It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Insiders say an F-16 will be destroyed in a noncombat crash every 20,000 flight hours, a dismal safety record that the Air Force and the manufacturers have failed to improve.
The Air Force has spent more than $50 billion buying frontline F-16 jet fighters since 1975. But 6 million flying hours later, the service and the manufacturers still have not fixed the myriad and deadly problems that plague the plane.
Published in Israel by Ha'aretz on 1 Aug 00
IAF F-16 crashes in south
An F-16 fighter plane crashed in the south of the country
Tuesday afternoon. The pilot managed to eject himself to
After a warning notified the pilot that there was a
problem with his engine, he was forced to eject during a
regular training flight just south of Hatzerim Airbase. The
pilot was transferred to Tel Hashomer hospital for a
routine check-up after being rescued.
Air Force says F-16 crashes are up
By SCOTT LINDLAW Associated Press Writer
Article Last Updated: 10/22/2007 02:53:34 PM EDT
The dreaded BANG! came from deep within the F-16's lone engine, shaking the warplane as it made passes over an Arizona bombing range last December. Then came the alarming loss of thrust.
Two attempts to restart the engine failed. Having exhausted their options, the pilot and his student bailed out, parachuting to safety before the plane slammed into the Sonoran Desert, a $21 million loss for taxpayers.
Not all F-16 pilots have been so lucky recently. The accident rate for this workhorse fighter has risen over the past few years, and two pilots have died in the past year, according to an Associated Press review of Air Force documents.
Mildly interesting topic if only because of it's entirely unfathomable relevance. In short what are you talking about? I have never discussed the F-16 and its troublesome service record with you, and can't really recall discussing it as an individual point SPECIFICALLY with ANYONE. However if my memory is faulty and I have SPECIFICALLY discussed this with you, please post up the link or quote and I will be only too happy to rationally discuss.
Originally posted by iskander
I’ll repeat this one especially for thebozeian, more pilots were lost (killed) to F-16s catastrophic system failures, then to enemy fire.
What exactly is the discussion point? That a corporation based on making money tried to hide the fact that they cut corners and knew about potential problems? Old news. Seriously, what are you hoping to get out of this thread?[
Here's a possible angle for you- your claim that the "F-16 has the world’s worst TECHNICAL failure record for single engine fighter", care to provide some justification for that claim? I would have thought the MiG-21 would be up there in the loss stakes.
1) The MiG 21 is a sound and excellently engineered design by one of the most respected design bureaus in the domain of fighter design.
2) The loss rate of the MiG 21 is in no way worse than any similar fighter of its genre and better than most.
Applying western accident rates is also somewhat unrealistic because of significant decay in thrust and lift due to high air temperatures. A 12% decrease in lift or thrust can lead to a 100% difference between crashing or getting back safe. There being no easy mathematical co-relation.
F-16 supporting ground troops crashes in Iraq
Last Updated: Monday, November 27, 2006 | 9:39 AM ET
The Associated Press
Pilot ejects before Luke F-16 crashes
F-16 CRASHES; 2 KILLED PILOT, CIVILIAN PHOTOGRAPHER DIE IN INCIDENT NEAR CHINA LAKE.
F-16 Pilot Dies in Crash
Pilot of crashed F-16 listed as killed in action
F-16 crashes in Gulf of Mexico
Italian F-16 crashes after birdstrike
F-16 Fighter Plane from Toledo Crashes in Iraq; Pilot Killed
Mildly interesting topic if only because of it's entirely unfathomable relevance. In short what are you talking about?
I have never discussed the F-16 and its troublesome service record with you, and can't really recall discussing it as an individual point SPECIFICALLY with ANYONE. However if my memory is faulty and I have SPECIFICALLY discussed this with you, please post up the link or quote and I will be only too happy to rationally discuss
how about comparison stats against other single
Following his tour in the Korean War, Lonnie returned to Florida where he served as Chief Test Pilot at EglinAir Force Base. He relished in his family, hardly believing that he could have been so blessed to have children as dazzling as his Dancer.
Each day was enjoyed with total fullness and appreciation by the Dancer and her Jet Ace.
And the finale;
The Italian air force grounded its AMX form February 4 to the end of May 1992 after an accident which was traced to the separation of a turbine disk in the Spey engine.
The third production batch was authorised in early 1992, one year late. It included 56 aircraft for Italy and 22 for Brazil. Italy and Brazil did cancel the planned production batches 4 (51 aircraft) and 5 (53 aircraft). At one time in the late 80s, numbers as high as 317 aircraft had been mentioned.
From January to 22 March 1996, the AMX fleet was grounded after a crash due to engine problems. A second-stage low-pressure compressor blade had gone off.
Seems the indians are on to it as well as you.
Yes, I now what the Corsair II was (and it was obvious from the start that you meant the A-7 as you were referring to single engined jets). I was correcting iskander for his 'rotary engined' gaffe.
Is it that Lockmart are a dirty dealing lying bunch of B......
Is it that the operators of the aircraft (apparently the USAF in this case, as opposed to any other operator) are a dirty dealing lying bunch of B......, (quite possibly - they wouldn't be the first to lie, to avoided a payout)
Is it that you are just making the case against single engined combat aircraft in a single v twin debate,
Is it that you believe that the F-16 is a flawed and unsound design
Is it that you are a campaigner on behalf of the victims of F-16 crashes
Honestly, your apparent lack of understanding of aviation terms and the differences between engine and aircraft types, tends to lead me to the conclusion that you are not too sure what you intended to say.
While not wanting to deter anyone from making a point, or having their say on this forum, please be aware that the vast majority of contributors here do not confuse 'Wenkel with Henckel' as you put it. (We even know that - in aviation terms - you were referring to 'Wankel' and 'Heinkel'
Upon reading the postings on this thread, I find that about 80% are devoted to clearing up your misunderstandings rather than discussing whatever point you are actually attempting to convey.
So, to this point at least, your post has been totally ineffectual, because nobody really knows what point you are trying to discuss - or if indeed you actually want to 'discuss' or just have a rave - Hey, nothing wrong with a good rave now and again!.
By all means, please submit your thoughts, but try to make your points and arguments clear so that we can all discuss them rather than second guessing what you're trying to say.
I’m not going to open that can of worms, but aerodynamically unstable airframe with single engine/tail fin operating on full FBW is more then questionable.
I do recall an experimental F-16 model with dual vertical stabilizing fins mounted under the nose cone…
i must ask - what is the point of this thread? to debate the F16 and its `safety` record? if so make an arguement that can be `countered`or `agreed` with - just posting `facts` makes for a boring discussion as well - theres little to discuss.