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.
Originally posted by waynos
if the F-16E HAD been bought then we would still be looking at replacing it with the Typhoon about now anyway.
Originally posted by waynos
Emile, the (original) F-16 was rejected by the RAF as not meeting its requirements in 1976, along with the F-15 (same reason)...
what where the requirements that the F-16 and F-15 could not meet besides the F-16 having one engine?
Why did the British not wait for these fighters instead of buying the F-4, which was going to be outclassed by either of these two aircraft
Originally posted by Zaphod58
Not necessarily. The F-16XL had several issues with wing weapons stations. If you carried external fuel tanks, you could only carry 10 weapons on the wing stations. If you didn't carry the external tanks you could carry 16 500lb class weapons. But you cut down on the range because you lost all that fuel. If you carried the centerline 300 gallon tank, you actually cut down on the range, unless you dropped it when it ran dry.
However, on each wing, the "heavy / wet" station was at the same buttline (distance from the center of the Fuselage) as two of the wing weapon stations. This means that you could use either the one " heavy / wet" or two weapon stations but not both at the same time.
Furthermore, if the "heavy / wet" station was used for an external fuel, the tank physically blocked one more wing station This meant that with external fuel tanks, the maximum number of weapons on the wings was 10. Two weapons could also be carried on a centerline adaptor. If no underwing fuel tanks were used, the maximum number of 500 lb class weapons was increased to 16. Although the XL could carry the centerline 300 tank, it was not really an operational loadout since mission range would actually be decreased unless the CL-300 could be dropped when empty.
Crew size F-16XL-2 two-seat cockpit
F-16XL-1 single-seat aircraft
Length 54.2 ft (16.52 m)
Wingspan 34.3 ft (10.45 m)
height at vertical tail 17.7 ft (5.39 m).
Max. weight 48,000 lb (17,915.60 kg)
# Engines F-16XL-2 General Electric F110-GE-129 engine (with afterburner) rated at 29,000 lb thrust.
# F-16XL-1 Pratt and Whitney 100-PW-100 engine (with afterburner), rated at 23,830 lb thrust.
Controls Both aircraft featured an analog fly-by-wire electronic flight control system during the laminar flow research. The single-seat aircraft now has a digital flight control system.
Wing construction The delta (cranked arrow) wings on both aircraft are manufactured of advanced graphite composites to provide strength for high wing loads during flight.
Design load Baseline F-16XL: 9 "Gs".
Modified F-16XL: 3 "Gs")
Maximum Speed F-16XL-2, Mach 2 (approx. 1,400 mph) (2,253 k/hr)
F-16XL-1, Mach 1.8 (approx. 1,260 mph)
Range Over 2,500 nautical miles (4,630 k), without in-flight refueling, and unlimited with in-flight refueling
Primary Function Multirole fighter
Builder Lockheed Martin Corp.
Power Plant F-16C/D:
one Pratt and Whitney F100-PW-200/220/229 or
one General Electric F110-GE-100/129
Thrust F-16C/D, 27,000 pounds(12,150 kilograms)
Length 49 feet, 5 inches (14.8 meters)
Height 16 feet (4.8 meters)
Wingspan 32 feet, 8 inches (9.8 meters)
Speed 1,500 mph (Mach 2 at altitude)
Ceiling Above 50,000 feet (15 kilometers)
Maximum Takeoff Weight 37,500 pounds (16,875 kilograms)
370 Gal 600 Gal 370 Gal 600 Gal
Internal 7,000 7,000 5,700 5,700
External 5,000 8,000 5,000 8,000
TOTAL * 10,000 13,000 8,700 11,700
Fuel on 3 & 7 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000
Conformal 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000
* less 2,000 lbs for takeoff & landing
# Combat Radius [F-16C] 740 nm (1,370 km)
w/ 2 2,000-lb bombs + 2 AIM-9 + 1,040 US gal external tanks
# 340 nm (630 km)
w/ 4 2,000-lb bombs + 2 AIM-9 + 340 US gal external tanks
# 200 nm (370 km) + 2 hr 10 min patrol
w/ 2 AIM-7 + 2 AIM-9 + 1,040 US gal external tanks
Range Over 2,100 nm (2,425 mi; 3,900 km)
I don't what's requirment RAF made that direct a Fighter must be twin engine? I think that twin engine fighter for RAF since 1960 only is a tridition not any requirements.
Originally posted by emile
Some data are not accurate, think about this: internal fuel of F-16XL is two times of initial F-16 that without CFT was carried. Arrow wing lead to a lower drag coefficient, so the range of F-16XL only more 400nm than F-16 primary version is impossible. Please notice that different flying profile or different external loading will cause very different range.
[edit on 18-4-2007 by emile]