Theoretically, you can send a couple (thousand) messages to Boeng, Lockheed Martin, etc. mail, saying like: "The russian developers from Gaijin systematically underestimates technical characteristics of __, the USA aircraft/ tank has a win rate of only 30-40%… There are hints that the company is cooperating with the Russian government… ".
If you succeed and the company you spammed pays attention to your letter, Gaijin faces AT LEAST a multimillion-dollar fine (U.S. copyright, section 501(b)).
This talks a lot about f16XL and says it would’ve had the apg66 radar(page 82) and also yeah it talks about the AMRAAMs be mock ups and if I remember correctly we’re just bolted on or something like that. Also talks about their being two types of f16Xl one being a one seat version and the other being a 2 seat version
According to NASA, a lot of the inner parts were swapped to F-16C block 40 parts like the original F-16A block 10 Analog flight computer for the Block 40 DFLCCS
From a lot of comments I read, they really don’t know anything about the XL variant. For one, it went up against the F-15E during prototyping and only lost by a very small margin. One main reason was the funding to swap the airframes for the Delta wing design was gonna be costly as heck.
Second the F-16XL mainly used Block 40 Inside avionics and parts. For example you can find in one of the NASA reports, it carried 5000 Ib’s more fuel on average to the F-16C, had 40% more external stores, and being able to have a tighter turn rate and same radar as the block 40. It even had better lift to thrust ratio making it have insane AoA authority.
It’s an F-16 with less missiles than F-16ADF. Su-30MK2 is a Flanker with less missiles than Su-27SM. There is a substancial chance of F-16XL being 13.0