F-16 FIGHTING FALCON, best light fighter yet?

Originally posted by FULCRUM
soothsayer,

I started this topic to HONOR the F-16s.

And to make its capabilities know to everybody who wants to know them.

This is to those who respect the good looks and power of this machine of war..

There will be no mud slinning at the F-16s here, i hope.

I must be saying something wrong as you people dont get it..



This topic is about F-16s.

No other aircrafts included..

THANK YOU!!!

The F-16 is a geat fighter. It is kinda weird though that it was designed to carry the sidewinder only.

Originally posted by FULCRUM

Originally posted by KrazyIvan
the aircraft is only as good as the man flying it. thats why the USAF and IDF/AF pilots (the best pilots in the world) can shoot down anything the baddies throw at them. doesnt matter what fighter it is, it all comes down to training and exprience.

USAF isnt about quality, it is about quantity..
(this goes with the people of USAF 110%.. machines are good.. but personel is only average at the best..)

And IDF/AF is among the best.. but isnt the best..
(FAF, Luftwaffe and RAF are the top 3 in both machines and in people and tactics..)

we have some of the best. hell REDFLAG was developed to produce better pilots. and where do the IAF RAF and Luftwaffe Pilots get their training from? the USAF!

I'm hoping I don't sound too negative on the F-16, it isn't my attention.

The F-16 is a good plane (why else would there be so many countries flying it)... the only problem I have with it is that the versions you see flying in other countries are not the same craft.

True, they share many characteristics; but what I was trying to get at with an earlier post (with all the modifications) is this: there are F-16's with conards, with delta wing-styles, forward swept wings... those are the modifacations I was talking about, when I said the F-16 makes a great test bed.

In that respect, the F-16 is good, that it can be adopted to different roles... but at the same time, because the appearance changes, flight style changes, etcetera, would it still be called an F-16?

FAF, Luftwaffe and RAF are the top 3 in both machines and in people and tactics..)

ummmm ok.........................If those were the only three forces on earth than yes maybe.

Ok,

What do i care..

You choose to ignore the facts, plus that you are all talking about something else than F-16s..

I did hard try to make a decent topic / posts about this..

But again..

My efforts are ruined..

THANKS!!!




USAF success against small 3rd world nations doesnt mean that USAF is supreme.. it doesnt even mean that USAF is good or even average.

An Old-Woman with a bag could beat these 3rd world nations, against which USAF has had some 'success'!!!

I even place Yugoslavia as 3rd world nation as their most 'high-tech' weapons were from 60/70 and 80s..

And..

To make sure..

Ill say this:

Im not claiming that the hardware is crappy..
(as i really LOVE THE F-16s..)

It is the 'human-resources' and training that are lacking the needed quality..

Originally posted by FULCRUM

Two-ship F-16D formation over the Golan heights, still carrying USAF markings.

And Israel uses same tactical "v" marking as NATO and US..

Or is it other way around?

What is this?

IDF/AF flying aircrafts with USAF insignia.. and NATO and US using in vehicles Israeli tactical markings..

they used those marking when the f-16's were shipped to the IAF!

Originally posted by KrazyIvan

they used those marking when the f-16's were shipped to the IAF!

KrazyIvan,

No? See the enlarged spine on these F-16 (D?)s..

That is build in IAI..

Not in US..

And so these aircraft already have Israeli modifications, and USAF markings..

Geez, now everybody has a mugshot cooler than mine.

I agree with FULCRUM - an old lady could beat a lot of 3rd world nations with her handbag. I also love the F-16, ever since I was a kid. It's the good ol workhorse of the USAF and has been used to chase UFOs with little success by our Belgian friends.

The dorsal strake is much larger to accomodate extra avionics. I know some USAF models have that. Also... are those two-seaters? The canopy looks extended. I don't know much about th F-16D.

>EDIT<

The F-16 AFTI has an enlarged dorsal strake, that much I am certain of. Regular models, I don't know.

[Edited on 14-10-2003 by Lampyridae]

Those IDF/AF F-16s with larger spine are Ds..

And the extra avionics there are jammers and radar locators.. etc..

Strike, elint and protection systems..

This F-16C block 42 is ready to kick some ass with it's load of AIM-120, AIM-9, AAQ-13&14 and ALQ-184.
(Navigation and targeting pod + jammer pod..)

Link for the same pic in desktop size!

Only other airforce using F-16Ds with enlarged spine is RSAF..


RSAF F-16D Block 52, #638, climbing away.

These were modified in US (but on Israeli plans?)..

Btw,

About that pic / enlarged spine..

As you can see it also has chaff / flare launchers in it..

2 per side..

Fulcrum,

Just thought I'd say, "Nice thread", although I really have nothing additional to contribute to it concerning the F-16.

It will be interesting to see how the F-35 does as the F-16's replacement.

I had the opportunity to see an F-35B (actually still designated X-35B i believe), taxi in one night - they really don't look as "boxy" in real life as they do in the pictures...

I was in the coffee shop and the 35's test pilot came in, (he wasn't wearing a wedding ring either - but I digress...)
Some of the guys asked him about the 35, and he was telling them all kinds of stuff using hand gestures to illustrate with, etc. He also spoke of how extremely agile the aircraft was.

One thing that he said was that the 35B's STOVL capablilty was the easiest to control/operate of any other STOVL aircraft - ever.
Of course that was his subjective viewpoint, but he was obviously impressed.

intelgurl

Is more or less direct copy from Yak-141 Freestyles systems..

As Yakolev sold these to US.. (Lockheed..?)

IDF/AF F-16D block 40, #673, seen here at the Nellis ramp for Red Flag 03-4

Link!



That picture actually shows total of 8!!! IDF/AF F-16s at Nellis AFB (Nevada?)



This is something quite unusual as IDF/AF doesnt even want to send its aircraft to international air shows,
as they fear that these might be 'needed'..

And as you can see the pic is taken in 20.8.2003..

And it is a Red Flag in which they are.. Red Flags are quite realistic excercises..
are they really prepearing for a war?

Or did they practise scenarios for the (then) up comming IDF/AF strike to Syria?

Originally posted by FULCRUM
Is more or less direct copy from Yak-141 Freestyles systems..

As Yakolev sold these to US.. (Lockheed..?)

Rather than saying a direct copy of the Russian Yak-141, I think �inspired� would be more accurate wording.

There is no doubt about where the basic design came from, Lockheed readily admits that it�s based on the Yak-141�s design; but just as the SBI-16 Zaslon M radar is not a direct copy of the AWG-9 radar from which it was reversed engineered, neither is the STOVL of the F-35B a direct copy of the Yak-141, which I don�t think ever entered production. (Fulcrum: you could probably confirm that quicker than me looking it up on the internet ;-)
The Yak �inspired� STOVL has the lift fan behind the cockpit, driven by a shaft off the P&W F119 engine, plus a vectored exhaust and two exhaust ducts, extending from each side of the engine to exit in the bottom of the wings. The lift fan minimizes the amount of hot exhaust getting back into the engine � thus robbing the aircraft of vertical thrust, a common problem with the Harrier design.
The Russian based design is better in my opinion than the Harrier style design (Boeing X-32) � the Harrier design has four rotating exhaust nozzles arranged around the aircraft's center of gravity � this provides a perfect target for heat-seeking missiles.
Also, in vertical mode the F-35 is said to be massively overpowered, the Harrier designed Boeing X-32 is anything but overpowered in vertical mode.

intelgurl

[Edited on 17-10-2003 by intelgurl]

'Direct copy'..

Or "inspired" by.. all the same to me..

It is only words..

To quite same 'effect'..



And yes..

Yak-141 isnt/wasnt and will not ever enter series production.



Edited for a typo..



[Edited on 17-10-2003 by FULCRUM]