The F-16N's were purpose built for the Navy.
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article22.html

They were replaced by embargoed Pakistani F-16's in 2003.
Those are not F-16N's.
The USAF and the Navy split that order between the two services.

The Pakistanis want those plane back.
Last I read that the USAF gave their's back, the Navy has so far refused.
http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=13415

Very cool, thanks man, didn't know that.

I still think it's super tits you have an Antartica service badge. That's fucking awesome.

Those guys, in F16s.

Hmm.

I get the image the learning environment got a bit... Sadistic from time to time.

Attached File

It was mostly TOPGUN Instructor Tomcat pilots (that's who populated the Topgun instructor cadre, along with RIOs) and a few Hornet pilots who learned how to set up intercepts with the F-16N from the senior F-15C FWS instructors.  These guys were already checked out as IPs in A-4s and F-5E/Fs used for adversary work in the school. They did ground training on the F-16N with General Dynamics, then did fighter conversion training at Luke AFB before transitioning to their weapons school tactics development in conjunction with the F-15C guys, most of whom had 2000-3000hrs of single seat Eagle time.

What it was like to fly the F-16N

The main adjustments were learning to use all their fingers and thumbs for HOTAS so they could manage the radar and modes, control range and altitude bands on the MFD, and employ the F-16N within the various threat profiles.



They said it was a game-changer for TOPGUN because they only had 2-seat fighters before that were really capable of setting up their own radar intercepts without as much of a GCI focus.  The F-8 Crusader, especially the F-8J, was designed to be able to detect and track off-axis, but the radar rarely worked and several Crusader pilots said it was garbage, so the F-4B was really the first Navy fighter that had a workable radar, and a back-seater to drive it.

F-16N pilot perspective on a 2 v 2 sortie against F-14s:



I suspect what they're going through now with the F-35C is a full spectrum and battle space analysis approach, not just limiting things to what fighters can do to other fighters, especially since they already changed the course to the Strike Fighter Weapons Instructor Course with the Hornets.

I'm looking for any literature on whether that happened with the F-14D as well in the Bombcat/Fighter-Interceptor training syllabus when F-14Ds started coming online.

Even if you look back at what they were doing in the 1970s and early 1980s, TOPGUN was a very BVR-centric course, with every intercept designed to start with optimum positioning from 2-ship F-4s or F-14s against A-4s simulating bait, with F-5E/F in high perch, just like the North Vietnamese and other Soviet clients were trained to do by the Russians/Soviets.

The ACM portions were baseline for worst-case merges after BVR missiles had reduced PID'd fighter tracks, but others survived to the merge, or surprise attacks from unseen ambushers who had been set up on them outside of their AWG-9 detection envelope.

For the 1vUNK sorties, they would often start the fight with long range detection of adversaries at roughly 30 miles out, set up on them, only to have F-5s come from a totally different direction and higher altitude and present a major problem for them to solve.  That would be augmented with surprise attack single or 2-ships along the way.

The TACTS and ACMI pods would record everything and weapons had to be employed correctly or else kills wouldn't count, mainly the AIM-7F and later AIM-7M, since AIM-54s were a carrier defense weapon for bombers that required specific authorization, not a handy BVR missile for taking out fighters.

Most of what went on was driven by RIO's running the AWG-9, talking to each other in a 2-ship, their pilots on intercom, while the pilots looked outside the cockpit for surprises and vectored appropriately to the RIO's calls.

I was stashed at VF-126 for 6 months while waiting to go to flight school. 126 operated several Vipers, with the bulk of the squadron being A-4Ms and TA-4Js. The pilots loved the 16Ns.

First time at the controls in my life: dash four in a six plane, coming back from the Kane MOA, trying to fly form on a 16N from the backseat of a Scooter. Good memories.

Everyone at Pax River called it the Lewinsky when it wallowed its fat ass and huge mouth down the glide slope.

Kharn

Awhile ago I was talking to an F35 pilot and he mentioned that the F35 didn't have a nickname yet. I suggested "Dark Helmet."

Attached File


Attached File


Lewinsky sounds like a perfect nickname for the X32 though.

Our local air guard is supposed to  transit from the F16's (C models I think, not sure) to F35's sometime in the future. I bet the city residents are going to enjoy the increased volume over the F16's...
No idea what models they are getting, but I think they are currently a air to ground wing. They were a warthog wing before the F16's.

Lost now, like tears in rain....

Have been checking lots of parts for those F35 birds lately...
.

The Air Force is only getting A models.

I live close to the flight pattern for NAS Fallon.  Depending on wind direction Jets are quite literally taking off or landing over my house.

I truthfully have not noticed much difference in noise level between the F-35s (A,B or C) and F/A-18s, F-16s, and so on.  They sound different, but not so much louder.  Most jets are not in AB by the time they go over me.

Not a dumb question at all.   I think those photos leave out all the context and supporting technology.

Imagine you’re in the 1990’s and you see every bit of the future iPhone production line.  Would it do you any good?

By the same token, if you time travel back 200 years, would any of today’s knowledge be of use?  Most of it is probably useless, because all the supporting infrastructure isn’t there.

It's not dumb.
The companies want to show off their ability to make some kick ass shit and the public wants to see what they are buying.
Those pictures are/were released when each program was well on its way.
At the point of assembly when those pictures were taken you can't really tell anything about the aircraft that you could not find on the internet (or in the case of the F-4 in a trade magazine or a book).

Finally, it's to show China, Russia, and the rest of the shitheads in the world that yes, we really are building aircraft to kick your ass at a pace that your pathetic military aviation industry could only dream of.


A-3 Skywarriors and AD Skyraiders being built on separate assembly lines in El Segundo, Ca in 1956.

My grandpa worked on A-3 Skywarrior and A-4 Skyhawk machining Titanium tubing for the tailhooks and aerial refueling booms.

He was a machinist foreman for Douglas and selected the better machinists to work on the Titanium since it was so expensive and scarce.  They couldn't afford screw-ups with their machining processes on it, from what he told me many years ago.  He's been dead for decades now.

I remember reading his periodic McDonnell Douglas magazines that would come in the mail since he was a stockholder.

He was a reloader at home, and started talking to me in depth about reloading since I can remember, always pulling out micrometers and calipers to measure cases and bullets, explaining to me what such and such meant.  He was a big fan of the .257 Roberts.

One of my uncles became a nuclear engineer, and my dad became an aerospace engineer/scientist/mathematician.

It's good to see another American innovation being cranked out in volume, unlike what the enemy within did to the F-22 program, effectively killing it before we even got 25% of the USAF order needed to replace the F-15C/D.

I'm reading though this right now.  Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments: US Air Force Aircraft Inventory and Procurement Analysis and Recommendations

So far, seems like a perfect storm arose as a combination of:

* The "Peace Divident" after the Soviet Collapse, which created a complacent Congress and Defense systems posture
* Early retirement of KC-135Es that had plenty of years left on them
* Premature shut-down of the B-2 production line
* Early shut-down and truncation of the F-22A production line
* Increased OPTEMPO on fighters/tankers/bombers/transporters/helos/UAS in CENTCOM
* Increased Operations and Maintenance costs (OM) while reducing service life of existing and newer production aircraft

Some of their main recommendations are to increase F-35A annual procurement from 50 to 70, increase the efforts to develop and produce the B-21 bomber, increase the efforts to develop and produce the PCA/P-EA 6th Generation fighter, slowly allow B-1Bs to time out as B-21s roll off the line, sustain and maintain B-2s and F-22s, replace older Block 25/30 F-16C/Ds with F-35As, and consider replacing F-15C/Ds with an upgraded F-35A since F-22 production was cut so short.

They have it all broken down year-by-year what the force structure should look like.