F-16 and (Mitsubushi) F2

[Matt Wiser]

F-16XL: Delta-winged F-16C version as a two-seat fighter/attack aircraft. Entered in Dual Role Fighter competition against F-15E and Tornado. F-15E won.

F-16/79: F-16A/C with J-79 engine meant for export. A favorite of Mr. Peanut's administration. No takers and Reagan offered the standard Falcons for FMS sales.

Some possible export sales that didn't go through for various reasons:

Australia: Considered along with F-14, F-15, and F/A-18 as Mirage replacement.

Brazil: In running for FX competition against Eurofighter, Mirage 2000, Su-30, and F/A-18E/F.

Argentina: Considered as Mirage/Dagger replacement. No final decision.

Philippines: Sale tabled when PhilAF didn't come up with cash for ADF versions from AMARC.

New Zealand: Almost got the embargoed PAF second batch but a change in government led to cancellation.

Saudi Arabia: on again, off again consideration of between 90 and 150 examples as F-5E replacements. Lockheed-Martin still hoping for at least 90 Block 50s as a first contract.

Imperial Iran: IIAF ordered 300 F-16A/Bs for first delivery in 1979. Order cancelled by Khomeni government and aircraft redirected to Israel and Egypt.

Kuwait: Considered as A-4 replacement, went to Hornets instead.

[david sMiGielski]

Just for fun, I thought I would take Italeri's 1/48 Brakeet (which isn't really a Brakeet) and build it as a "what-if" RAF Falcon FGR.1. The idea is that the Tornado program collapsed and the Brits decided to use two-seat F-16s in the low-level attack role (probably not likely but I'm just doing this for fun).

Sticking with that theme, I got to thinking: how odd would a JP233 look on a Viper? Stephen was nice enough to send me an extra 1/48 set (they arrived today) and, surprise surprise, the JP233 will not fit on an F-16s centerline pylon. So I'm thinking ofhanging them from the inboard station (the one usually used for fuel tanks).

One reference tells me that station can hold 4500 lbs. Would the wing be able to take another 600lbs in that location? And what would one need to do to strengthen it?

The cold weather has obviously gotten to me and I'm probably holding on to my modeling sanity by a thin thread, so please bear with me (especially the F-16 experts).

-David

[elmayerle]

Just for fun, I thought I would take Italeri's 1/48 Brakeet (which isn't really a Brakeet) and build it as a "what-if" RAF Falcon FGR.1. The idea is that the Tornado program collapsed and the Brits decided to use two-seat F-16s in the low-level attack role (probably not likely but I'm just doing this for fun).

Sticking with that theme, I got to thinking: how odd would a JP233 look on a Viper? Stephen was nice enough to send me an extra 1/48 set (they arrived today) and, surprise surprise, the JP233 will not fit on an F-16s centerline pylon. So I'm thinking ofhanging them from the inboard station (the one usually used for fuel tanks).

One reference tells me that station can hold 4500 lbs. Would the wing be able to take another 600lbs in that location? And what would one need to do to strengthen it?

The cold weather has obviously gotten to me and I'm probably holding on to my modeling sanity by a thin thread, so please bear with me (especially the F-16 experts).

-David

Well, it'd take a fair bit of re-engineering to beef them up that much.  If you use conformal tanks, that at least takes care of the fuel.  You might want to consider a strike variant of the F-16XL that would give you stations that could handle the load.  As an alternate, new composite wings, similar to those made for the F-2 but retaining the F-16's planfomr might work.

HTH,
Evan

(PS. Welcome)

[Geoff_B]

There was a shorter verdion of the JP233 propossed that just used the front section with an aerodynamic tail attached with wings. This smaller version was intended for use on wing pylons. Got an 80's book based on the Salamader series that shows the various weapon options on an Aircraft including the short JP233, will check when i finish work.

Like the idea but RAF Falcons are more likely to replace the Jaguars in RAF service along with the Lightnings i guess, keeping the tornados for the slightly larger loads.

Cheers

Geoff B B)  

[Nick]

Just for fun, I thought I would take Italeri's 1/48 Brakeet (which isn't really a Brakeet) and build it as a "what-if" RAF Falcon FGR.1. The idea is that the Tornado program collapsed and the Brits decided to use two-seat F-16s in the low-level attack role (probably not likely but I'm just doing this for fun).
-David

Hey, that's my idea.....  

But I did my F-16s in 1/144 and the 1/48 would look pretty impressive. Go for it!!!

Nick B)  

[Muttley]

JP233 ejects all submunitions straight down, which puts upward loads on the hardpoints when firing: I understand that using the weapon is - er - dramatic.  The German MW-1 ejects everything sideways, balancing out the firing loads; less stressful on the airframe, but not too much cop under the wings.   There really isn't much room under the belly of an F-16

Norway, Denmark, Belgium and Holland procured the F-16 to do Tornado-like things for less money, so the scenario isn't all that far-fetched.

I seem to remember a proposed weapon called MSOW (Modular Stand Off Weapon) that had a passing resemblance to a short JP233 with wings, intended to relieve the delivering aircraft of the need to fly straight and level at 50 feet down the runway and looking like a firework display :-)  All the enemy needs to deter this kind of attack is a gun or missile site at the end of the runway, and you're a sitting duck.  You could put some folded wings on the shortened JP233 dispensers to gove the poor old single-engined Viper a bit more of a fighting chance :-)

[elmayerle]

Sure, they'd work ! It's your a/c, a so strengthen the wings as you see fit ! You know what would look really cool on an F-16 ? Some kind of conformal type munitions dispenser that wrapped all around the bottom of the fuselage, to go along with the cinformal tanks. Would look like some kind of Walrus !

Nice imagery, but it'd get in the way of a number of other things and, really, there's not that much room between the nose gear and the mains.  Now, I'd have to take a look, but I think you might could do some "bottomside" CFT's, also.  I'd have to look closely, though (get back to you later on that).

Elmayerle, would it be possible to get a picture of one of the Omani F-16's when it is nearing completion or indeed comes off the line?
Love to bug the guys here with it...
Sorry for the thread hijack...
Cheers

Tony

No apologies necessary.  I can't take a camera into the plant, even cell phones that can take pictures are VERBOOTEN!  *G* I'll have to go for a walk some lunch break and see what's on the final line.  Now, they don't get painted until they're through production flight test, so what's on final line is still in primer et al.  I know the first ones for Chile and Poland are under assembly so I imagine that the Omani ones are too since all three are of similar configuration, a modification of that for the last batch providced to Greece.  The ones that'll have slight, but noticeable, differences are the Polish ones that have more antennae to accomodate a larger commo suite.

They sound truly awesome.
I hope some enterprising manufacturer comes up with a kit (or modified kit) with the necessaries for a late prod F-16, especially with the conformal tanks.
In 1/48th too.

If you included the special "lumps and bumps" and other detail bits of the UAE version as separate parts, you could basically do any of the 50/52m and Series 60 one-seaters from one kit and any of the two-seaters from a second that had the spine built in.  Both would include the conformal tanks, though I think they benefit the two-seater more.
I'm seeing enough data, though not able to copy it, to consdier trying to model this one, or an advanced version with the JIST inlet.  One thing I need someone with the Monogram 1/72 F-16XL and a 1/72 YF-22 or F-22 to compare the wing root of the YF-22/F-22 wign with the wing of the F-16XL and let me know how much fuselage surgery, other than removing hte original wing, is required.

*G* I've also got access to view a pic that shows the stores locations on this variant.

Oh, I should note that if/when I build this one, it's going to include the JIST inlet and the LOAN nozzle to make it even harder to spot on radar.  Beyond that, I'm open as to markings.  Of course, I could start from a F-2 kit and leave it in Japanese markings as a F-2Kai.  B) 

[Deino]

Just found at the ACIG-forum !

http://www.acig.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3425



Deino    

[elmayerle]

I'm surprised they're still using a splitter-plate intake instead of the aero-bulge thing as on the F-35.............after all they did flight-test the bulge on an F-16!! 

That would've been my thought since we did test it on the JIST F-16 testbed (last go 'round of the AFTI-16 testbed).   I'm not on the F-16 anymore so I can't comment further, I suspect this may be a "just in case" fallback position.  I'd also think they might look at incorporating aspects of the F-2, if the agreement with Mitsubishi allowed it, to add more stores stations to the wing.  Then again, all sorts of proposals get floated out of the PD/AD world.

I wonder why they are even entertaining the Idea I thought that the F22 and F35 were supposed to be the best thing since tear off toilet paper.

I suspec it's  'fall-back" position in case the bean-counters get moNEy hungry.  Compared to some studied upgrades, this is essentially a "minimum change/minimum risk" update of the F-16.

*G* Now the one that would be really impressive is a cross between this, the "extreme" UAE proposal, and the inlet of the JIST testbed.

[NaOH]

Well I'm doing a new CF-16B (CF-166) Falcon. The old one is in the photo section.

Hasegawa 1/48 F-16B for the kit, Leading Edge CF-104 for the decals.

I'm building it as realistic as possible based on the thought process and weapons/markings of the day.

It will be an early delivery CF-16 from the early/mid 80's. Paint colour will be the same as was used on the CF-18 but following a similar pattern to the current F-16. It will be two colour not three.

Weapons will be a training A-G fit as the kit has been built with the outer rails, centre wing pylons and centre pylon (drop tank). CRV_7's would be great on TER's but I don't have any in the scale so either 250 lb dumb bombs or CBU's. AIM-9M's will be on the wing tips.

Markings will be in the toned down version of the day as used on the CF-104 and CF-5. Red and blue with no white.

Squadron will be either 421 Red Indian (in black) or 439 Sabre Tooth Tiger (in grey on grey) because that's all I have for current CF-18 squadrons. I prefer the Tiger but I'm not convinced that toned down markings would go with the low viz squadron marks. If the national markings are in colour I'd think the squadron badge would be as well.

Pics to follow as I get the second coat of paint on.

Opinions and ideas welcomed.

[noxioux]

Did they seriously think that sweeping wings forward would make them better?  

Forward swept wings were proven to improve low speed handling and load carrying characteristics.  The X-29 was pretty successful in demonstrating the advantages of an FSW platform.  Read up on it, I think you'd be surprised.

[GTX]

Chris,

How are you going with your search?  I thought this may be of use:



regards,

Greg

[elmayerle]

F-16.net did state that the bulge was created to house flight control accumulators because they are displaced by a high frequency radio.  Would that radio have been installed forward if the radar had no CW illuminator?

Yep, that radio would've remained in its usual place without the need for the CW illuminator.  I suspect that this effort may have contributed to the idea for a full spine for later two-seat variants as it mainly houses "boxes" that are in the main fuselage on single-seat variants.

[jcf]

Go to this thread on Secret Projects:
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/inde...ic,1335.15.html

The project is the Vought Model 1600 as Vought would have handled the USN version under contract to GD.

Here is the Whif thread:
http://www.whatifmodelers.com/forum//index...211&hl=usn+f-16

Jon

[Thorvic]

Geoff for the Vought 1601 consider the Hase Mitsu F-2 as it basically an enlarged F-16 anyway