Lockheed Martin F-16 Fighting Falcon News and Developments

Unless you have seen the actual contracts, it is hard to comment. One might be surprised that even 'boring' things get contracted to companies such as these.
 
Here is the actual DSCA statement:

https://www.dsca.mil/Congressional-...4173182/ukraine-f-16-training-and-sustainment
Note that the $310.5 million cost is the estimated total cost, not that for any one contractor. Also note the following statement: "The description and dollar value are for the highest estimated quantity and dollar value based on initial requirements. Actual dollar value will be lower depending on final requirements, budget authority, and signed sales agreement(s), if and when concluded."
 
I fully understand. What it tells us is that there is significant value and professionalism to scale it into something that would drastically change the status quo. From a meager components to a potent integrated force.
 
Scorpion82 said:
but that "an emergency occured" during the interceptuon of drones and the pilot had to eject from the aircraft... Not the same as being downed by a drone.
Click to expand...

Maybe the F-16 was too close to the drone when it was intercepted resulting in some debris going into its' air-intake causing engine FOD?
 
Forest Green said:
https://www.twz.com/air/air-force-chief-responds-to-possibility-of-buying-new-block-80-f-16s
Click to expand...
Not really very honest reporting by TWZ, I expect Allen taking the questions on notice is essentially his way of saying we aren't even thinking about that. Unless there was a drastic increase in F-16 production it is unlikely the price would reduce significantly compared to just buying more F-35s setting aside the cost pathway to develop a Blk 80 that was actually worthwhile for the USAF to operate. The real solution is to fund the F-35 at the rate previously expected, in the 80+ a year mark, and not languish in the 40s.
 
FighterJock said:
What is the main if any difference to the Scorpion from the JHMCS Helmet Mounted Displays?
Click to expand...
At this point in time, given JHMCS production started in '02, maintainability and parts availability may be a major issue.
 
ssdunkel said:
Scorpion HMD is newer (designed in 2008), designed using a full color wave-guide display (not a visor projection), can be used with NVG's, lighter weight, more accurate, does not require a custom helmet...
Click to expand...
The latest F-16 variant is also being integrated with the JHMCS II which was launched back in 2012/13. Existing JHMCS users can choose between upgrading to JHMCS II, upgrading existing JHMCS to JHMCS - Digital or the Scoprion HMD which is a more cost effective option to all new helmet like a JHMCS II or something else.

https://www.elbitsystems.com/news/j...hmcs-ii-undergoes-flight-testing-aboard-f-16v
 
ssdunkel said:
Scorpion HMD ... can be used with NVG's, ...does not require a custom helmet...
Click to expand...
Being able to be used with NVGs was part of the JHMCS spec, so that's not an advantage for Scorpion. Meanwhile, if you're hanging a couple of pounds of gear off a helmet that has to go through ejection forces, then an individually fitted, integrated design may be precisely what you want, particularly if it can integrate night vision without hanging NVGs off the front of the helmet.
 
snne said:
Can you blame them for taking precautions though? They haven't met these jets in a real combat environment yet , so this is hardly something shocking enough to use as a propaganda material.

You gotta expect the unexpected...
Click to expand...

Given that the combat deployment of the F-16 in Ukraine so far was most notable for it slamming into the ground repeatedly, I somewhat doubt the veracity of the article at hand overall. Especially given what's flying against these old MLUs.
 
stealthflanker said:
SEA Nations maybe e.g Phillipines who also interested in acquiring F-16's. Thailland too. Tho expect MTCR compliant shorter range version.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I was kinda surprised by the prospect, but that clears it up a bit
 
EmoBirb said:
Who would be the potential users of AShMs carried by F-16s?

I suppose Korea and countries in SEA?
Click to expand...
My first thought was actually PACAF, as the only other user of LRASM is Australia. With three wings of F-16s, PACAF can take advantage of existing warstock rather than having to wait for B-1s.
 
isayyo2 said:
When reading this "Feel Good" story on Stripes, I noticed these F-16's were lacking their "Bird Slicer" IFF antennas on the nose - has APG-83 removed their need?
Click to expand...
I don't think so. New Blk 70 aircraft have APG-83 and also still have the bird slicers unless that is a USAF only mod.

First-Bulgarian-F-16-Block-70-will-stay-in-the-U.S.-longer.jpg
 
isayyo2 said:
When reading this "Feel Good" story on Stripes, I noticed these F-16's were lacking their "Bird Slicer" IFF antennas on the nose - has APG-83 removed their need?

https://www.stripes.com/theaters/as...emergency-landing-alaska-island-18016762.html
View attachment 772492
Click to expand...

All active duty Block 40 don't have them it would seem... That is units in Korea and Aviano, Italy these days. Block 40 Vipers from Hill AFB also were without bird slicers, but have them now in ANG service.
And Block 42 equipped Oklahoma ANG also have bird slicers, these F-16s should have APG-83, so there is nothing that prevents a Block 40/42 with APG-83 from also having the IFF installed.
 
I hope I can ask this question without going completely Crazy Ivan on the thread but... how many fighter jets have the bird slicer IFF arrays in front of the windscreens like the F-16s do? I've seen them, I believe, on the IDF Chung Kuo light fighter out of Taiwan, but I don't think I've seen them anywhere else.
 
Titus said:
I hope I can ask this question without going completely Crazy Ivan on the thread but... how many fighter jets have the bird slicer IFF arrays in front of the windscreens like the F-16s do? I've seen them, I believe, on the IDF Chung Kuo light fighter out of Taiwan, but I don't think I've seen them anywhere else.
Click to expand...
F-2 has then as does the Legacy Hornet.
 
F-2 said:
F-2 has then as does the Legacy Hornet.
Click to expand...
By golly, you are correct. (I am ashamed to say I looked them up to make sure, for which I apologize most humbly.)
Now, my new conundrum is...why do IFF antenna arrays on other modern fighters look different? I will try researching it on my own.
Thanks.
 
Gen. Deptula: There’s no legal prohibition that outright prevents U.S. pilots—those no longer on active duty—from supporting Ukraine, just as many U.S. ground veterans have done. The real challenge is practical and political, not legal. Flying an F-16 in combat isn’t just about sitting in the cockpit—it’s about full integration into command and control systems, rules of engagement, and the overall air campaign plan. That said, with proper diplomatic channels and agreements in place, it’s entirely feasible to allow experienced American pilots to contribute—particularly in advisory or training roles, as well as in combat if they fly under Ukrainian command.
Let’s not forget: Ukraine’s air defense depends heavily on Western-supplied systems, and American pilots bring unmatched expertise in maximizing those systems' potential. If the decision were made, and the integration issues worked out, they could make an immediate difference.
Click to expand...

https://english.nv.ua/russian-war/u...-s-limits-on-long-range-weapons-50523986.html
 
Here's a bit of news of sorts concerning how Ukraine has been keeping its' F-16s operational and it's very clever of them too, from Wes O'Donnell:


And there's nothing Russia can do about it. In this video, I dive into how Ukraine’s Air Force, backed by the non-profit Come Back Alive and state oil company Ukrnafta, has deployed a fleet of custom-built ground vehicles to support F-16 operations from just about anywhere. Think mobile weapon loaders, tactical briefing rooms on wheels, and what I can only describe as an Air Force RV, with a shower.​
Click to expand...
This is the very definition of "austere" and expeditionary operations.​
Click to expand...
Ukraine’s airfields are being hunted relentlessly by Russian drones and missiles, and standing still is a bad idea. So, the Ukrainians are doing what they do best: moving fast, adapting faster, and teaching NATO how to wage war in the 21st century.​
Click to expand...
I break down the entire system, from the Iveco and Peugeot-based mobile maintenance trucks to the MAN 6x6 mission planning rigs, and explain why this mobile strategy could be NATO’s future, not just Ukraine’s present.​
Click to expand...
This video also explores how this dispersed operations model fits perfectly with NATO’s Agile Combat Employment (ACE) doctrine, and what it means for the survivability of F-16s in a contested battlespace. From highway landings to mobile command centers, Ukraine is turning its air war into a rolling thunder campaign.​
Click to expand...

I was going to post this in the Ukraine F-16 thread but I'd forgot that it was locked.
 
and teaching NATO how to wage war in the 21st century.
Click to expand...
I think I'm dying from laughter right now, yikes.

Furthermore, they're landing these on highways? With how low the intakes are on the F-16, I don't want to know the odds of ingesting a foreign object, that sounds less than ideal given that the F-16 is more or less meant to operate from perfect runways, running on the vast NATO infrastructure.

And here I was thinking them flying the F-16s into drones was the biggest risk...
 
And there's nothing Russia can do about it.
Click to expand...

Iskanders, Khinzals, Gerans, Kh-101s on Western Ukraine

S-400s, Flankers and Felons if air battles are still happening over Sumy


There’s a lot Russia can do.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom