Does anyone know if the AN/APG-68(V7) of the F-16C has any improvements to the notch speeds (minimum radial speed of the target required to spot it) compared to the AN/APG-66’s 50 knots?
it seems to be copy paste APG-66V3 in dev right now as a placeholder we’ll have to wait
What about IRL?
F-16s all got massive flight model buffs in dev server now and can pull 14g/15g at mach .95
in my testing all F-16s except the israeli F-16D can out turn the MiG-29 at almost every speed (high speed is similar but low speed F-16 dominates hard)
MiG-29 now only had edge in BVR, and SMT which has inferior performance to 9.13/9.12 due to its heavier weight performs even worse so SMT will have to rely heavily on R-73s and R-27ERs to compete with F-16s because in dogfights it gets slammed pretty hard
1 Like
Also, anyone know if the AN/APG-68(V7) has a HMD slewable radar or have sources to support that? The only ones I have been able to find so far that mention HMD radar slaving are export-restricted.
The VTAS mounted on the F-4 could, why wouldn’t a later system?
Here are some sources that could be used to daisy chain the features together.
I didn’t go through the report, but isn’t it a proposed concept? Also, I’m not certain whether it could or could not, all I know is that there is an option for the F-16C to slave the radar in ACM, I just do not know if HMD could do it
The point is that the implementation on the dev server assumes the option was exercised (Not that it wasn’t) as the study asserts that otherwise there is a need to slew the radar to the HMD’s LoS first, before SEAM takes over.
So things are actually backwards from how they should be even though it is obvious that the F-16 has both capabilities and the actual actioning depends on the the setting of the relevant SEAM related switches
It’s mentioned on page #11 [PDF #14] of the study.
The relevant VTAS pages prove that there is historical evidence that the capability to optional select either system to interface with existed, they are after all now asking about systems that are actually in active service so it should be expected that a lower bar for implementation should be accepted.
The F-16 is also currently missing the full 120 CM, despite having the 4 ALE-47 dispensers installed on the model, hopefully will be fixed on release.
Pls correct me if I’m wrong, IRL merican F-16C is incapable of carrying Aim-7s, isn’t it?
it was capable of both carrying it and guiding it
There isn’t absolute proof, that US Airframes couldn’t be refit to carry them. As there are Client nations that use the F-16C that do / did, [ Iraq, Egypt, Bahrain, and Singapore] and that the refit is non standard as Sparrows do not show up in any of the documentation that is available online relating to other nation’s F-16C’s of similar vintage.
Could the Have Glass V F-16CJ (2010) that has been presented carry Sparrows, without modification? Almost certainly not, as there would be no need to be able to upload and fire stores that are no longer in stock considering the AMRAAM exists.
Also if you take a look at the following excerpt note how it mentions carriage by user counties F-16C/D , where it directly mentions the Block F-16A/B-15ADF in US service.
So should the US F-16C get access to AIM-7’s, No at least in my opinion as it isn’t accurate to the USAF Airframes (outside the F-16A/B-15ADF which is already present in the tech tree for this explicit reason).
If it did though assuming that the AIM-9M wasn’t being added they should be at least be able to be carried by the AMRAAM capable stations, of which they had been test fitted to which is apparent good enough for ordnance in some cases.
Well, “There isn’t absolute proof, that US Airframes couldn’t be refit to carry them” is kind of… You know, applicable to any plane and missile. Like, R-73 can be installed on F-16C if the latter gets an upgrade
Anyone know of a source I can share here that explains the elevation marks of the HUD? I know the longer one in the middle is for 0° elevation and that each of them are spaced 10° apart, but I can’t find a doc that I can use for a bug report.
Someone mentioned that the AGR-20 (APKWS II)couldn’t mount a HEAT warhead
It’s definitely been tested.
1 Like
Very glad to hear that the F-16’s will no longer turn like a brick compared to every other plane.
The new F-16C looks very promising too, especially if the rumors of Fox3/AMRAAM coming later this year are true.
Thank you mods for moving to the correct section!
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/gXT98jt0NYZy
Apparently the Crew Chief messed with the HUD compass heading settings :D
Should the early F-16 blocks have better STR than the F-16C?
Depends on speed, but yes. All future F-16’s will have worse maneuvering performance.