The innovative F-16V configuration provides advanced combat capabilities in a scalable and affordable package. Lockheed Martin photo by Randy Crites.
Posted on 10/21/2015 4:48:29 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
The newest version of Lockheed Martin’s venerable F-16 has taken to the air for the first time, with a range of equipment enhancements including an active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar.
Flown from Lockheed’s Fort Worth production facility in Texas on 16 October, the F-16V is being aimed at potential export customers, including Indonesia. The company exhibited a cockpit demonstrator for the new variant in Jakarta earlier this month, having formally launched the product at the Singapore air show in 2012.
Lockheed describes the addition of Northrop Grumman’s APG-83 Scalable Agile Beam Radar as delivering “a quantum leap in capability” for the F-16. Further enhancements incorporated for the F-16V include the addition of a centre pedestal display for the pilot, plus a modernised mission computer, other new avionics equipment and an updated electronic warfare system. Combined, these “add significant combat capabilities to address the dynamic threat environments emerging in the coming decades”, the company says.
Lockheed is offering to manufacture the V-model aircraft for new and repeat customers, or to provide elements of the update package – such as the AESA radar – during upgrades to in-service examples. Taiwan is the launch customer for such a modernisation programme, with 144 F-16A/Bs to be updated via a Lockheed-led activity.More than 4,550 F-16s have been delivered throughout the programme’s history. The design was first flown in 1974, and Flightglobal’s Fleets Analyzer database records the type’s current active global fleet as totalling 2,998 aircraft. Lockheed’s current sales backlog for the type includes fighters on order for Egypt and Iraq, while the United Arab Emirates also plans to increase the size of its current fleet of E/F-model examples.
The innovative F-16V configuration provides advanced combat capabilities in a scalable and affordable package. Lockheed Martin photo by Randy Crites.
F-16 best dang MRF ever ping!
yet we keep dumping money down the F-35 money pit...
“Lockheed describes the addition of Northrop Grumman’s APG-83 Scalable Agile Beam Radar as delivering “a quantum leap in capability” for the F-16”
Sensor and weapon technology has far out paced advancements in air frames and that’s where our focus should be.
pong
“affordable” in a government context only.
>>“affordable” in a government context only.<<
Which is unfortunate b/c I really want one. I wonder if I can pick up an old Block 50 on EBay. Maybe a PAF-16?
>>Sensor and weapon technology has far out paced advancements in air frames and that’s where our focus should be.
<<
Almost all combat today is BVR. Which is why these airframes can last almost forever while the F-35 Flying Political Anvil can’t get traction.
Dogfights are last generation.
> Dogfights are last generation.
That’s what they said last generation.
That’s quite debatable. A quick check of BVR kills vs WVR kills will show an overwhelming overhang for WVR. Even with AMRAAMs.
Basically a cheaper version of the F-16E/Blk60, right? Same approach, just without the conformal tanks (which I’m sure can be added) and a different type of AESA radar.
So why aren’t we buying more improved F-16s? If we go on the assumption that most of our future wars are going to be with countries like Iraq and Afghanistan rather than Russia or China then doesn’t it make sense to have a mix of non-stealth, slightly less capable aircraft like the F-16 and F-15 for wars like that and a group of F-22s and F-35s to offset the more sophisticated foes? One would think that would give us more aircraft at a lower cost to handle more potential hot spots.
>>That’s quite debatable. A quick check of BVR kills vs WVR kills will show an overwhelming overhang for WVR. Even with AMRAAMs.
<<
Really? Point me at a site. I was pretty sure WVR was a thing of the past, but this is no the first time I have been wrong (it would be the 2nd).
I am not challenging you, I am perplexed. The F-22, although designed to kick ass in dogfights, was mostly designed to perform BVR with many targets (hopefully that limitation is lifted with this version of the venerable F-16 Falcon).
F-16 ping.
The main issues, in my opinion, are as follows. (1) First of all ROE is a huge limiting factor. If prior identification is required that limits the range at which 'true' BVR shots can be attempted (by true BVR I mean shooting at BVR ranges, rather than using BVR missiles at ranges that are closer to WVR). (2) The fact that for a very long time, until the introduction of the AMRAAM, the probability of kill for BVR shots was really bad. For example, the Phoenix has a zero pK for the three times the missile has been used (with anger) by the USN. Of the three shots, two didn't even fire their engines and fell down like dumb bombs (a FReeper in the know said that was due to human error when loading), and the third fired it's engine and absolutely missed the target. (By the way, another interesting search you may want to do is search the pK for the AMRAAM ...it may not be what people may think it is, and not at the ranges they expect it to be). (3) It depends on what the opposing fighter is doing. Of the target is some MiG21 that doesn't even have a radar warning receiver to inform the pilot they are being painted, and the target is flying towards you, then it is an easy kill at BVR ranges. However, if the target has a RWR, the pilot is awake, and the aspect is not the best, then shooting it down can be difficult. (Another interesting search would be the experience by the USA and USN in shooting down Iraqi Foxbats in the Gulf War ...in many cases the Mig 25 pilots would realize they have been launched at, and they would simply outrun the missiles).
As for Raptors ...the thing about them is they would be operating at the tip of any aerial engagement. This means that there would be no other friendly plane expected to be ahead of them, and thus their ROE would probably be very relaxed and they would be making true BVR shots. Additionally, due to the LPI AESA carried by the Raptor, the target would probably only realize something was afoot the moment the AMRAAMs radar kicked in, which would be too close and too late for the target. The Raptor is simply at a different league, but also note two things about it. First, it is the most maneuverable operational plane in the US ...that is the case for a reason, and the reason is WVR is not outdated. Secondly, the WVR is the most lethal range in aerial combat because modern WVR I/IR missiles (be it the Russian R74, the Israeli Python 5, and the West's Aim9x, ASRAAM and IrisT) are all so capable that a shot is virtually a guaranteed teed kill (no matter how maneuverable your plane is or what flares you drop), that mutual kills are very possible. Two planes with modern I/IR missiles and helmet mounted sighting systems will kill each other. BVR is a far 'safer' range for advanced fighters, but get within WVR and a 30 year old Mig 21 with a good helmet mounted system and a good missile can kill anything (that was not a typo) even as it itself gets killed.
WVR is a death zone, and due to this BVR will continue to get enhanced in three ways to avoid WVR merges. The first is by relaxing ROEs (or using the Raptor to simply kill anything ahead of it), second coming up with highly capable BVR missiles like the Meteor, and finally having legacy fighters carry many more BVR missiles and do multiple shots (something that the Soviets had planned to do, with their Flanker launching salvos of missiles ...including a mix of radar guided, anti-radiation air to air, and BVR missiles with IR seekers; and something that is being seen in the USAF with the F-15 concept that carries a multitude of AMRAAMs).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.