f16 F-16 Fighting Falcon: History, Performance & Discussion

[_RemiliaScarlet__ 340]

Excellent jet both in performance and design, I suspect it's not too far off, and Gaijin will likely be adding F-16 variants for quite a long time.

[Fireraid233 4,254]

F-2 with Sniper pod

[Faster_Boiiiii 739]

19 minutes ago, Fireraid233 said:

F-2 with Sniper pod

never realized that the F-2 has canopy bows. the f-16 has them too but only in the rear

[Fireraid233 4,254]

2 minutes ago, Faster_Boiiiii said:

never realized that the F-2 has canopy bows. the f-16 has them too but only in the rear

Yeah it was for better protection against bird strikes iirc

[Target1331 3,044]

7 hours ago, Faster_Boiiiii said:

never realized that the F-2 has canopy bows. the f-16 has them too but only in the rear

The main (and easiest visible) feature we used in aircraft recognition to figure out if it was an F-16 or F-2, and if the roundels were not visible.

Best regards,

Phil

[Suizu_Aika 59]

isn't all F-16 able to carry AGM and GBU?, for example A block 1 - 10

Edited July 17, 2022 by Suizu_Aika

[spacenavy90 1,399]

3 hours ago, Suizu_Aika said:

isn't all F-16 able to carry AGM and GBU?, for example A block 1 - 10

 

No, the ability to carry AGM-65 were added with the blk 15 OCU upgrades, and AGM-88/GBUs with the blk 40.

[oom1992 622]

49 minutes ago, spacenavy90 said:

 

No, the ability to carry AGM-65 were added with the blk 15 OCU upgrades, and AGM-88/GBUs with the blk 40.

F-16A Baz for Isreal only carry AGM-65 ? 
I wonder regular F-16A Blk 15 and F-16A Blk 10 (USAF) not be able AGM-65 ?

Edited July 17, 2022 by oom1992

[TimeFaker 237]

37 minutes ago, oom1992 said:

F-16A Baz for Isreal only carry AGM-65 ? 
I wonder regular F-16A Blk 15 and F-16A Blk 10 (USAF) not be able AGM-65 ?

usaf block 15ocu can carry these bombs while the usaf didnt upgrade their f-16 to carry these until f-16 block 15 ocu while other nations wanted the upgrade from the beginning i guess 

[ZVO_12_INCH 492]

3 hours ago, oom1992 said:

F-16A Baz for Isreal only carry AGM-65 ? 
I wonder regular F-16A Blk 15 and F-16A Blk 10 (USAF) not be able AGM-65 ?

http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/F-16A_Falcon_(Block_1-10)_SAC_-_March_1984.pdf

http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/F-16A_Block_1_thru_10_Falcon_CS_-_March_1985.pdf

Differences between the upgraded Block 1-10 and Block 15...

Spoiler

 

Edited July 17, 2022 by PLESETZK

[Hobel 99]

Are there documents that describe the look down performance of the radar?

[tripod2008 572]

5 hours ago, Hobel said:

Are there documents that describe the look down performance of the radar?

They are likely out there somewhere, but Gaijin won't accept them due to them "not being marked correctly" and generally being too modern(past the 1980 "cutoff").

 

Though we do know many of the physical characteristics of the radar, and general operating methodologies, a perfect replication in game is unlikely since many things relating to radar performance are either simplified or not "yet" existent mechanics.

 

I would expect the AN/APG-66 and subvariants to perform towards the lower end of similar "4th generation" radar sets due to the smaller than average array in comparison to the APG-65 and APG-63 and AWG-9 of the F/A-18, F-15 and F-14 respectively, and the lack of an IRST to offset "worse" performance won't help things either;  while an improvement over earlier systems the later variants of the AN/APG-66  won't change their respective standings against other modernized radar sets, though they may well add a few modes that help in certain edge cases.

Edited July 22, 2022 by tripod2008

[Suizu_Aika 59]

I wonder when can we see this jet in the sky?

[Cairn_67 537]

2 hours ago, tripod2008 said:

[...]They are likely out there somewhere, but Gaijin won't accept them due to them "not being marked correctly" and generally being too modern(past the 1980 "cutoff") [...]

The first batch of F-16As entered service with the USAF, No388 Tactical Fighter Wing, in 1979. Deliveries of F-16As to the Belgium and Dutch Air Forces also began in 1979. The Danish, Norwegian and Israeli Air Forces received their F-16As & Bs in 1980-81 (although the production orders had been placed about two years earlier).

[Faster_Boiiiii 739]

2 hours ago, Cairn_67 said:

The Danish, Norwegian [...] Air Forces received their F-16As

gaijin pls for sweden

[Valqyrie 1,802]

29 minutes ago, Faster_Boiiiii said:

gaijin pls for sweden

Wat

[oom1992 622]

On 17/07/2022 at 22:43, PLESETZK said:

http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/F-16A_Falcon_(Block_1-10)_SAC_-_March_1984.pdf

http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/F-16A_Block_1_thru_10_Falcon_CS_-_March_1985.pdf

Differences between the upgraded Block 1-10 and Block 15...

Hide contents

 

So F-16A Block 1 F-16A Block 5 and F-16A Block 10 it's just a difference color nose radome but same engine, radar, avionics and common weapon systems ?

You try guess developer take add F-16A lack BVR missile before F-16A Block 15 ADF for USA tech tree by start F-16A Block ?
 

F-16A Block 1 

 

F-16A Block 5



F-16A Block 10


 

Edited July 23, 2022 by oom1992

[tripod2008 572]

11 hours ago, oom1992 said:

So F-16A Block 1 F-16A Block 5 and F-16A Block 10 it's just a difference color nose radome but same engine, radar, avionics and common weapon systems ?

You try guess developer take add F-16A lack BVR missile before F-16A Block 15 ADF for USA tech tree by start F-16A Block ?
 

F-16A Block 1 

 

F-16A Block 5



F-16A Block 10


 

As according to

https://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article3.html

 

The difference between Block 1 and -5 aircraft is the color of the Radome(Black/Grey), all other changes are minor and otherwise internal.

The difference between Block 1/-5 and -10 Aircraft is the location of the UHF "Blade" antenna, most other changes are minor and otherwise internal, the only one worth a mention was that those(24 Aircraft) that served with the New York ANG were modified ("F/A-16A/-B") to be able to employ the "GPU-5/A" 30mm Gunpod for a short period of time, before being returned to baseline Block 10's.

Edited July 23, 2022 by tripod2008

[oom1992 622]

15 minutes ago, tripod2008 said:

As according to

https://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article3.html

 

The difference between Block 1 and -5 aircraft is the color of the Radome(Black/Grey), all other changes are minor and otherwise internal.

The difference between Block 1/-5 and -10 Aircraft is the location of the UHF "Blade" antenna, most other changes are minor and otherwise internal, the only one worth a mention was that those(24 Aircraft) that served with the New York ANG were modified ("F/A-16A/-B") to be able to employ the "GPU-5/A" 30mm Gunpod for a short period of time, before being returned to baseline Block 10's.

Personal you guess developer and GJ take add start F-16A by starting at F-16A Block 1 or F-16A Block 5 or F-16A Block 10 before F-16A Block 15 ADF ?

Edited July 23, 2022 by oom1992

[Fireraid233 4,254]

Some more F-2 stuff 

[tripod2008 572]

28 minutes ago, oom1992 said:

Personal you guess developer and GJ take add start F-16A by starting at F-16A Block 1 or F-16A Block 5 or F-16A Block 10 before F-16A Block 15 ADF ?

For the US at least, I think the First F-16 should be the "F-16C/-D-25", since the F-15A, F-14A/-B and F/A-18A/-B would be strong enough to make Earlier F-16's redundant within the Tech Tree(some of course would likely be reserved as Event / Squadron / Premium aircraft), at least without them getting "advanced" missiles (AIM-9L/-M), though like the R-60M,I could see the AIM-9P-4 as a "fair" option in order to allow them to remain competitive should earlier (without access to sparrows) variants struggle as more modern aircraft are added and a BR reduction would otherwise be called for.

 

The thing with the US tech tree specifically is that there is a very large number of variants and modifications of the "Teen" series to chose from, so they can be tailored / released to cover other lines weaknesses, and still be "round robin'd" to encourage people to grind the entire tree.

Edited July 23, 2022 by tripod2008

[oom1992 622]

33 minutes ago, tripod2008 said:

For the US at least, I think the First F-16 should be the "F-16C/-D-25", since the F-15A, F-14A/-B and F/A-18A/-B would be strong enough to make Earlier F-16's redundant within the Tech Tree(some of course would likely be reserved as Event / Squadron / Premium aircraft), at least without them getting "advanced" missiles (AIM-9L/-M), though like the R-60M,I could see the AIM-9P-4 as a "fair" option in order to allow them to remain competitive should earlier (without access to sparrows) variants struggle as more modern aircraft are added and a BR reduction would otherwise be called for.

 

The thing with the US tech tree specifically is that there is a very large number of variants and modifications of the "Teen" series to chose from, so they can be tailored / released to cover other lines weaknesses, and still be "round robin'd" to encourage people to grind the entire tree.

Why are you sure GJ add early lightweight F-16C carry ARH missile AIM-120A AMRAAM ? rather than become early 4th gen for USAF after F-5 add F-16A non BVR and F-16A carry modern SARH before F-16A Blk 15 OCU and F-16C Blk 25 carry ARH ?

Edited July 23, 2022 by oom1992

[tripod2008 572]

16 minutes ago, oom1992 said:

Why are you sure GJ add early lightweight F-16C carry ARH missile AIM-120A AMRAAM ? rather than become early 4th gen for USAF after F-5 add F-16A non BVR and F-16A carry modern SARH before F-16A Blk 15 OCU and F-16C Blk 25 carry ARH ?

The Issue with the 15ADF is that it is "solely" Air to Air focused, which defeats the point of having the F-14 or F-15 in other lines as "attractive" Air to Air options and as a minor "specific" modification would likely be reserved for Premium / Event status.

And I don't think that the addition of two / four extra AIM-9's and a flight performance improvement, would be worth it for "Early"(Block 1~15) F-16's vs the F-5E, since they would likely see a significant BR bump, and so spend most of their time attempting to close on, and dogfight targets that outrange them by a significant margin with SARH / ARM / Advanced IR options that they can't respond to easily, without advanced missiles of their own which would dictate an even higher BR and only make the issue worse.

 

You still have a four year gap between the F-16C-25 and AIM-120 entering service where it would have only had access to the Sparrow (AIM-7F/M), and adding an OCU and a C-25 to the tech tree is almost completely redundant from an ordinance standpoint since they share a significant amount of electronics.

[RanchSauce39 395]

On 23/07/2022 at 17:40, tripod2008 said:

For the US at least, I think the First F-16 should be the "F-16C/-D-25", since the F-15A, F-14A/-B and F/A-18A/-B would be strong enough to make Earlier F-16's redundant within the Tech Tree(some of course would likely be reserved as Event / Squadron / Premium aircraft), at least without them getting "advanced" missiles (AIM-9L/-M), though like the R-60M,I could see the AIM-9P-4 as a "fair" option in order to allow them to remain competitive should earlier (without access to sparrows) variants struggle as more modern aircraft are added and a BR reduction would otherwise be called for.

 

The thing with the US tech tree specifically is that there is a very large number of variants and modifications of the "Teen" series to chose from, so they can be tailored / released to cover other lines weaknesses, and still be "round robin'd" to encourage people to grind the entire tree.

 

I think they should add F16A block 15, and then skip straight to either a block F16C block 40/42 for a proper multirole aircraft or a F16C block 50 for the most powerfull engine of the F16s in USAF service.

 

Block 40/42 night falcons were the first to get a Targeting pod compatibility ( IE the Lantirn TGP), and thus also be provided with ability to self designate laser guided bombs. . block 25/30s may as well just be an F16A with a Apg68 radar ( just a improved apg66) and a updated cockpit.

 

 

On 23/07/2022 at 18:42, tripod2008 said:

The Issue with the 15ADF is that it is "solely" Air to Air focused, which defeats the point of having the F-14 or F-15 in other lines as "attractive" Air to Air options and as a minor "specific" modification would likely be reserved for Premium / Event status.

 

 

I wouldn't say so.  F14 and F15 will still have far more powerful radars, and can carry more missiles. also keep in mind both have Internal Jammers, whereas the F16's had to carry external mounted ECM pod. ( well im operating under the assumption gajin will at some point add radar jamming)

 

sure the F16s APG66/68 is a Pulse doppler radar, with Medium PRF but its detection ranges for fighter sized target,s isnt that impressive, at least not when compared to larger radars in other teen series fighters of the same generation

 

 APg66 has  low detection ranges when compared to larger radars of the same generation. later  Apg68 is better, but even then  i remember seeing Apg68 V9 ( 2000s improvement for export)  estimates for detection ranges against a target with a radar cross section 1m^2 ( Eg a small fighter such as  clean F16 with no external stores) would only be 35-37 Nautical miles. A larger fighter like a Su27 or F15 has a larger cross section and could be detected further of course.

This is why even F/A18's APG65/73 series radars were a notch above APG66/68.

 

a F15 would be able to detect a target at least twice that range of a vipers radar if not more. ( although that would vary also if comparing  early APG 63 versus finalized APG 63 with PSP or  APG63 V1 or APG70 etc)

 

On 23/07/2022 at 18:42, tripod2008 said:

 

You still have a four year gap between the F-16C-25 and AIM-120 entering service where it would have only had access to the Sparrow (AIM-7F/M), and adding an OCU and a C-25 to the tech tree is almost completely redundant from an ordinance standpoint since they share a significant amount of electronics.

 

F16C's didnt have sparrows in US service. So even your F16C's blocks thru to the block 40's would be Aim9 equipped until the post gulf war period where the Aim120's started becoming a thing.

[tripod2008 572]

  

4 hours ago, RanchSauce39 said:

Block 40/42 night falcons were the first to get a Targeting pod compatibility ( IE the Lantirn TGP), and thus also be provided with ability to self designate laser guided bombs. . block 25/30s may as well just be an F16A with a Apg68 radar ( just a improved apg66) and a updated cockpit.

I'm not disagreeing, but I think that Gaijin is rightfully wary (to some degree) of adding actually competitive multirole aircraft to the game (at least for now) that doesn't have some sort of flaw somewhere, and any prospective F-16 already look pretty good in any role that aircraft can fill (except for SEAD since they lack any form or Anti Radar Missile up until block -50/-52 added the HARM I think, though to some degree the AGM-65D works as a stand in to some degree)

 

I think the most likely "multirole" candidate for the addition of TGP's (and associated ordnance) to the US tree would be the F-4E (either as it is or a separate "late" variant), but otherwise could be the F-111,  A-6 or A-10C (Honorable mention to the AV-8B(NA) and -B+) that would get it first.

 

They could though I feel that it would be difficult to properly "implement" in a way that makes things obvious "what counters what" (to what degree and with what effective range), and how to dumb down a fairly complicated and obtuse topic, since basically every relevant SARH / radar has some form of counter jamming guidance / tracking, or IRSTS / EOTS to get around simple noise jamming, and ways to counter track breaking methods that work against some systems but completely fail against others in a given situation, and that only covers self-defense jamming and counter methods, offboard systems and decoys make things even more complicated let alone how they would interact with ground based systems especially as we move towards Ground-based automatic guidance.

 

I'm not saying that I don't think that it could happen, but in all likelihood whatever does turn up will likely be very simple and only deal with specific situations, that are likely to be edge cases in common gameplay, though anything at this point would probably be a massive help to "Strike" focused aircraft, like the F-111, A-6 and A-7's.

 

4 hours ago, RanchSauce39 said:

sure the F16s APG66/68 is a Pulse doppler radar, with Medium PRF but its detection ranges for fighter sized target's isn't that impressive, at least not when compared to larger radars in other teen series fighters of the same generation

 

 APG66 has  low detection ranges when compared to larger radars of the same generation. later  Apg68 is better, but even then  i remember seeing Apg68 V9 ( 2000s improvement for export)  estimates for detection ranges against a target with a radar cross section 1m^2 ( Eg a small fighter such as  clean F16 with no external stores) would only be 35-37 Nautical miles. A larger fighter like a Su27 or F15 has a larger cross section and could be detected further of course

It's definitely a step up from the current HPRF radar sets since it effectively tightens up the required angle(s) and speeds for an effective Notch maneuver, and is "mirrored" by the inclusion of IRST on the MiG-29's which could be granted similar Anti-Notch performance.

 

With the smaller maps of WT detection range isn't going to be an issue for earlier blocks which are limited to Sidewinders and Sparrows (Some variants / nations), since they couldn't take advantage of that extended range anyway due to seeker / guidance limitations of said missiles, and later blocks (AMRAAM capable) likely have a TGP with EOTS (and / or Datalink) capabilities that would provide enough for limited info launches.

 

4 hours ago, RanchSauce39 said:

a F15 would be able to detect a target at least twice that range of a vipers radar if not more.

Considering that they use the same missiles, range is going to be broadly similar in the majority of situations that is encountered in WT (for now at least since no one really has a reason to be more than 3~6 km up since standoff ordnance isn't implemented yet, though that may yet change) and as such the worse radar performance not be quite as telling of a disadvantage as it otherwise would be by itself, though higher altitude performance certainly will be.

 

4 hours ago, RanchSauce39 said:

F16C's didn't have sparrows in US service. So even your F16C's blocks thru to the block 40's would be Aim9 equipped until the post gulf war period where the Aim120's started becoming a thing

Gaijin doesn't really care about that, all C/D models are completely Sparrow capable even if it was never used, and it avoids the need to hand out advanced (IRCCM) IR missiles early, or lowing their BR so it will likely happen using "known" documentation to support it like they have with that one manual page for the F-4F and AIM-9J, or that one picture of an YF-5A with TER's to justify Certain presets for some aircraft.

 

Edited August 7, 2022 by tripod2008