Forum: F-16 Design & Construction

Jet test,

Respectfully... older, lighter birds are being retired. The future does in fact require some avionics and electronics though. That being said, I would concur with you to further evolve a block 60 class powered airframe to be even better maneuvering and lighter weight, beyond what they would be even today over a block 50/52+.

F-16.net Sponsor

[quote="geogen"]gunzo,

I'm curious now... what is the additional dry weight of a single 600 gal EFT plus the pylon? And what is the additional drag penality and fuel burn, necessary to hold the same cruise speed produced by the CFT-only airframe?

I'm sorry, but an F-16 powered by 32k lbf and loading CFT plus a centerline tank could out-fly any block 50/52/52+ flying with two wing EFT.

Do you disagree?[/quote]

The weight penalty on the 600gal tank is alot less .. but the extra limitations on drag and G of the aircraft makes it a use once and throw in combat type tank .. with the CFT you have alot less restrictions and more flexibility .. not to mention pylon space for munitions

I am sorry .. an F16 with 32k thrust and CFT will be a sitting duck in the hands of the viper babies .. the way the viper fights with CFT is totally different from the standard F16s
.. in the end its about understanding the aircrafts

even a lowly F5 can gun the crap out of the F16s in the hands of a capable pilot. Ask the viper guys that have fought some of the world's best Wink

Well... speed and altitude are crucial to BVR as well. Thinking about the eagle, aside from its radar...

So a CFT viper should suffer a bit in this too. But then, all the older vipers carry 370s, so they're worse. But then...., they can selective jettison them. But then!!!! they won't last long in a BVR energy fight with afterburners wipe open....?!

Complicated. I guess there's no definite answer for this.

[quote="skwabie"]Well... speed and altitude are crucial to BVR as well. Thinking about the eagle, aside from its radar...

So a CFT viper should suffer a bit in this too. But then, all the older vipers carry 370s, so they're worse. But then...., they can selective jettison them. But then!!!! they won't last long in a BVR energy fight with afterburners wipe open....?!

Complicated. I guess there's no definite answer for this.[/quote]

Not really .. the primary role of the viper is not air superiority .. they are multirole .. capable of anything and everything .. jack of all trades masters of none ..

We have dedicated air superiority fighters for that reason.

CFTs basically just add flexibility to an already flexible platform .. to go further with the same weapon load or to carry more with the same fuel load ..

But when you come down to knife fights and close quarters .. it is a heavier aircraft with a different way of fighting like the older vipers.. you make alot more decisions to change the fight from a rate to radius back to a rate fight more frequently than you would on the older vipers.

gunzo wrote:

Not really .. the primary role of the viper is not air superiority .. they are multirole .. capable of anything and everything .. jack of all trades masters of none ..

We have dedicated air superiority fighters for that reason.

CFTs basically just add flexibility to an already flexible platform .. to go further with the same weapon load or to carry more with the same fuel load ..

But when you come down to knife fights and close quarters .. it is a heavier aircraft with a different way of fighting like the older vipers.. you make alot more decisions to change the fight from a rate to radius back to a rate fight more frequently than you would on the older vipers.

I know, Eagles and raptors definitely rule BVR don't they?

Although some nations sure need the viper to do that too?

Thinking about the viper's poor high altitude performance... It feels like a brick at 30k already, and you need to pull the nose up some 30 degrees to loft the AMRAAM it ain't comfortable. The extra weight the CFTs bring won't help I imagine. But OTOH BVR is an energy game and you need to go gate all the time. A clean viper without fuel tanks can trade shots for like 3 rounds and it's joker, and when it does carry tanks, pilot will prolly combat jett to lighten the load, especially when you're defensive. The extra fuel the CFTs bring would be GREAT.

But that AESA radar and avionics goodies on the Block60 should be really sierra hotel. (me drools....) The old APG68 creates all kinds of headaches on targeting and sorting in BVR in a multi bogey scenario. That should compensate enough of that extra weight the CFT brings I guess...

[quote="skwabie"]
I know, Eagles and raptors definitely rule BVR don't they?

Although some nations sure need the viper to do that too?

Thinking about the viper's poor high altitude performance... It feels like a brick at 30k already, and you need to pull the nose up some 30 degrees to loft the AMRAAM it ain't comfortable. The extra weight the CFTs bring won't help I imagine. But OTOH BVR is an energy game and you need to go gate all the time. A clean viper without fuel tanks can trade shots for like 3 rounds and it's joker, and when it does carry tanks, pilot will prolly combat jett to lighten the load, especially when you're defensive. The extra fuel the CFTs bring would be GREAT.

But that AESA radar and avionics goodies on the Block60 should be really sierra hotel. (me drools....) The old APG68 creates all kinds of headaches on targeting and sorting in BVR in a multi bogey scenario. That should compensate enough of that extra weight the CFT brings I guess...[/quote]

no they don't .. everything depends on the guys sitting at the controls Smile

You are correct to say some nations employ the vipers as air superiority. But your idea is only on a single configuration.

Typically vipers are configured for their roles .. ie air sup - tanks to bring them up high and fast .. then jett to allow them to become really superior .. or stay on station to maintain local superiority..

multirole long ranged - CFTs with tanks and self protection BVR and bombs ..
drop the bombs on target and become sweepers / cappers etc

A clean viper is useless :p .. trading BVR shots is not just shoot shoot and shoot Smile

it requires tactics and planning ..

CFT capable F16s have a superior APG68 radar that makes targetting multi bogey and unidentified threats a breeze .. Wink

Yes I'm talking about a single situation. It's just most ppl still think about viper doing dogfights nowadays but actually combat goes further and further. When you do long range fights, you try to keep it that way and keep the enemy out of the door. Once it gets within the phone booth the whole game plan changes. It sure is almost a none issue considering the opponents the F-16 fights these days, but we never know what the future brings. Regarding the CFTs, of course fuel is a force multiplier in the big picture and is definitely worth it.

gunzo wrote:

CFT capable F16s have a superior APG68 radar that makes targetting multi bogey and unidentified threats a breeze .. Wink

Well if it's 68V9 and beyond.....bah! It's still old!! Nothing matches the AESA Exclamation

Quote:

Thinking about the viper's poor high altitude performance... It feels like a brick at 30k already, and you need to pull the nose up some 30 degrees to loft the AMRAAM it ain't comfortable.

What have they done to the little hummer?

At only 30K and only 0.85 Mach (325 KCAL) you can almost pull the the nose of most modern airliners up to 30 degrees* and only the passengers would be uncomfortable.

OL

(*not for long though)

outlaw162 wrote:

Quote:

Thinking about the viper's poor high altitude performance... It feels like a brick at 30k already, and you need to pull the nose up some 30 degrees to loft the AMRAAM it ain't comfortable.

What have they done to the little hummer?

At only 30K and only 0.85 Mach (325 KCAL) you can almost pull the the nose of most modern airliners up to 30 degrees* and only the passengers would be uncomfortable.

OL

(*not for long though)

Well... it's not THAT uncomfortable. But comparing to the eagle or even the Mirage2k for example the viper's maneuverability is limited there. It's not a simple pull, u can't do it too hard/too early, or you'll bleed off too much speed. After the shot you'll probably need to roll 135 deg to execute a crank or out maneuver or even 180 deg to abort. The viper feels sluggish in all these maneuvers.

The eagles or a flanker for that matter has a much better high altitude performance coupled with a much stronger radar and probably ECM, hence when the engagement begins they might already be at 35 or 40K with targets sorted and tactics planned and get the head start already... Next they can nose up easily some 40 degrees at Mach1+ to loft a shot which gives the missile a very good range. After the shot while still nose up they can roll and turn nice and tight while dashing to mach 1+ again to get outta dodge quickly. After the first round is served they zoom up to high altitude again and repeat the whole process. BVR is rather a high speed high altitude energy game + avionics and they just excel at that.... If the opfor are vipers they wouldn't be able to keep up this pace and would go defensive in no time.

In the end I'd realize the F-16 is not a very strong BVR fighter although it got all the improvements over the years. Some things are buried in the roots and can't be changed it seems. Many just know in theory that it's a dogfighter but not a air superiority type and I somewhat knows why now.

Excuse this if it's an opsec vio., but back to the topic... I'm curious how cruise speed and agility and maybe even acceleration would generally compare between an F-16 w/CFT + centerline tank + 4 AAMs @ say 25k' vs, same model F-16, but with two wing-EFTs + 4 AAM? Any difference at all? Any advantage, or efficiencies in flight performance above 20k altitude between both configurations?

I may be wrong, but the CFT design appears to increase RCS by a relatively small amount. Just my rough-hewn opinion based on the shaping of the tanks.

We don't need cfts. thats what tankers are for. Drag, G;s, weight, etc....Lets spend money on the 35.

deadseal wrote:

We don't need cfts. thats what tankers are for. Drag, G;s, weight, etc....Lets spend money on the 35.

Unless you're a smaller country that doesn't have the money or resources to purchase/maintain a fleet of tankers. The Blk60 is great for the UAE and probably for some European countries with financial issues that make the JSF unaffordable.

southernphantom wrote:

deadseal wrote:

We don't need cfts. thats what tankers are for. Drag, G;s, weight, etc....Lets spend money on the 35.

Unless you're a smaller country that doesn't have the money or resources to purchase/maintain a fleet of tankers. The Blk60 is great for the UAE and probably for some European countries with financial issues that make the JSF unaffordable.

Obviously

Forum: F-16 Design & Construction

Impact of CFTs on the Viper's manouverability