Five Reasons the F-16V is the BEST
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 окт 2024
- Mover, Mace, and Gonky discuss an article that lays out why the F-16V is the best. nationalintere... Check out Mace's website: www.macecurran...
Every Monday at 8PM ET, Mover (F-16, F/A-18, T-38, 737, helicopter pilot, author, cop, and wanna be race car driver) and Gonky (F/A-18, T-38, A320, dirt bike racer, author, and awesome dad) discuss everything from aviation to racing to life and anything in between.
Send your voice message for the show: podcasters.spo...
Looking for a good book? www.cwlemoine.com
Want to create live streams like this? Check out StreamYard: streamyard.com...
The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement.
Views presented are my own and do not represent the views of DoD or its Components.
So cool to see our old aircraft getting the modernized love they need.
The F-15 now with the EX Eagle II, the F-16V now, can’t wait to see what our aviation has in store for the future
Taiwan already flies them. There was a F16V demo cockpit about 6 years ago and the center pedestal was a big digital screen. I wonder if it has changed any.
Aerodynamic principles don't change; the F-16's design owns aerodynamics!
It should be called Bactrian Camel because it has two humps for storing liquids. 🤓
😂
Five reasons why the **insert fighter jet name** is the best:
1) It's beautiful
2) It's beautiful
3) It's beautiful
4) It's beautiful
5) It's beautiful
That's during peace time.
Then when things get real it's considered the best if:
1) It wins
2) It wins
3) It wins
4) It wins
5) It wins
No jets are the best.
The P-47 was the best. And it has a prop.
That's wild. I just watched Mace speak at a conference yesterday. She was awesome!
I'm a Viper fan, but I don't see the resemblance between an F-16 and a Colonial Viper.
I think the comparison was between the inside of the two cockpits.
Meh... a little I guess..
It is an all electric and very futuristic single seat fighter when it came out and at the time Battlestar Galactica was a popular TV show.
I'm a Viper turbofan.
@@pistonburner6448 Atmospheric, I like it.
What you mentioned at the end regarding attrition is what worries me a bit about our air assets (and Navy...but that's a different story). The ability to rapidly replenish stocks for a lot of the inventory seems to be lacking.
That's honestly my main concern in a near peer conflict. The United States doesn't really have the industrial might to replace lost war material in a reasonable time frame. FFS it takes ten years or so to build a carrier and an F-35 takes 40,000 hours and can only be built at a rate of 2 a week or so in a single manufacturing plant. That's not really a wartime production rate.
USA doesn't have many qualified skilled workers that is why everything takes so long to build
The downside of democratic capitalism vs autocratic planned economy.
In one system production must be profitable, in the other production must fill quotas.
New drinking game. Everytime Mover says Viper you have to do a shot. :)
I'd be unconscious quite quickly.
I was playing that with "mental health" and pot brownies. So I ended up in the psyche ward.
Have you guys been able to see the F-2 from Japan? The Viper-Zero.
Mover, what Blocks of F-16s did you fly, and did you have a favorite?
And thoughts on the F-16XL? Even though it lost out to the Mudhen it was a cool looking variant, though I’d imagine its handling would be drastically different from any others.
The XL wasnt a fighter, more like a striker like the F-111. Could carry lots of ordnance but was a pig in BFM
AESA requires a lot more computing power, probably more high freq. output power thus more cooling equipment...I think...
"I don't know what it's called. I just know the sound it makes when it takes a man's life."
😆
I’m thinking they’re going to produce the Viper way up until the “Z” model, just like the Cobra attack helicopter.
Brothers: Not in favor of recycling the names of iconic aircraft. It’s P-47 Thunderbolt, not A-10 “Thunderbolt II.” And P-38 Lightning, not F-35 “Lightning II.” Whose ditzy idea was it to re-use great war bird’s names?
Probably marketing peeps.
What about Corsair II and Phantom II?
@@Caseytify Yes!
Lightning II
Is not only for P-38 but also English-Electric/BAE. The Brits were the 2nd largest contributor to the F-35 program. And a primary customer for the aircraft.
The appropriate name is F-135 Thunderchief II.
Or: Thud II. Aardvark II.
I'm holding-out for the variant that transforms from flight-mode to BattleMech mode like Robo-Tech.............
Out-Nerd that............................
I have always loved the F-16 since I was a kid in the 70s and 80s. I know the conformal tanks are a very useful upgrade, but man I hate the way they spoil beautiful lines.
If the APG-83 is lighter than previous radars, then it will be supplemented with ballast to preserve the jet's CG, or so I would imagine. Start messing with the CG and you may have to recalibrate other things. The simpler approach is to maintain the same CG, right?
Yeah, that's what they did with the Eagle I think.
Or you move some module from the rear to the nose in order to maintain CG without adding weight. (Some module which is easy to move.)
That's sometimes done in automotive applications: just move the battery from one end to the other to compensate for differences in the weight of one engine version to the other.
AESAs are much heavier than MSAs due to the TRM density and the back-end of each TRM, which makes the antennae array itself much heavier. MSA antennae are really light because they have to be mechanically-gimbaled repeatedly as part of their normal scan scheduling.
@@CWLemoine I heard somewhere they took advantage of the new FCS to move the F-15EX CG slightly aft and reduce trim drag.
The F-16 was already optimized that way so I doubt they got much improvement.
@@appa609 I don't know. But that is interesting. The F-16 gained weight with the Block 40/50. The 30s had a lighter nose, which was better for BFM. I wonder if going AESA helped go back to more of what the 30 could do with nose authority.
Worked F-16 AIS from Block 5-40. Would love to see the Block 70 suite.
Any info on the upgrade ability of the platform? With all the 5 gen features they also would need fast upgrade cycles. Or is it a one off and will need an MLU to upgrade? Thinking of platforms like Gripen E with 5 gen features but designed for constant upgrade ability. F16 has always been one of my favourites.
What is better: 180 super expensive F22 Raptors or 4500 much less expensive F16 Falcon?
The conformal tanks look pretty much like that of F-16I, did they reuse that?
First F-16 produced in 1978, delivered to AF in 1979. Battlestar Galactica came started in 2004. I soloed in tail number 78-004
Battlestar Galactica was in 78.
@@CWLemoine My bad. Never saw the movie. Was thinking of the TV series. I still didn't hear the Viper term until after I was out of the AF.
Just like with the F-15EX, almost all those extra structural hours are likely a result of differences in accounting and limiting critical loads with fcs tweaks. The physical structure is barely changed.
We'll find out in 40 years whether it's legit or Boeing/LMT were playing fast and loose to make a sales pitch
Todays mission profiles has changed...no chance of dogfight since you have high off boresight missiles, no low level interdiction , smarter fly by wire envelope protection with heavy loads...all these used to be hard on airframe and pilot...
F-15EX is rated for higher g loads and a much broader and more aggressive set of handling conditions. Seems like it is more than just software but I am sure that helps.
Put all those goodies on an F-16XL with an F110-132.
Here's the 90M dollar question... Is the EX worth the extra maintenance, personnel and up front costs over the Block 70?
I'm some clown that knowns nothing but a Viper with the conformal fuel tanks is still going to have less range than an EX without conformal tanks OR drop tanks carrying the same payload. Would a Viper with non-droppable tanks beat a clean EX in BFM? AMRAAM math alone would probably go to the mudhen.
They aren't in competition. They complement each other. But I guess still a valid quesiton.
Yes they are worth it. A better complement to the F-35 with opposite strengths. Perfectly suited for domestic air policing while also top of the heap for war time missile truck firepower. Operating costs are higher than for F-16 but still much lower than for F-35.
What about the XL? What kind of limitations did it have vs. the accepted and deployed variants?
XL was basically a lighter F-111, a decent striker with tons of gas but a pig in BFM
Good on Gonky letting the Fighting Falcon pilots have their moment in this video. 😂
Can we get the XL- double delta wing?
F2 is a big wing F-16 with light weight materials.
@@stupidburp do you mean the Japanese Mitsubishi f2?
Yes. F2 was also the first active service fighter to have an AESA radar. It is out of production now but still a good fighter.
@stupidburp I'm thinking XL since it's range doesn't require conformal tanks. And it's payload is almost double.
F-16XL acceleration and take-off distance were major problems. Thrust-to-weight was like a 1960s jet, not a normal F-16 rocket ship. You would need to make all the bulkheads out of CF, CF skin, and install a beast of a motor to get the F-16XL where it needs to be with take-off, climb rate, and acceleration. That engine and manufacturing methods didn’t exist at the time, but were in development. The real problem is RCS, which we already identified in the 1970s and decided to go with Stealth VLO for all future designs for TACAIR. A-12 really threw a wrench in that plan by not having the manufacturing methods consistent enough for populating the internal cavities, so that program was cancelled instead of fixed. USAF at least went forward with all-VLO force, which SECDEF Gates and Shanahan seized from the jaws of victory and saddled us with the current mix looking backwards instead of forward.
Because it is built in South Carolina about 10 miles from where I am sitting right now.
Isn't the F-16E/F aka Block 60 actually better than the F-16V/Block 70 since it has a more powerful engine, larger radar, and IRST, among others
You are right.
The F-16E/F has a more powerful engine. But a brand new F-16V should have the same radar performance (not scaled down to fit to older airframes) as the F-16E
Yep, that F110-GE-132 is a monster.
Did they have to install a catalytic converter or particulate filter on the new one to meet emissions requirements or something? 😅
Slightly but it's probably more expensive
Some of the architecture is superior on the F-16E/F for LO and sensors, as well as the obvious propulsion kick in the pants needed to haul the increased take-off weights. The E/F noses don’t have a perpendicular Radar bulkhead if you look at them from the side, so Radar energy is resonated upwards and away from the emitter, unlike legacy fighters. It was done to reduce the frontal RCS. Block 60 is what you get when you get the Pentagon out of the way and let the contractors and customers actually spec out a great aircraft. They were over $200 million each though, fully-funded by UAE.
That’s why the Hellenic Airforce 🇬🇷 opted for the following tactical fighter fleet mix.
By 2030:
121 F-16V Blk 50/52
30 Rafale F3R
20-40 F-35A Blk 4
Comment got deleted
Turks got screwed
We need f-35C and Bs
C because of short take off abilities and B for vstol.
@@max2008abhi Turks have good stuff, too. It's sorta weird two NATO countries pump up the muscles so bad against each other with the help of the rest of NATO countries.
Mace looks just like my favourite golfer, Grace Charis. Maybe sisters ??? ❤
The problem is that significantly upgraded electronics are expensive, and since they produce 12 low rates a year, they cost over $130 million. Upgrading from block52 to viper specifications is also getting more expensive...
I think it's useful to clarify what is meant by "expensive". The electronics themselves are not expensive. It's the cost to develop the tech.
So either you save money and don't develop the new electronics at all, or you develop the new electronics and then you might as well update all the aircraft it makes sense to upgrade (all you're going to use, and all you need to for training).
Inflation and labor shortages
The initial CCIP 1 overhauls were more expensive than an entire Block 15 Viper from 1981-1983. Once you account CCIP 1, CCIP 2, and PoBIT, a Block 40 or 50 that goes through those is approaching twice the price of an F-35A. But we’re capitalizing on existing airframes that were already built to keep them relevant for any Vipers that will be or are forward-deployed in USAFE and PACAF, while Block 30s and older 40/42s stay Stateside awaiting conversion into QF-16Cs or headed to the boneyard.
What happened to “Fighting Falcon” ?
I worked on the F-16E’s when the UAE had a dozen of them stationed at Tucson Air National Guard. We could remove all the conformal tanks and fuselage attaching points in less than an hour. A clean F-16E with the F110-132 engine was a Viper on steroids!
I always wondered how they would perform against other blocks (block 50-52 mainly and maybe block 30 since it was one of the best if not the best in bfm) in dogfights without those conformal tanks.
Did he fly FA-18 super hornet block 3 ?
I wonder why LM never tried to give it a go to make the Viper stealthier beyond the divertless supersonic intake (DSI) and Have Glass RAM coating LM and the USAF experimented with. Would love to see a V-tailed 5th gen version of her.
Money
having backwards compatible upgrades help you in the long run; to keep the cost down and make older aircrafts more future-proof.
There's ballast installed with the AESA package
Are we buying any or just exporting?
Both.
6th reason is it also comes with a Martin-Baker ejection seat.. ;)
Was it inspired by the F-16i?
a couple thousand drones with explosives just chucked up with preset waypoints or led by a human pilot usung a follow me type feature. the remote operator can switch to different "swarms" and lead them through complex paths then just hit repeat and they follow the bread crumbs
0:15 look at his eyebrow haha
Which one is better F-16-70 vs Grippen E
Gripen E.
Gripen E
F-16E/F and F-16V are vastly-superior to any Gripen, including the E. Gripen E isn’t even fully-developed yet, runs on old school Mil-1553B databuses. When I told a friend of mine that who does UAV avionics, he even laughed at Mil-1553B because they have something better. Gripen E is a lot of marketing hype among the avgeek press, who really don’t know what they’re looking at, especially the younger guys who have no foundation or history with any of these programs.
I know that they use 5x 1553 on the C/D series. But I thought they upgraded the databus hardware for the E series?
@@stupidburp Last I saw was a call-out for 4x Mil-1553B databuses. US went to a newer bus set with fiber optics, then newer ones after that with even more ports and capacity. We're at least 2 generations of databus architecture and protocols ahead of Mil-1553B.
F16 platform never get old and still best aircraft ever.
the AH1Z is the correct Viper , Twin engine fast jets are all superior, even an F-111 splashed one while evading and not using weapons. The Bell X-15 and the F-104/105 are maybe the exceptions
You’re up against Fifth Generation Fighters
Why they didn't just go with the XL is beyond me. The benefits eclipse all the upgrades they're spending money on today.
Not really. The XL was basically a lighter F-111 with tons of gas but couldnt turn well at all. The Strike Eagle is a much better platform and better fighter for the cost
Check out the F-21 concept
I'd rather have seen us buy like 70 F-16V in Belgium instead of the mere 34 F-35A Block 4 (yeah ...) we have on order
A lot of people hate the tanks, but I think they're pretty cool. But with those, a full load-out, and all the other bumps... it doesn't look like it should be able to fly.
We all love the Fighting Falcon in all its forms, even if you call it the Viper. Fun fact: Falcons eat snakes.
Reason number one: it's an F-16!
Five reasons
1. V
2. I
3.P
4.E
5.R
No ammunition problem in ph, funds goes to pocket Corruption ???
Great fighter. The yardstick that others measure by and still highly capable but not the best any more. Sorry.
I’ll always prefer “Falcon”.
I still wouldn't want to fly over an actual hostile territory with only one engine.
Fighting Falcon and can't change my mind. Just like the Thunderbolt II and Lightening II. I give respect to the guys that actually designed the aircraft and gave them a name.
The F-16 has it's charm. Not really a fan of it but I respect what it can do in a merge. This new version though? Definitely not a fan. What did they do to it? What is with those ugly ass protrusions above the wingroots? Why are they trying to make this thing into something else? Just let it do what it was designed to do. Stop trying to force it to become something else.
5the gen fighter.......... the bravery of being out of range 🫡
That's the progression. They're basically missile trucks for network guidance.
Falcon... Fighting falcon .
Nerd.
70 > 72, GE FTW.
Did you hear Putin saying to the oil refineries owners " we can't protect you. You need your own private defense" Maybe they will want to buy some F16......😂
As good as the V model is with all it's modern tech.. It has still put in the pounds and it's raw flight performance and manoverablity will never match the A models. I'm a Viper fanatic & the reason I love the jet so much is because it's a hot rod. The V probably throws that out the window. It's now a bomb truck loaded with tech and no raw flight performance.
Not quite the A Model but the Turks upgrade their Block 30s with modern avionics (AESA, Helmet Display etc) and structural improvements. Having the lighter nose of the early vipers, the GE F110 and the mentioned upgrades could be interesting mix.
The two seat viper with CFT’s look horrendously ugly
Guys, it dosn't look sleek and fast anymore, it looks bloated.
Gripen E is better hehe
Even the C&D's with the new MS20 upgrade are formidable.
Smaller, shorter range, more expensive 😜
Gripen E is so underpowered. It will not have the kinematics to max perform missiles and to evade from enemy missiles.
I don’t think there’s a single metric where Gripen E compares well against an F-16CM+ PoBIT Viper with AESA, let alone Block 60 and 70 Vipers. Payload, range, climb rate, weapons suite, lethality, survivability, avionics architecture, DFLCS maturity, etc. Gripen E still uses Mil-1553B databuses and isn’t even developed yet, 17 years after Gripen NG was announced. Only thing better is the nose landing gear, which is more rugged.
Bs. They have not met their match yet. Wait till S 300, S 350, S 400 and S 500
F16 is a Beast we love F16 and Pakistan air force pilot's has best skills and experience on F16 in the world
Not even close. USAF, Israelis, Norwegians, Belgians, Dutch, and Danes have the best skills and experience in Vipers.
@@LRRPFco52 not like Pakistan Pakistani pilots has best skills and experience on F16
Pakistani pilots can't even keep normal passenger aircraft in the air, like seen from Pakistan Airlines flight 8303 and overall the massive fraud uncovered among Pakistani pilots, with your airlines being blacklisted from flying in most countries!
@@MNawaz-ge6uy My bad. You must be right. Pakistan probably accounted for most of the 88 A2A kills and A2G tonnage F-16s have dropped in strike roles over the past 45 years.
The Israelis are looking like top dog in the A2A space with F-16s with at least 53 A2A kills. USAF is without peer in strike mission sorties and tonnage dropped on-target.
It's literally the fighter we sell to allies we don't trust enough to offer the F-35. The only advantage over it is cost.
Facts prove that Toyota jeep is better🖕
Everything American is the best until it shows up in Ukraine and then all the marketing and PR falls apart
are you guys on a promise? You both had a shave.
Can we add some perdix micro drones to the F-16V
This may be an unpopular opinion but I think the CFTs make the F-16 look a bit ugly from the front.