How? worse acceleration, worse top speed, worse climb, worse sustained turn rate. That’s not better in every regard, they are pretty comparable in a gunfight but in everything else the F-16C is better.
F-16D has better acceleration/speed and HMD + 180 countermasures, FM is a bit worse for dogfights but not by a big margin. Instead of aim120 it has derby, I don’t know which one I prefeer, the derby is much better at close range HOBS, but it seems to have tracking issues sometimes and bleeds a lot of speed when maneuvering after the motor burns out, like the r77.
I would pick the F-16D over an ADF with aim120, the lack of a proper radar and HMD is the main issue for me.
Block 15 is a whole 3kph slower at sea level, and is actually 41kph faster at its top speed
At sea level, the block 15 has marginally worse acceleration between the speeds of 500 and 1400 kph, not something you’d notice anyway
Climb rate is about the same (negligeable)
The block 15’s sustained turn rate is better than the 16C’s, and its minimum turn radius is smaller.
F-16D is also noticeably worse in a dogfight, and also uses the GE-100 engine, opposed to the 16C’s 229 engine, which means a noticeably worse TWR than both, which means it is both slower and has a worse climbrate however does have HMD+more countermeasures.
However, the AIM-120 is much better suited to air realistic battles, as the Derby has next to no range…
(and can be rolled like a sparrow)
Sea level is not very relevant, move up to 5km and the F-16C picks up speed a lot better, which matters for fox3 engagements.
At low altitude its just a bit better yes, but as you climb the block50 gets a wider margin, not a huge deal, I agree. But with a weapon load the F-16C gets even more advantage in TWR.
No, its the other way around. Block 50 has 1.5 to 2 deg/s advantage IIRC, which is meaningful. It has about the same STR than the block10 which is the best F-16 FM for dogfighting.
True, also the maximum instantaneous turn rate is a bit higher by 2-3 deg/s, but thats just for 1 turn.
Have you flown the F-16D? TWR is similar to the ADF and they have pretty comparable climb, but since the F-16D has considerable higher thrust, in level flights or shallow climbs the F-16D just pulls away from the F-16A, even from the block10.
The F-16C does essencially everything better than the F-16D since it is only 13kg heavier than it and has even higher thrust output. Now the F-16C barack II might be a better sidegrade from the block50, same thrust as the F-16D but also considerably lighter.
Yeah, the derby is more fun to use for me, but you gotta use them like radar-guided python 3s. Another negative is the smaller warhead, which sometimes just tickles your target, like the micas, but even worse because at least the micas have the energy and speed to reliably hit directly on target.
F-16C barak II is a sidegrade. Not sure if I prefer the bit more pull and the ability to use Derbys for the engine power decrease but wtv
F-16D is a boat. it does not “pull away from the 16A”, the 16As are faster. Sure the 16A has worse static thrust, but the peak TWR (and non static thrust) is all in the ADF’s favour.
As for rate performance, the ADF outperforms the C (28.8 vs 27.5)
Maybe you or I are reading the graphs wrong?
no, it means in extended (or short) one circle fighting, the ADF will win.
I meant that the F-16D is a better alternative than the F-16ADF with fox3 for the F-16C, the F-16C is stil arguably better than the F-16D except 1v1 fox3 HOBS fight.
F-16D is not a boat by any means, it has the worst STR of any F-16 but it’s still decent, and it for SURE accelerates better than F-16As. Everybody knows stat cards are wrong, but usually stat card climb rate is reliable for a clean jet with minimum fuel at sea level. But even that value is wrong for the F-16D and a few other israeli top tier jets.
You can’t sustain those even with 1kg of fuel, seems like you are doing something wrong. Also statshark is not very reliable. All I talked about was tested with with real time data with WTRTI by actually flying those jets in-game in similar conditions.
Anyway, STR should be the SEP 0 line, and with F-16s you can’t really sustain anything over 800kph IAS reliably even with ace crew.
Why would an F-16C do one circle if he sees the ADF pulling hard for 1C? Just keep rate speeds in lag pursuit the ADF will eventually be an easy kill if he dumps speed like that
You clearly don’t know what you are talking about. The F-16D is heavier but also has considerably highter thrust. The engines are not the same. You can even check that in game hangar if you don’t have the jet
so it doesn’t eat shit to an attack? also in an ARB situation, you are rarely not going to survive or not get 3rd partied long enough to win a ratefight. One circle performance matters a lot more in air realistic battles than sustained.
Of which it won’t get to that point as the AMRAAM has more range than the derby.
you can, with ace crew, as the graph indicates. Statshark isn’t the most reliable, which is why I severely doubt the block 15 loses 2 circle to the much heavier block 50.
(maybe irl, where the early F-16s FCS severely limited it’s performance- of course not modelled in game)
In comparison to the ADF or any of the other F-16 flight models, it is.
Also believe statshark has the wrong data for either the F-16C Barak II or the F-16D, as they show up as the same weight despite the F-16D handling noticeably worse in game.
I would argue that keeping your speed makes it easier to survive getting thrid partied, you won’t get the F-16C in a short time because their dogfight performance is almost identical.
Range hardly matters in a 1v1. You won’t win against a mirage 2k with micas for example, a 10km fox3 shoot can be reliably notched even with the F-15E. Also the derby can be launched at extreme HOBS, the aim120 not so much.
Not even the typhoon will do those STRs. The F-16C is about 23deg/s with minimum fuel and no weapon load, the ADF is like 1.5deg/s lower I think. I could test them again eventually but for sure the F-16C does a bit better.
Static thrust and in flight thrust doesn’t mean much. pretty sure thats why people underestimate the J7D’s engine, as its stronger at altitude (or vice versa I can’t remember)
If static thrust meant everything, the Su-33 should be faster than the regular Su-27
