Block 30 finally got moving map with our last OFP update. Only took 25 years to catch up with the SLUF. Still nothing for the 40/50s.

Its useful, but not earthshattering.

Sounds like something interesting to read about. Any more information?

This is cool:

"Raytheon Company has won a contract to upgrade the Center Display Unit (CDU) of U.S. Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard F-16 aircraft. The initial contract value is $3.1 million for system integration and pre-production units. The contract includes options for production of up to 120 systems per year for five years.

The Raytheon CDU will replace multiple analog flight instrument displays currently used in the F-16 cockpit with a single large-LCD color display. Advanced technology will provide pilots with new capabilities, including the ability to overlay data from both onboard and remote sensors on a digital moving map, video processing, and two-way data-link situational awareness messaging.

Raytheon Technical Services Company LLC (RTSC) will perform engineering and low rate initial production on the system at its site in Indianapolis under the initial contract. The contract includes five optional years of full rate production.

"The CDU will be a significant advance in providing information F-16 pilots need to conduct their missions," said RTSC Customized Engineering and Depot Support Vice President Wayne Iurillo. "Giving them the data they need, when they need it, will help ensure their effectiveness in the battle zone, their ability to protect and support ground forces, and their safety while performing their duties. And that's the ultimate goal.""

Forum: General F-16 forum

Possible Life Extension Program for USAF F-16C