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

[tripod2008 565]

36 minutes ago, Conejero00 said:

Never heard about GPHE, what does it mean?¿

I am specifically referring to a "conventional" General Purpose High Explosive warhead arrangement that doesn't have any "special" features outside a higher filler ratio (overall weight vs Filler mass being separable into 20, 40, 60, 80% fill ratios for specifying general use case) and intermediate length delayed action fuse options. Which helps delineate it from a "Armor Penetrating" / "Bunker buster" design as to be specific, in comparison more specialist designs e.g.; High Explosive Anti-Tank, Linear Shaped Charge, Annular Blast, Fragmentation, Continuous rod, Fuel Air Explosive, Cluster, Unitary, ect.

Edited January 17 by tripod2008

[tripod2008 565]

56 minutes ago, ACOMETS said:

You should not be needing a pure HE variant anyway in the game 

 

HE effect is highly restricted which makes maverick sometimes worst than zuni rockets 

In all likelihood that was actually an AGM-65E which is laser guided and uses HE-F warhead if that was even a Maverick that was launched, which there is actually some photo's proving they were at least test fitted on both the AH-1W / AH-1Z and AH-64A among the numerous vehicles that carried them.

 

It also doesn't help that their HEAT warhead is significantly underperforming, at only 830mm flat of penetration instead of the 1300~1400mm it should be, let alone the missing overpressure mechanic.

 

As things are with the Maverick, the HE-F warhead variants(-65F, -65G, -65J, -65K) all that would really change is that they become a lot more constant at knocking out MBT's, and may even reach performance levels approaching that of the -29T and the -65 & -65E the -29L as they are both additionally Laser guided and use a HE-F warhead.

Edited January 17 by tripod2008

[ACOMETS 960]

2 hours ago, tripod2008 said:

In all likelihood that was actually an AGM-65E which is laser guided and uses HE-F warhead if that was even a Maverick that was launched, which there is actually some photo's proving they were at least test fitted on both the AH-1W / AH-1Z and AH-64A among the numerous vehicles that carried them.

 

It also doesn't help that their HEAT warhead is significantly underperforming, at only 830mm flat of penetration instead of the 1300~1400mm it should be, let alone the missing overpressure mechanic.

 

As things are with the Maverick, the HE-F warhead variants(-65F, -65G, -65J, -65K) all that would really change is that they become a lot more constant at knocking out MBT's, and may even reach performance levels approaching that of the -29T and the -65 & -65E the -29L as they are both additionally Laser guided and use a HE-F warhead.

That was a agm65a on a ah1j international from IRIAF . During Iran Iraq war iran was running low on tow missiles . So they mounted mavericks on cobra . This makes the gbu the more favorable option on f-16 cause how stupidly it is modeled

Edited January 17 by ACOMETS

[Fireraid233 4,250]

31 minutes ago, Smoak741 said:

@spacenavy90 https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/another-war-thunder-leak-player-reportedly-posts-restricted-f-16-documents

https://www.aeroflap.com.br/usuario-vaza-dados-sigilosos-do-caca-f-16-em-forum-do-jogo-war-thunder/

you are famous

Can we stop acting like children and just move on from this? It's just getting annoying now.

[Smoak741 1,092]

2 hours ago, Fireraid233 said:

Can we stop acting like children and just move on from this? It's just getting annoying now.

Edited January 17 by Smoak741

[ACOMETS 960]

I cared

Edited January 17 by ACOMETS

[Smoak741 1,092]

4 minutes ago, ACOMETS said:

can you remove it?

[SlowHandClap 510]

So we shouldn't expect any further changes to the F-16A flight model?..

Disappointing if that's the case. It's hard to enjoy it when it begins locking up completely at speed. 

[spacenavy90 1,399]

33 minutes ago, SlowHandClap said:

So we shouldn't expect any further changes to the F-16A flight model?..

Disappointing if that's the case. It's hard to enjoy it when it begins locking up completely at speed. 

 

There is no reason to think that the flight model is currently final, just give it some time. The devs haven't been back from their holiday vacation for very long.

[Ziggy1989 1,531]

2 hours ago, SlowHandClap said:

o we shouldn't expect any further changes to the F-16A flight model?..

Disappointing if that's the case. It's hard to enjoy it when it begins locking up completely at speed. 

I used to feel the same way. But I’m in love with the jet fm now. It just takes getting used to. At first I was getting smacked around in the Chinese ADF.  now I have a 4:1 kd in the Israeli one alone.  
 

Are you aced crew? That is mandatory with this jet. 
 
To answer your question. I think the fm is final iirc. @spacenavy90 would know. 

Edited January 18 by Ziggy1989

[MiG_23M 1,593]

2 hours ago, Ziggy1989 said:

I used to feel the same way. But I’m in love with the jet fm now. It just takes getting used to. At first I was getting smacked around in the Chinese ADF.  now I have a 4:1 kd in the Israeli one alone.  
 

Are you aced crew? That is mandatory with this jet. 
 
To answer your question. I think the fm is final iirc. @spacenavy90 would know. 

It's underperforming.. there were bug reports about this. You should know that, we've talked about it.

[Ziggy1989 1,531]

21 minutes ago, MiG_23M said:

It's underperforming.. there were bug reports about this. You should know that, we've talked about it.

I could  not remember if it was the 29 or the both.

 

I’ll take a buff for it all day.

[RanchSauce39 395]

On 17/01/2023 at 02:38, MiG_23M said:

I can link many detailed completely unclassified and unrestricted documents on those as well, so I don't think that is much of an argument.

 

Is there any "safe"  but primary source documentation to show the F16A ADF did have at least some form of TWS mode added to radar?

[MiG_23M 1,593]

12 minutes ago, RanchSauce39 said:

 

Is there any "safe"  but primary source documentation to show the F16A ADF did have at least some form of TWS mode added to radar?

I haven't done any research in to the APG-66

[WolfOfWarThunder 163]

Clearly the only solution here is for all of us to chip in and buy an F-16A. Then we will all meet with our tools and take it apart piece by piece till Gaijin bends the knee. Don’t forget hazmat suits for the Hydrazine bath. 

[spacenavy90 1,399]

1 minute ago, WolfOfWarThunder said:

Clearly the only solution here is for all of us to chip in and buy an F-16A. Then we will all meet with our tools and take it apart piece by piece till Gaijin bends the knee. Don’t forget hazmat suits for the Hydrazine bath. 

 

I'm in. I have.... $10 dollars is that enough?

[ACOMETS 960]

13 minutes ago, spacenavy90 said:

 

I'm in. I have.... $10 dollars is that enough?

I have 0.25 GJN .... 

what do you mean I can not redeem them?!

 

Edited January 18 by ACOMETS

[ACOMETS 960]

@spacenavy90  my country bought 80 F16 block 10s 40 years ago ( agh never received one!) so I guess we are a rightful owner of one.

[spacenavy90 1,399]

6 minutes ago, ACOMETS said:

@spacenavy90  my country bought 80 F16 block 10s 40 years ago ( agh never received one!) so I guess we are a rightful owner of one.

 

You are absolutely correct, I will contact President Biden to get you Iranians your long awaited F-16A block 10 immediately!

[oom1992 613]

@ spacenavy90 You try a guess in the future after F-16A Block 10 & F-16A Block 15 ADF in rank 8 for USA tech tree, developer plan add F-16 newer F-16A Block 10 & F-16A Block 15 ADF ?

Edited January 18 by oom1992

[spacenavy90 1,399]

1 minute ago, oom1992 said:

@ spacenavy90 You try a guess in the future after F-16A Block 10 & F-16A Block 15 ADF in rank 8, developer plan add ?

 

Well the F-16C is the obvious answer, question is which block?

Block 25 and 30/32 are rather uninteresting (aside from improved engines) compared to the block 40/42 which were compatible with the LANTIRN targeting pod.

 

So I hope the block 40 or 42 is next.

[Firestarter__ 104]

On 16/01/2023 at 07:21, Dragon_Storm_246 said:

Can you like **** off Respectfully, thank you

Have fun dealing with US authorities?

 

Also, congrats to which ever muppets leaked F-15 and 16 docs that shouldn't be on here. You haven't learned from the Chally 2, Leclerc, Eurocopter, DTC-10-125 disasters have you?

[Grimtax 87]

25 minutes ago, Firestarter__ said:

Have fun dealing with US authorities?

 

Also, congrats to which ever muppets leaked F-15 and 16 docs that shouldn't be on here. You haven't learned from the Chally 2, Leclerc, Eurocopter, DTC-10-125 disasters have you?

 

add the F-22 already so that I can watch the world burn

 

[ACOMETS 960]

16 minutes ago, Grimtax said:

 

add the F-22 already so that I can watch the world burn

 

Jokes aside , we need a solid way to verify these things.

As I understand now it is not safe to post anything if it is dated after 1985 .

How can a average warthunder player verify such documents?

 

[MiG_23M 1,593]

2 hours ago, ACOMETS said:

Jokes aside , we need a solid way to verify these things.

As I understand now it is not safe to post anything if it is dated after 1985 .

How can a average warthunder player verify such documents?

 

Post the title page and ask if anyone can check the citation or restriction, email relevant authorities and ask for the distribution statement on said document.