Forum: General F-16 forum

Block 15, painted orange and white powered by a low houred PW-220

Cap 9's on 1 and 9

Chase Raptors all day long ... If a tanker is available Laughing

F-16.net Sponsor

I'd love to shove a PW-229 into your pretty orange/white Block 15...... WOW! Devil

Just keep that tanker near by.

Low HOUR block 15, painted two-tone grey, Pratt 220, with 46TW CC on the tail...and the gun and a few other odds and ends removed. My viper can turn tighter than your viper Very Happy

(so WHAT that I'm not on that jet anymore...I still consider it mine!!!)

That_Engine_Guy wrote:

I'd love to shove a PW-229 into your pretty orange/white Block 15...... WOW! Devil

Just keep that tanker near by.

Ya -229 must be a pretty Rad motor

I picked up the wrong book the other day prior to my run test and it was for a PW -229 which we don't have ... and I knew it was the wrong book because when I opened it to the parameters page I saw something like a 2000pph fuel flow at idle and said what? This ain't right for a 220 or GE Rolling Eyes

I'd love to see some stats for the ANG Block 42s that received NEW -229s.

I bet they are a hot setup over the -220s they replaced?

Perhaps even better than a Block 52 with the same engine?

Elite 1K Joined: Aug 19, 2004 - 09:19 AM Posts: 1092

I hate to rain on the parade here yet again, but isn't the Block 50 the fastest Viper of them all? As far as top end Mach number, there's not much difference between Block 50 and 52, but acceleration? Block 50... you know it. Wink

Block 50's rule............ Not Worthy

I thought the big mouth 30's where the hot rods. Since they don't have the weight of the 40's and 50's

Elite 1K Joined: Aug 19, 2004 - 09:19 AM Posts: 1092

Racer497 wrote:

I thought the big mouth 30's where the hot rods. Since they don't have the weight of the 40's and 50's

Block 30 has better turning performance due to its lighter weight and similar T/W ratio relative to the Block 50, but the Block 50 has better level acceleration and top speed throughout pretty much the whole flight envelope.

Quote:

the Block 50 has better level acceleration

I disagree,

Pratts accelerate faster than the GE and you feel all the segments light off which definitely puts that motor in the my hard-on class

Elite 1K Joined: Aug 19, 2004 - 09:19 AM Posts: 1092

VarkVet wrote:

Quote:

the Block 50 has better level acceleration

I disagree,

Pratts accelerate faster than the GE and you feel all the segments light off which definitely puts that motor in the my hard-on class

You can disagree all you want, but you will have an extremely hard time proving your claims.

Active Member Joined: Nov 22, 2004 - 09:20 PM Posts: 134

Why don't I just bring over a ruler so you guys can settle this issue once and for all like real men ought to? This one should be more than long enough. Wink

Elite 1K Joined: Aug 19, 2004 - 09:19 AM Posts: 1092

Robert,

I'm not a pilot nor do I have any special place for GE or P&W in my heart. I think they both make fine engines. Look at P&W's F119 and F135 engines on the F-22 and F-35 respectively. Amazing pieces of engineering. But I know for a fact that the Block 50 with F110-GE-129 has better acceleration than the F100-PW-229. I've done extensive research and calculations on F-16 variants which include everything from the YF-16 to the Block 50/52. All this effort went towards the development of high fidelity F-16 flight models for the Falcon 4.0 PC combat simulator. I know what I speak of, and specifically know that the Block 50 has better acceleration than the Block 52 throughout the entire flight envelope. As far as top speed in level flight, both the Block 50 and 52 are pretty even. But the Block 50 gets to just about any speed inside its level flight envelope faster than the Block 52. Not only that, but the Block 50 often has higher specific excess power at the points where it's about to exceed the F-16 airframe's 800 KCAS limit. I doubt you'll find an F-16C Block 52 pilot who will tell you in a matter-of-fact way that the Block 52 has better acceleration than the Block 50. And even if you did he'd be either 1) lying or 2) not informed on the Block 50's flight performance versus that of his Block 52. It's really that simple. I honestly don't care whether people *think* I'm right or wrong. I know what the facts are and I'm simply stating them here because... well... that's the point of this thread, right? What would you have me do... say I could be wrong when I'm 100% sure I'm not?

80-0557 BLK 15 just before I was leaving Edwards they were talking about putting a 229 in it. It is the only jet I know of that is hard wired to take a 200, 220/220e and a 229 with no wiring changes. Razz

TJStoney wrote:

80-0557 BLK 15 just before I was leaving Edwards they were talking about putting a 229 in it. It is the only jet I know of that is hard wired to take a 200, 220/220e and a 229 with no wiring changes. Razz

I know they put -220s into the Thunderbird's A models and didn't do any wiring changes. The -229 would behave in a similar fashion.

If the PW -220 or -229 computer does not get certain signals from the airframe such as MACH, ALTITUDE, AOA, etc; it will use preprogrammed values to perform its calculations. Communication between the engine/airframe can be lost with very minimal results. No stalls, No 'burner restrictions, No fuss... Cool

That's what makes the -220 and -229 such a great upgrade to ANY viper, and no need for a big-mouth intake and you DON'T have to rewire the entire aircraft. The engine is smart enough it just don't care... Wink

On the Thunderbirds back then, the airframe interface plugs on the engine were simply capped off, and the engine allowed to figure things out on its own.

A -229 in a Block 15 would do the same, but WOW! Is it a D Model? I want a ride! Devil

Forum: General F-16 forum

My Viper is faster than yours