Lockheed Martin’s F-16V Fighting Falcon

V8Interceptor

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Mar 3, 2009
Messages
30
Reaction score
0
I've always wondered if; had the official name for the F-16 been simply "Falcon", it would have been accepted and referred to as such by the fighter pilot community.
After all, they had no problem with "Eagle"
Was the "Fighting" suffix added to the name of the aircraft as a way to avoid confusion with the Hughes AIM-4 Falcon series of air-to-air missiles? The -4F/-4G variants of that AAM were still in the ANG inventory during the F-16 procurement;they remained in service with the Guard until 1988 when the last F-106s were retired?
 

Steve Pace

Aviation History Writer
Joined
Jan 6, 2013
Messages
2,266
Reaction score
63
V8Interceptor said:
I've always wondered if; had the official name for the F-16 been simply "Falcon", it would have been accepted and referred to as such by the fighter pilot community.
After all, they had no problem with "Eagle"
Was the "Fighting" suffix added to the name of the aircraft as a way to avoid confusion with the Hughes AIM-4 Falcon series of air-to-air missiles? The -4F/-4G variants of that AAM were still in the ANG inventory during the F-16 procurement;they remained in service with the Guard until 1988 when the last F-106s were retired?
Sounds logical to me. -SP
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
14,615
Reaction score
3,539
TomS said:
Probably -- my memory is vague. At the time, all I'd seen was X-Wings and TIE fighters (and Vipers).

Was January of '79 and overcast with a bit of rain as I recall.
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
14,615
Reaction score
3,539
V8Interceptor said:
I've always wondered if; had the official name for the F-16 been simply "Falcon", it would have been accepted and referred to as such by the fighter pilot community.
After all, they had no problem with "Eagle"
Was the "Fighting" suffix added to the name of the aircraft as a way to avoid confusion with the Hughes AIM-4 Falcon series of air-to-air missiles? The -4F/-4G variants of that AAM were still in the ANG inventory during the F-16 procurement;they remained in service with the Guard until 1988 when the last F-106s were retired?

I'd heard they couldn't use "Falcon" because Dassault was already using it for a business jet.
 

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,221
Reaction score
822
FighterJock said:
Steve Pace said:
As I understand it the V suffice simply stands for the name Viper which USAF pilots prefer their '16s to be called. The official name Fighting Falcon never really turned '16 drivers on. -SP

So why did the USAF not call the F-16 the Viper instead of the Fighting Falcon? A highly strange situation if you ask me.

Highly strange? Maybe not. Notice they didn't they rename the A-10 as the Warthog although NO ONE calls it a Thunderbolt II.

There have always been official names and pilot-given names for operational combat types. That doesn't mean the latter should necessarily make it into the official documents. The only case I'm aware of when it actually happened was the F-111, whose later variants received the name Aardvark, a nickname which had been in use for a while with the pilots.
 

Steve Pace

Aviation History Writer
Joined
Jan 6, 2013
Messages
2,266
Reaction score
63
Then there's the Bone for B-1 (B-one), Boner for B-1R (B-one Regional) bomber - on and on and on...
 

TomS

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,931
Reaction score
2,469
Officially, the F-111 was named Aardvark only at its retirement ceremony; before then there was no official name for the type. Oddly enough, the EF-111 was officially the Raven even while the base model was unnamed.
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
3,158
Reaction score
517
marauder2048 said:
LowObservable said:
Wouldn't be too sure about that. The F-16 aftermarket is much bigger than any other, and the Korea experience showed how difficult it is to break in.

Willful misrepresentation (and that's a kind way of putting it) makes it difficult to break into just about any market.

More on that willful misrepresentation (I did use that term advisedly)

BAE Spoiled $1.7B Radar Deal With Korea, Suit Says

By Adam Sege
Law360, Wilmington (February 3, 2016, 6:06 PM ET) -- Defense giant Raytheon sued BAE and two subsidiaries in Delaware Chancery Court on Tuesday over the soured $1.7 billion sale of F-16 aircraft radar upgrades to South Korea, saying BAE hid the fact the deal was in trouble and caused its ultimate demise.

While Raytheon Co. had met all its obligations as a subcontractor, prime contractor BAE Systems Holdings Inc. concealed mounting problems with the project and ultimately caused price increases that led to the deal's failure and the subcontractor's losses on the project, the complaint alleges.

“[R]elying on BAE-T’s representations, Raytheon invested millions of its own dollars in the upgrade program,” the suit states. “BAE-T, however, failed to meet its own obligations, both to the U.S. government and to South Korea, and these repeated failures ultimately caused Korea to cancel the purchase.”

The dispute relates to a planned, $1.7 billion sale in which Raytheon and BAE were to provide the South Korean government with radar upgrades for F-16 fighter jets, according to the complaint. After reaching an agreement with the Korean government, the U.S. government designated BAE as the prime contractor on the upgrades, with Raytheon listed as a subcontractor, the suit says.

Raytheon says it assigned 70 employees to the project and abided by all its obligations.

But the sale ultimately fell apart, with the Korean government ending its contract with the U.S., the U.S. government nixing its contract with BAE, and BAE terminating its subcontract with Raytheon.

Raytheon claims that cost increases caused by BAE contributed to the breakdown, and that BAE contributed to Raytheon’s losses by hiding warning signs about the project.

“Despite knowing the upgrade program was in serious trouble, BAE-T continued to tell Raytheon negotiations were on
track and that Raytheon should continue to invest its own funds,” Raytheon says.

The subcontractor’s claims against BAE and its subsidiaries include breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.

In addition to its immediate losses associated with the botched deal, Raytheon says, the sale’s failure has impacted the subcontractor's future business by robbing it of an opportunity to demonstrate its capability in the F-16 radar market.

“For both companies, winning these contracts represented a beachhead into the large and lucrative F-16 upgrade marketplace, theretofore dominated by Lockheed Martin, the F-16’s original manufacturer, and by Northrop Grumman,
supplier of the F-16’s original radar system,” the suit states.

In a company statement emailed to Law360, BAE said it was "disappointed" to learn its former partner on the project had filed suit.

"As we have said previously, BAE Systems does not believe the company owes the Republic of Korea any monies related to Korea’s decision to cancel the KF-16 upgrade program," BAE continued. "By extension, we do not believe BAE Systems owes Raytheon any additional monies outside of the normal contractual termination settlement process. We are currently reviewing Raytheon’s complaint and will respond in due course through the appropriate legal processes.”

An attorney for Raytheon declined to elaborate on the company’s complaint.

Raytheon is represented by Jack B. Jacobs, Mark D. Hopson, Gordon D. Todd, Maureen B. Soles and Morgan Branch of Sidley Austin LLP.

Counsel information for BAE was not immediately available.

The case is Raytheon Co. v. BAE Systems Holdings Inc. et al., case number 11957, in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware.
 

Grey Havoc

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
16,866
Reaction score
6,481

The company has plans to make structural improvements to the F-16s that remain in military service even after production stops. The company is now pushing what it calls the F-16V, a new configuration that includes some of the technology developed for its successor, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

The upgrades include a new mission computer and Northrop Grumman-made radar, which is common with the same system used on the F-35. That allows the plane to track more targets in the air and on the ground.

The configuration is part of the upgrade the U.S. is offering Taiwan’s existing fleet in lieu of selling new F-16s. Lockheed is also pitching the upgrades to Indonesia. Howard said the company is in discussions “with multiple countries for upgrades of their existing F-16s.”
 

TomS

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,931
Reaction score
2,469
dan_inbox said:
sferrin said:
Why would the F-15A be called Rhodan?

I suppose that it is a reference to to scifi books hero Perry Rhodan, but I don't get it.

That's a typo. It should be Rodan.

latest
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
3,158
Reaction score
517
DOD Contracts for Nov. 18, 2016

Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co., Fort Worth, Texas, has been awarded a $1,204,200,000 fixed-price-incentive-fee contract to upgrade F-16 aircraft for the Republic of Korea. Work will be performed at Fort Worth, Texas, and is expected to be complete by Nov. 15, 2025. This contract is 100 percent foreign military sales to the Republic of Korea. This award is the result of a sole-source acquisition. Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, is the contracting activity (FA8615-l 7-C-6045).
 

lantinian

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
504
Reaction score
37
Re: Lockheed Martin’s Fighting Falcon Evolves With New F-16V

1st, I think we need to merge the "F-16V Takes Flight' topic into this one.

2nd. First time I see an F-16 with a triple AMRAAM launcher and I am impressed although its probably just a rendering and nothing like this exist yet.
Via
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/lockheed-martins-new-f-16-block-70-fighting-falcon-has-f-22-26419

Update: also found this official tweet from LM India, so the 3 launcher is not fan art
https://twitter.com/lmindianews/status/985017881732710400
 

Attachments

  • final_airtoairloadout_steveotte_lowreswithchute.jpg.pc-adaptive.1920.medium.jpeg
    final_airtoairloadout_steveotte_lowreswithchute.jpg.pc-adaptive.1920.medium.jpeg
    114.3 KB · Views: 418

Jemiba

Moderator
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,348
Reaction score
1,545
Done, thanks for the clue !
Title shortened, as it's about 6 years ago, that the F-16V was unveiled and 3 years, that
it had its maiden flight !
 

kitnut617

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Dec 15, 2006
Messages
483
Reaction score
261
Re: Lockheed Martin’s Fighting Falcon Evolves With New F-16V

lantinian said:
2nd. First time I see an F-16 with a triple AMRAAM launcher and I am impressed although its probably just a rendering and nothing like this exist yet.

It looks very similar to the launch rack F-16's have for Maverick
 

Attachments

  • F-16 with Mavericks.jpg
    F-16 with Mavericks.jpg
    67.3 KB · Views: 424

lantinian

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
504
Reaction score
37

Attachments

  • F16 Product Card_Slovakia.jpg
    F16 Product Card_Slovakia.jpg
    4 MB · Views: 364

MihoshiK

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Feb 9, 2007
Messages
234
Reaction score
192
I see that picture of the Block 70, and all I can think of is how much Pierre Sprey must be frothing at the mouth over it.
 

kaiserd

I really should change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2013
Messages
1,183
Reaction score
599
MihoshiK said:
I see that picture of the Block 70, and all I can think of is how much Pierre Sprey must be frothing at the mouth over it.

How dare an aircraft evolve to better suit what the customer actually wants and actually uses them for....
A fine line between visionaries and zealots, and the former can easily evolve in the latter...
 

SpudmanWP

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
1,072
Reaction score
59
MihoshiK said:
Pierre Sprey must be frothing

He started doing that within 5 years of the F-16 going IOC as they added BVR weapons and more sensors to the F-16.
 

TomS

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,931
Reaction score
2,469
If they can do that from the air, they can do that from a ship ;)

Kinematics aren't as favorable shooting up from a standing start as they are shooting down from 500 knots.
 

stealthflanker

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
963
Reaction score
851
That's a nice "side use" of capability.

For cruise missile scenario tho.. i would put more faith on AMRAAM's.
 

rooster

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jun 21, 2019
Messages
310
Reaction score
196
Isn't that just a trick of kinematics like dropping a bomb ana flying helicopter? Or...?
 

Ronny

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jul 20, 2019
Messages
568
Reaction score
374
The Block 70 was a different configuration on offer to India. Then there's the Block 61. The "V" designation is more amorphous and unblock like since, IIRC a customer an do a la carte upgrades from the "V" grab bag of avionics.
Block 70 has SABR and F-110GE129 while Block 60 has APG-80 and F-110GE 132
GE-132 has higher thrust and block 70 has no cooling upgrade like block 60, so SABR range is much worse than APG-80
1.PNG
 

stealthflanker

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
963
Reaction score
851
Aw.. looking at above paper really reminds me that i have to take down the AESA radar calculator and replace it with the fixed version ASAP.

The earlier version i put up have issue namely inconsistent unit, for calculation of detectability factor. I admiteddly made mistake with the equation. The issue was not really obvious as the calculator still does work and give reasonable result, it only came to my awareness after the researcher contacted me and finally i re-read the literatures.

The version used in the paper is rectified version where i finally (hopefully) got things straight with the help of the researcher. The latest version is on the work but i havent released it yet as i incorporated some more features and actually attempt to make a user manual. Containing the equations and "flows" of the sheet.
 

aonestudio

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Mar 11, 2018
Messages
513
Reaction score
1,072
WASHINGTON, June 24, 2021

The Government of the Philippines has requested to buy ten (10) F-16C Block 70/72 aircraft; two (2) F-16D Block 70/72 aircraft; fifteen (15) F100-PW-229EEP engines or F110-GE-129D engines; fifteen (15) Improved Programmable Display Generators (iPDG); fifteen (15) AN/APG-83 Advanced Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) Scalable Agile Beam Radars (SABR); fifteen (15) Modular Mission Computers 7000AH; fifteen (15) LN-260 Embedded GPS/INS (EGI) with SAASM and PPS; twenty-four (24) Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAM) AIM-120C-7/C-8 or equivalent; one (1) AIM-120 Guidance Section; forty-eight (48) LAU-129 missile launchers; three (3) KMU-572 Laser Joint Direct Attack Munition (LJDAM) tail kits; six (6) Mk-82 500lb bombs; six (6) Mk-82 500lb Inert training bombs; six (6) FMU-152 or FMU-139 fuzes; six (6) Sniper Advanced Targeting Pods (ATP) or Litening ATP; fifteen (15) Multifunctional Information Display System Joint Tactical Radio System (MIDS-JTRS) aircraft terminals, and; fifteen (15) M61A1 Vulcan Anti-Aircraft 20mm guns. Also included are AN/ARC-238 radios; Advanced Identification Friend or Foe with Combined Interrogator Transponder and Mode 5; Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing Systems II (JHMCS II) or Scorpion Hybrid Optical-based Inertial Tacker (HObIT); Integrated Electronic Warfare Suite; Electronic Combat International Security Assistance Program (ECISAP) support; AN/ALE-47 Countermeasure Dispenser Systems (CMDS); Joint Mission Planning Systems (JMPS) or equivalent; AIM-120 CATM; LAU-118 launchers with Advanced Launcher Interface Computer (ALIC); LAU-117 missile launchers; DSU-38 Precision Laser Guided Sensor for LJDAM; Harpoon interface adapter kits; PGU-28 High Explosive Incendiary (HEI) ammunition; PGU-27 ammunition training rounds (non HEI); Cartridge Actuated Devices/Propellant Actuated Devices (CAD/PAD); ARD-446 impulse cartridges; ARD-863 impulse cartridges; BBU-36/B impulse cartridges; BBU-35/B impulse cartridges; MK-124 smoke flares; MJU-7/B Flare Cartridge L463; BRU‐61 Bomb Racks; BRU‐57 bomb racks; MAU‐12 bomb racks and TER‐9A triple ejection racks; weapons support, test equipment, and missile containers; chaff and flare; Night Vision Devices (NVD) and support equipment and spares; secure communications; cryptographic equipment; aircraft and personnel support and test equipment; integration and test; weapons, ammunition, pylons, launcher adaptors, weapons interfaces, fuel tanks, and attached hardware; travel pods, precision measurement equipment laboratory, calibration, and simulators; spare and repair parts, repair and return services; maps, publications, and technical documentation; studies and surveys; classified / unclassified software and software support; personnel training and training equipment; facilities and facility management, design and/or construction services; U.S. Government and contractor engineering, technical and logistics support services; and other related elements of logistical and program support. The estimated total cost is $2.43 billion.

The Government of the Philippines has requested to buy twenty-four (24) AIM-9X Sidewinder Block II tactical missiles; twenty-four (24) AIM-9X Block II Captive Air Training Missiles (CATMs); six (6) Tactical Guidance Units; and ten (10) Captive Air Training Missile (CATM) Guidance Units. Also included are containers, support and test equipment, spare and repair parts, personnel training and training equipment, publications and technical data, software delivery and support, U.S. Government and contractor technical assistance and other related support; and other related elements of logistical and program support. The estimated total cost is $42.4 million.

The Government of the Philippines has requested to buy twelve (12) AGM-84L-1 Harpoon Block II air launched missiles; and two (2) ATM-84L-1 Harpoon Block II Exercise missiles. Also included are containers; spare and repair parts; support and test equipment; publications and technical documentation; personnel training and training equipment; U.S. Government and contractor engineering, technical, and logistical support services; and other related elements of logistical and program support. The estimated total cost is $120 million.
 

aonestudio

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Mar 11, 2018
Messages
513
Reaction score
1,072
MANILA, Philippines - Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana said the F-16 fighter jets that were being offered by the United States were “expensive”, prompting the Philippine Air Force (PAF) to look at other options.

“The US wants us to buy their F-16s. It’s very expensive so the PAF is evaluating others,” he told INQUIRER.net on Friday (June 25).

Only 1 other option is the Saab JAS-39 Gripen from Sweden.
 

helmutkohl

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
900
Reaction score
1,554
I've a question about the F-16s radars and pitot tube

the regular F-16s As through Cs generally have a short pitot tube at the end of the radome

the UAE b.60 F-16s, don't have them. I assume its because of the AESA.

does the V have them? or the AESA equipped USAF F-16s?
the problem with google is htat many media agencies incorrectly use random F-16 stock image, which I think are of an older model

even the official LockMart website
the top pic has one without a pitot tube
while the next pic has one with a pitot tube

does the relocation of the pitot tube away from the tip of the radome matter for AESA radars?
 
Top