1. The article mentions the "aerodynamic disadvantage" to the F-16 caused by the external Fuel tanks. Can you quantify this disadvantage...does it degrade the plane's maneuvering abilities by 10%, 20%, 30%???
2. Do current tactics call for the external fuel tanks to be jettisoned if the F-16 finds itself in a dog-fight (unless absolutely needed to RTB?
Thanks
Cant give you an answer to your first question as I have never flown military aircraft. But having been around them yes it is normal procedure to drop the tanks when entering combat. In the more information than you wanted to know category...
The normal fuel transfer procedure from external to internal is to transfer fuel from the centerline tank first, then from the external wing tanks. However, this may be overridden by setting the fuel transfer switch to wing first according to the Falcon manual.
The fuel system of the F-16 is based on the
Forward/ Right Left /Aft layout.
The fuel is divided into two systems, the F/R and L/A, and is fed from both systems to the engine. In this way balance is maintained and the aircraft does not become too nose or tail heavy or have a tendency to roll.
The fuel storage system is composed of the following:
•Two Reservoir tanks, these hold 480lbs of fuel each and feed the engine directly. One reservoir is for the F/R and the other L/A system.
•Forward and aft fuel tanks hold the bulk of the internal fuel. They feed into the appropriate reservoir tanks.
•The wing tanks which feed the forward and aft tanks, the left wing tank feeding the aft main tank, and the right feeding the forward tank. These tanks hold 550lbs of fuel each.
•External tanks feed into the wing main tanks. The wing externals feed into the appropriate wing tank, and the centerline feed into both. Capacity is dependent on the tank size loaded.
The fuel is transferred from the reservoirs to the engine. There are fuel pumps that are normally activated to aid the transfer, but the main transfer mechanism is gravity and siphoning between tanks. The fuel then goes through the Fuel Flow Proportioner (FFP). It adjusts flow rates from the two systems to maintain the balance of fuel between F/R and L/A systems to maintain the aircraft’s center of gravity. Should the FFP fail (it is part of the ‘A’ hydraulic system) then erratic distribution may occur leading to a center of gravity imbalance.
The fuel then goes through the main fuel valve to the engine (where it burns!). The amount of fuel in the F/R and L/A is shown on the fuel gauge. More important is the ratio of the fuel in the tanks. If the difference is too large, a center of gravity imbalance will occur. Attention to the fuel gauge indicators is important beyond just assessing remaining fuel.
Total degradation with external wing tanks is hard to quantify. Let’s say 15%. Factors include, increased radar cross section, increased drag, decreased G limit, reduced acceleration turn rate and speed. They used the doggiest F-16 they could find and then put external stores on it to hinder it further. It still beat the F35. This was a block 40. They make newer block 50, 52 and 60 now. These newer models have bigger engines as well as better radars and helmet mounted sights ect. Send one of these out against an F-35... Oof.
External Fuel tanks are only there to get you to the battle area with full internal Fuel. They would ALWAYS be shucked off in a combat situation. Better to survive/win the fight and run out of fuel on the way home than get killed trying to carry extra Fuel.
BTW- The main reason the F35 sucks is because the Marines demanded a vertical take off and landing capability. Designing that into the F35 demanded huge compromises limiting capabilities dramatically. They should have built the Marines their own new airplane.