One more thing. Didn't clean Block 52 have the ability to super-cruise until the meaning of the term was changed? In the 90's due to Raptor's ability it was changed to be "1.5 Mach without afterburner". Of course people who were designing the F-16 were thinking of it's super-cruise capability, but since the Production F-16 was much heavier and Pentagon wasn't interested, it was never developed.
Recently, there have been reports that the USAF is considering another replacement for the F-16, other than the F-35, because of concerns over running costs. Do you think these concerns are justified and if so, do you think an updated variant of the F16, such as the F-16XL, could be a suitable replacement?
The F-16 and the AR-15 have been described with a similar analogy: they are the "PC" of fighters and guns. You can build them and customize them however you want not just because the chassis is conducive to modularity, but because the logistics, manufacturer base, customer support, etc is built on satisfying and upgrading for that customization. The "Low" in the "Hi-Lo" philosophy was geared towards economic advantage, and so ensured a business model that could be cheaply and ergonomically maintained - while the Hi was constantly expensive and incorporating hi-risk technologies, the LO simply incorporated proven technologies for a customer base that gave it economics of scale.
@@rykhaven3331 I also just made this analogy, while watching this video, so I asked myself what's the Russian Fighter Jet equivalent of the AK-47... Perhaps the Mig-21!
@@GonzoTehGreat but today you can still make vipers ar 15 and ak 47 but china is where the mig 21 has its latest version and today its not made so not the same.
Aahem,,,check out the original YF-16 prototype, the current is a bloated abomination. The Mitsubishi F-2 was the pinnacle. czcams.com/video/fFbYn4rOa1M/video.html
I read that Harry HIllaker, the F-16 chief designer, said in a convention regarding the placement of canards that the ideal place was on someboye elses plane, not his.
I walked the production line in late 80’s at general dynamics during an interview. I was surprised to see that under the sleek outer mold line, the production methods were straightforward, with lots of corrugated panels, simple skin and stringer construction, not a lot of exotic materials or vacuum bonded parts. Maintenance was straightforward. The use of then-new precision castings was a feature. The electronics were revolutionary, but the structure was old school.
Please do a similar video for the F-5, I was recently reading about the South Korean variant. Damn its good!! Considering its even older then the F-16. Tbh you can also talk about the F-4 in a similar way , (I know you know this ) have you seen the recent upgrades by the Israelis to the Turkish F-4s, they you can talk about other variants adapted by other nations like Japan and South Korea. You can also make a video and (as you mentioned) on the mig-21 and its variants because I actually find it even more interesting because it has more drastic changes like the new chines trainer or the former communist countries adapting western systems in the old mig-21 shells, showing how adaptable it is (i.e Romania and Croatia). PLEASE do one of these video ideas, there is plenty of information... and with you unique knowledge and resources you can definitely make it interesting and bring facts that very few people know (that's Literally what happens in every video of yours). Thank you very much and keep up the insanely amazing work you do.
Boyd and the Fighter Mafia had this idea that we would mass-produce thousands of daytime/WVR F-16s with no radars or RWRs to outmatch Soviet MiG-21s with pilots trained heavily in BFM. They would be vectored to contact kind of like an F-104, slash at enemy fighters with fast attacks using the AIM-9, then egress the fight and if jumped, have superior Energy-Maneuverability to out-radius the MiG-21 and get within rear quadrant weapons employment control zone for either AIM-9J or Guns. Several things happened around the same time that made this concept obsolete and invalid: 1. Fighter radars actually improved to a state that they worked very well, with the F-15's APG-63 being the flagship breakthrough in solid state pulse-doppler, multi-mode radar. 2. The AIM-9L all-aspect Sidewinder meant you could face-shoot pre-merge, and re-orient for follow-on shots or egress. 3. Not only the NATO MSIP partner nations (Norway, Belgium, Netherlands, and Denmark), but the USAF wanted a replacement for the multi-role F-4E and something to fill the gap with the transition of the A-7D to ANG units, while the far less capable A-10A replaced A-7Ds in those squadrons as well. The A-10 would never be as survivable as the A-7D or F-16 past the FEBA in a high saturation mobile SAM environment expected in Europe and Korea, so the F-16 would have to fill that role. 4. The evolution of solid state and Digital electronic systems made the F-16 far more capable as a multirole fighter, with a primary interdiction/strike role and nuclear attack role in the USAF, with CAS and later SEAD as additional mission sets to be absorbed. When the F-16A started competing in USAF and NATO precision bombing competitions against dedicated strike/attack aircraft, it immediately placed very high and then started winning them as the norm, much to the surprise of everyone outside of the initial F-16A pilots from 388th TFW at Hill AFB. The dot of death CCIP HUD mode driven by the bombing computer was simple and quick to use, with dumb bomb accuracy that allowed the Israelis to drop 2000lb bombs through the same hole in the Osirak nuclear reactor dome in Iraq. It was clear that there was even more growth potential for the F-16A, and plans for an improved model/Block upgrade from 1/5/10/15 began with lots of feedback from the initial operational pilots in the USAF and NATO MSIP partners. The F-16C Block 25 ushered in major changes to the cockpit with dual MFDs, a better APG-68 multi-mode radar, the PW-220 motor as a standard, and expanded Air-to-Air and Air-to-Ground weapons employment. Block 30 brought in the new GE F110-GE-100 motor with 29,000lb thrust, Level IV multi-TGT employment for the AIM-120A, expanded memory, secure comms radios, and HARM missile employment capability. The F-16 just from 1977 to 1987 underwent a massive transformation into a far more capable multirole fighter than the fighter mafia ever envisioned.
The aggressor squadron F-16s for both USAF and Navy are the coolest F-16s around even if they are the oldest! Love all the Nevada F-16 aggressor footage!! Great vids love all of them!!
The F-16, love of my life (I know, it's sad ;)). But seriously: the lines are so smooth, the shark-like appearance and once you've seen a Viper perform on an air show or at a firing range (the Brrrrrt of the M-61 Vulcan). I Remember back in the late 1970ies, being a young kid and my dad took me to an open day at a RNLAF base and seeing the red, white and blue prototype fly! The thunder unlike anything I've ever heard. Never looked at a sportscar again in my life. Seen RNLAF perform DACT over my small hometown against 32nd TFS F-15s from Soesterberg airbase multipkle times back in the 1980ies, my kid brother and I watching with binoculars. The F-15s were like angry lions harassed by enoying wasps, they just couldn't shake them. A good friend of mine, a retired RNLAF colonel and Starfighter/Viper jockey said the F-15's - which they called flying tennis courts - never stood a chance in WVR. Gonna miss the aircraft as F-35s are taking over. It's an OK fighter but not nearly as spectacular as the Viper.
We went from Edwards AFB in 1980 to München, West Germany after seeing the YF-16 and FSD development early F-16s. F-4s and F-104s were still prominent in the air back then in USAFE/NATO. Every F-15C and F-16C pilot that has transitioned to the F-35A says it's unfair fighting the F-35 against the older jets. It humiliates them all in BVR, and does more than hold its own in BFM (while carrying up to 2000lb bombs internally and makes no difference). RNLAF F-35A pilots did a bunch of BFM sorties against Red Air Aggressor F-16Cs out at Nellis after some campaign work in large joint exercises. On Day 1, the Aggressors showed up with 2 External Fuel Tanks since they had heard a family model F-16D beat the F-35A easily. After losing repeatedly (RNLAF F-35A pilots at the time were all senior F-16A MLU Viper drivers), the Aggressors showed up with only the centerline 300 gallon tanks the next day. Same thing, more defeat. On the next sorties, they showed up slick with only CATM AIM-9 and ACMI pods on the wingtips to try to even out the fight some, with a more even exchange range. You would never take a Viper into combat configured with 2 AIM-9s on the wingtips and nothing else, and it still wasn't as dominant as they thought they would be. The Aggressors RTB'd, and the RNLAF F-35As didn't follow them. While the Aggressors were waiting for debrief, the F-35s went out to the test ranges for something else, then came back later. F-16 pilots said, "Where did you guys go?" RNLAF F-35A pilots: "We had do go drop JDAMs and GBU-12s in the test ranges. This plane is amazing. Yeah, we were carrying bombs the whole time we were doing BFM with you." F-16 pilots were stunned. A lot of them requested F-35 after doing their IP time at Luke so they could end up in operational F-35A squadrons. A former TOPGUN FWS instructor USMC F/A-18 pilot who converted to the F-35B says he looks back at the Hornet and says, "Damn you're ugly." A Navy Super Hornet pilot who converted to F-35C said if he never sees the inside of a Super Hornet again, he couldn't care less.
@@LRRPFco52 Don't mind me. The F-35 will stand more than its ground when push comes to shove, but I just can't get the same warm, fuzzy feeling looking at it when compared to the F-16. It's like comparing a 1970ies Ford Mustang to the present day Bugatti Chiron. The latter checks all the boxes in terms of high performance and technology, but it appears to be inanimate. Too much perfection for my taste (and certainly for my budget). The roar of the V-8 get's me ticking while the Chirons engine makes me smile wearily. And I guess that's all part and parcel of having passed 53 and realizing you're being overtaken by progress. As for all those who fly the F-35, service it and may have to fight in it one day, I have nothing but respect. So forgive my Archie Bunker act. ;)
And it’s been the testbed and deployment platform for auto GCAS, which has saved the lives of a number of pilots. Particularly important in a 9+ G airframe.
Thanks another brief and well made video on a great aircraft. I remember the LFA programme and the YF16 and 17 and recall the emphasis being stated on money saving but their approach to upgradeability was eye-opening, 4k units later for the F16 variants alone along with the successful F18 programme is quite an achievement almost 50 years later. The conformal leading edge extensions on the F16 still pleases my eye.
Great video! Just discovered the channel. Excellent content! With the popularity of modern combat flight simulations like Digital Combat Simulator (DCS), you will probably find a large audience with that crowd. Any chance you could produce a video like this for the F/A-18 Hornet and Super Hornet?
2:50 most upgraded plane in history... I've heard the final Starfighters were over twice as heavy as the first service craft. It was also used by a wide range of countries so may be similar.
Thank you, this video is informative as always, yet I believe you could explain more about F-16 + F-15 if you did it in a series. I would really like to know how did american government and designers come to idea of such a mafia fighter, including some description of EM strategy (I believe it is energy management strategy, isn't it?). And of course like is a must!
Thank you for making these awesome videos! You talked about the potential of a delta-canard F-16, but what about THE delta-canard F-16 that is in actual service? I'm talking about the J-10 of course, haha!
Viper block 70 with trust vector and canards whould just be the best in the world but also not cheap... one can dream still it kill mig 29 and mig 25 with no loss agaisnt those planes and only lost one plane to mirage from Greece and one from india ? So not bad only f 15 eagle has 100 air combat wins with zero loss has better war performance... so far
Bravo, Thanks !!! I hope in a future you can analize the F16XL, the best F16 ever built and so good that they don't want to produce (cheper faster high range, good for Italy that was with F104)
F-16XL would have accomplished most of what the USAF uses the Viper for, except it lacked sufficient thrust-to-weight ratio. Every single test pilot stated this in their reports-how they liked the aircraft payload/range, but were concerned about its lack of thrust compared to the F-16A and F-15. They saw it as a step backwards in the trend of 1:1 or better T/W in the 4th Gen fighters. If an engine like the F119 had been available, with carbon fiber and other weight reduction materials for the structure, it could have been more viable. We were at Edwards AFB when the initial F-16XL testing was being done. The test pilot reports are now available online.
Thanks for another great video! Would love to hear what you think about Gen 4 upgrade programs like the F-15EX program and how they fit into the near-future strategic picture.
The new conformal fuel tanks for the F-16 are not an intuitive shape but I'm sure there is a very good and interesting aerodynamic reason for them being so square looking. Anyone else think this would make an interesting video?
I wish that my country would upgrade it's fleet of F-16's. Poland has only 48 F-16 C/D Block 52. We could refit them and buy at least 24 F-16 V. Some dedicated EW planes would also be useful.
@@EEEEEEE354 What? I'm serious - you do know that Kaliningrad region is one of the most militarized in the World? They do have s-400's etc there. And best Russian AESA radars. And Su-35 with IRST. If you think that 32 F-35's are gonna handle dozen SAM batteries and about 400 fighter and fighter-bomber planes that would come in the first attack - and that without Electronic Warfare planes and a large number of weapons platforms - than you must be one of those Americans that think that anything American is flawless and perfect and cannot be even endangered by "other's" technologies. I'm sorry, but do you have actual knowledge of Military Operations, Logistics, Tactics, Strategy etc. like I do? Or are you just a "fan"? Because my American friends from USAF, USN, USMC and many other branches and agencies of your Military and Government - tell me opposite. Sure. Military Industrial Complex wants to sell us F-35's. But they say - wait couple of years - you will still be getting them very late, because of the waiting list - in the meantime have Airforce that exceeds 100 (Ideally around 250) Fighters and Fighter Bombers, plus EW planes at the very least. I won't go into details, but given I know this people from Afghanistan and Iraq - I will trust them more than your "judgement".
@@jannegrey593 Well, that was a lot in response to my small comment... You made a lot of assumptions about what I was insinuating here. No, i do not think your country can handle Russia with 32 F-35s. Thats why Poland is in NATO. There is no way you guys are matching the Russians pound for pound, even if you have a very limited number of the most capable fighters. One on one the SU-35 is no match for an F-35, but they have a fleet that dwarfs yours. Even if you upgraded those F-16s and bought dedicated EW platforms (how do you suppose the waiting list for all of those unsigned contracts will be any shorter than just acquiring more F-35s??). And when did I ever claim our equipment is flawless or cannot be challenged by other technologies? Whats with all the hostility? Why are people like you on the internet so quick to jump to conclusions based on very simple and short statements. Is it because im american? Don't assume i'm "one of those" americans. I simply believe spending your money in a hopeless uphill battle against a country with 3 times your GDP is a waste of time. I understand military operations, logistics, tactics, and strategy I assure you. I know them well enough to know that you will never win against russia. Not with your economy, not with your military. Upgraded F-16s won't do the job. Dedicated EW platforms wont do it either. Those 32 F-35's aren't there so you can fight russia alone, they are there so you can be well equipped to contribute to a joint NATO effort. So no, you don't need those other planes. There is no need to militarize the world even further than it already is. Money is best spent on more important things like healthcare, infrastructure, education. You know, things that don't involve killing people... Now, don't go putting words in my mouth.
@@EEEEEEE354 I apologize. Frankly I felt bad, 2 minutes after writing that comment. You're correct. Amount of Hostility (which I was surprised myself at after re-reading my comment) and assumptions are unfair on my part. I can only offer an "excuse" that I have just finished with.... let's say very gung-ho American Commenter to my other Comment - this one was on Binkov's channel - that basically claimed the same as you did, but with "32 F-35's is ALL you need" and "pshaw - those Russian SAM's are shit, American is the best" - and it was like 50th this type of comment I've had to deal with in short order. So I basically vented on you, which was not only rude, but unprofessional of me as a military analyst. Again this is just excuse, which DOESN'T excuse me venting on you. I agree with your Sentiment - spending more on healthcare and helping people. However remember that Poland has had military poorly funded for decades now. And we're frontline country. I also have knowledge of local "politics" - and I know there were plans to spend this money better and in a way that would make not only Polish army be able to hand threats better, but at cheaper costs. They were thrown out, because our Government has a boner for buying American, while completely ignoring possible co-operation with European Industries. As for NATO - we still tend to remember 1938 and 1939 - of course I know we can't handle Russia alone. But if the attack happens we have to be able to buy enough time, before our allies sign a peace treaty that makes Russia not to go into Germany. And fight well enough in other ways that if our allies decide to help, the have support. Which brings me back to F-35's - there will be no transfer of technology, our deals with European governments on other aerial vehicles (such as attack helicopters) were broken, when our new and fascist government came into power (and miracoulously cancelled a deal that would actually benefit the poorest region of Poland - which is their base. As long as they are poor the keep voting nationalists in). They also tend to forget about logistics etc. I would love if the Wars all over the world stopped. But given recent War in Armenia I cannot say I'm optimistic about that. So military is still needed, unfortunately. BTW did you know that a year ago there were 6 countries leading development of drone swarms, with only US, Russia, Israel and Poland having some Demonstrators? Polish one was de-funded, even though it was better than US and Russia's. You know why? Our government decided that with F-35's we will be able to beat Russia - some of those morons actually believe that "American stuff is so OP that it will obliterate Russia". I want to again apologize to you. My behavior was unacceptable - do you wish me to do something with my previous post? Or leave it as testament of my stupidity and as evidence of my mistake? I leave the decision entirely to you.
@@jannegrey593 I would much rather an F-35 to face Russian SAMs than F-16, and I am NO fan of the F-35. In that environment, radar stealth would be a minimum criterion for survivability. Are you pissed that Germany wants Russian gas? What is the point of a defensive military if you give your enemy the ability to shut down your heat in winter? May as well not spend the money on defense anyway because the Germans will give in to any Russian demand once they are freezing in the winter. I guess Angela Merkel is pining for her happy youth under the Soviets.
6:20 delta vs. traditional wing. I've heard deltas lose energy very quickly in turns? I think I've heard that in Vietnam, Phantoms were told to get in circle fights with MiGs; while the MiG could initially maneuver faster, it bled off energy much faster as well and within 720 degrees of turn the Phantom could always end up on the MiG's tail.
As soon it was acquired by the Israel AF, it was sent to destroy Iraq's nuclear plant, very far away and difficult target, thanks to its superb design already in its first version. The F-16 is the backbone of IAF. It is heavily modified, new radar, new avionics, electronics, pods... Although details were never released, it was test bed for stealth capabilities not included in the original design. Its structure was also modified for support of extra bombing capabilities, as well as extra range. A squadron of F-16i is like a spec ops team, with different specialized units for different scenarios.
The best fighter plane ever. Super agile, fast, smart, indefinitely upgradable, moderately priced with greatest bubble canopy. I don't like the conformal fuel tanks though. F-16 is a fighter not a mule.
Interesting that airframe life could be extended from 4000 hours to 12000 hours. I am curious as to how much weight that added to the structure. My guess is, probably not that much. On a different note, I like the F-16 aesthetically, but it's almost too pretty, kind of like the P-51. I'm more of a P-47 man.
In the grand scheme of things, I predict stealthy airframe will be like popup cameras for smartphones. There was a time when it seemed like the only way forward. But quickly we realised that the future was about software and electronics not hardware. Popup camera mechanism took up too much space inside a phone only to increase a dot worth of screen in the front. In future with the help of different bands of radars and predictive software so as to make the radar prediction more accurate, the benifit of stealth is not as much as compared to the problems it brings in regards to payload and maintanance. So in conclusion, a plane that just works, might be upgraded electronically to the point that stealth and other things don't matter.
Excellent contet as always. What about a second part with the lessons learn in the battle? Israeli F16´s are the much heavily modified one´s flying around... Thanks!
F-16 is a great light fighter and is still capable. However, the scenarios where a light fighter is appropriate is becoming more restricted over time. Advances in sensors, off bore sight targeting, highly manueverable missiles, long range missiles, and missiles with better sensors are pushing likely fights further out and making dogfights less likely. If a dogfight does happen these advances would make a double kill of both sides a more likely outcome. But, there remain some areas where it is appropriate such as in Taiwan, where combat will likely be at short range anyways because of the close proximity of opposing forces.
Ever hear of the Gripen E? Arm that with 4 Meteors, and it will probably knock down anything in the sky. Gripen E is in the same size category as the F-16, just more modern and capable.
@@kostaskritsilas2681 Gripen E is a capable light fighter but it is limited by the size of the radar antenna in the nose and the total number of hardpoints and total stores weight. While it has a high quality radar, a fighter with a larger radar for the same level of technology will have an advantage in detection, track, and lock ranges. To take advantage of the full potential capability of the Meteor missile, a bit larger radar is required. They will still function on Gripen E but the ability to guide them to a target at maximum range is somewhat reduced. A medium weight fighter of similar technology level and layout such as Rafale will be more capable at extreme range. It will have a larger radar and can carry more missiles. This makes such medium to large fighters far more likely to get first look, first shot, first kill. The size of the radar antenna and number of missiles available make a huge difference in BVR combat.
Yet another informative video that explains the Viper's success to this day. Although I must admit that I find the Viper a bit boring compared to many other 4th gen fighters, its just so generic.
Excellent video again. My heart leaps up as soon as I see you've uploaded a new video. May I ask an impertinent question? Could you tell us more about your background? Or did I miss the episode in which you did exactly that? And please, please, please, could you do an episode on the Italian/Brazilian AMX one day? There's so little on that little gem. The lightweight fighter maffio certainly loved that design. I'd love to see/hear your take on that aircraft.
I was hoping tht one day you will do a video on F16 because the content and info found on your channel can't be found anywhere else on the Internet, that's why it is held in such high regard among aviation enthusiast community. F16 has always been my favourite plane the Russian Flanker series is beautiful but the viper is just a notch above the rest.
Again an awesome informative video. Thanks! Could you do a video on the NF 5 a i.e. the aerodynamic improvements. Same problems as with the F16 AMRAAM. And the start of the ever longer strakes at the intake of a same low tech fighter technology. The f5 forerunner of the yf 17 fly off to the yf16 and thus f18.
While the added weight of the AMRAAM mounted on the wingtips caused fatigue problems like you mentioned, the choice to mount heavier missiles there reduced flutter and cut down on the related metal fatigue in the wing.
The Fighter Mafia were smart men but they were trying to build a fighter to fight past wars. Even by the end of Vietnam, which they based their ideas off of, long ranged missiles were becoming a mature and effective technology. Had the F-16 been the fighter those guys wanted, it would have been obsolete by the 80's.
I enjoy watching videos made by people who truly love aircraft. You're videos have many bits and pieces not offered by other channels. Nice job. The corny 'Dad' humor is absolutely dreadfully funny and if left out of these videos would be a huge disservice and utter catastrophe for viewers everywhere.
Question for you. That bit of footage starting at 1:45: the YF-16 is 'waddling' down the runway. Is that an early FLCS error or a deliberate mishandling of the plane? Or something else?
Question: 10:07 I see upgraded F-16s with sidelobes on the airframe. That will be usefull to store additional fuel and electronics. But is it still supersonic? It seems it doesn't meet the Whitcomb area rule.
QUESTION: Funny, that it was a problem to carry the AIM-7 instead of the AIM-9 on the wingtips and that the AIM-7, due to the much heavier weight created cracks in the outer wing section. Why is it todays USAF standard to carry the heavy AIM-120 on the wingtips instead of the AIM-9? Did LM strengthen the wing structure?
@@Millennium7HistoryTech thanks for answering. I heard this question many times in the last year, but never heard a satisfying answer. Structural enhancement makes the most sense. Best aviation channel ever 👍🏻
Nice summary of how the F-16s have evolved over the years to remain up to date/ relevant, but I'm confused about your statement late in the video suggesting the F-16 V has an IRST sensor. I don't believe that's the case though LM has developed an IRST 'Legion' pod that can be carried by both the F-16 & F-15. www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/products/legion-pod.html
Great video about the F16. In your opinion, assuming US congress allow a country to purchase either an F16 or F35a. Which is better? Given the unit cost of F35a is cheaper than a F16 but maintenance costs F16 is cheaper. Hope you do a video comparing about this.
and it still has the best cuppola of all today's fighters. I wonder why only the F22 adopted a frameless canopy. Anyway the F16 turned into the successor of the F5 (since the F20 was killed by politics)
Think of the types the F-16 has replaced: F-104, F-105, F-106, F-4, F-5, A-4, A-7, Mirage III/V, Draken. And in some cases the MiG 21. It's little wonder such a massive production run was achieved.
Perfect. An interesting spinoff was the famous leaked report where the Gripen was deemed unfit. The conclusion has been generalized to saying that the Gripen is rubbish... It is simply the plane with the lower SEP and no wonder it is not suited for the alpine environment.
@@michaelkeller5008 I would have thought the Swedish environment The Gripen E is designed for was pretty close to Austrian/Swiss environment, or am I missing something?
For me, this fighter is the Manny Pacquiao of the skies. They both may have been around for a while, but both are superb at what they were put on this planet to do. Look at how Manny put 'The Young Pretender' Keith Thurman away not so long ago. World Champions at 40. With all the modern day talent strutting their stuff? Unheard of? Yeh right.
Support me on Subscribestar www.subscribestar.com/millennium-7-history-technology
Support me on Patreon www.patreon.com/Millennium7
One more thing. Didn't clean Block 52 have the ability to super-cruise until the meaning of the term was changed? In the 90's due to Raptor's ability it was changed to be "1.5 Mach without afterburner". Of course people who were designing the F-16 were thinking of it's super-cruise capability, but since the Production F-16 was much heavier and Pentagon wasn't interested, it was never developed.
Recently, there have been reports that the USAF is considering another replacement for the F-16, other than the F-35, because of concerns over running costs.
Do you think these concerns are justified and if so, do you think an updated variant of the F16, such as the F-16XL, could be a suitable replacement?
Simply the best aviation channel on CZcams
I'm torn between him and Bismarck. Well...I don't want to compare them, the're both excellent.
@@vaclav_fejt Bismarck is good, but I'm sorry I often find him rather boring to watch
Let's not forget that the F-16 is still one of the sleekest and most beautiful fighter planes out there.
If it looks good, it flies good 👍
The F-16 and the AR-15 have been described with a similar analogy: they are the "PC" of fighters and guns. You can build them and customize them however you want not just because the chassis is conducive to modularity, but because the logistics, manufacturer base, customer support, etc is built on satisfying and upgrading for that customization.
The "Low" in the "Hi-Lo" philosophy was geared towards economic advantage, and so ensured a business model that could be cheaply and ergonomically maintained - while the Hi was constantly expensive and incorporating hi-risk technologies, the LO simply incorporated proven technologies for a customer base that gave it economics of scale.
@@rykhaven3331 I also just made this analogy, while watching this video, so I asked myself what's the Russian Fighter Jet equivalent of the AK-47...
Perhaps the Mig-21!
@@GonzoTehGreat but today you can still make vipers ar 15 and ak 47 but china is where the mig 21 has its latest version and today its not made so not the same.
Aahem,,,check out the original YF-16 prototype, the current is a bloated abomination.
The Mitsubishi F-2 was the pinnacle.
czcams.com/video/fFbYn4rOa1M/video.html
I read that Harry HIllaker, the F-16 chief designer, said in a convention regarding the placement of canards that the ideal place was on someboye elses plane, not his.
Interesting! Why though?
I walked the production line in late 80’s at general dynamics during an interview. I was surprised to see that under the sleek outer mold line, the production methods were straightforward, with lots of corrugated panels, simple skin and stringer construction, not a lot of exotic materials or vacuum bonded parts. Maintenance was straightforward. The use of then-new precision castings was a feature. The electronics were revolutionary, but the structure was old school.
1:36 the (unofficial!) First flight. During a high speed taxi run it began to 'wobble' so the pilot just took it up for a circuit!
Please do a similar video for the F-5, I was recently reading about the South Korean variant. Damn its good!! Considering its even older then the F-16. Tbh you can also talk about the F-4 in a similar way , (I know you know this ) have you seen the recent upgrades by the Israelis to the Turkish F-4s, they you can talk about other variants adapted by other nations like Japan and South Korea. You can also make a video and (as you mentioned) on the mig-21 and its variants because I actually find it even more interesting because it has more drastic changes like the new chines trainer or the former communist countries adapting western systems in the old mig-21 shells, showing how adaptable it is (i.e Romania and Croatia).
PLEASE do one of these video ideas, there is plenty of information... and with you unique knowledge and resources you can definitely make it interesting and bring facts that very few people know (that's Literally what happens in every video of yours).
Thank you very much and keep up the insanely amazing work you do.
Boyd and the Fighter Mafia had this idea that we would mass-produce thousands of daytime/WVR F-16s with no radars or RWRs to outmatch Soviet MiG-21s with pilots trained heavily in BFM. They would be vectored to contact kind of like an F-104, slash at enemy fighters with fast attacks using the AIM-9, then egress the fight and if jumped, have superior Energy-Maneuverability to out-radius the MiG-21 and get within rear quadrant weapons employment control zone for either AIM-9J or Guns.
Several things happened around the same time that made this concept obsolete and invalid:
1. Fighter radars actually improved to a state that they worked very well, with the F-15's APG-63 being the flagship breakthrough in solid state pulse-doppler, multi-mode radar.
2. The AIM-9L all-aspect Sidewinder meant you could face-shoot pre-merge, and re-orient for follow-on shots or egress.
3. Not only the NATO MSIP partner nations (Norway, Belgium, Netherlands, and Denmark), but the USAF wanted a replacement for the multi-role F-4E and something to fill the gap with the transition of the A-7D to ANG units, while the far less capable A-10A replaced A-7Ds in those squadrons as well. The A-10 would never be as survivable as the A-7D or F-16 past the FEBA in a high saturation mobile SAM environment expected in Europe and Korea, so the F-16 would have to fill that role.
4. The evolution of solid state and Digital electronic systems made the F-16 far more capable as a multirole fighter, with a primary interdiction/strike role and nuclear attack role in the USAF, with CAS and later SEAD as additional mission sets to be absorbed.
When the F-16A started competing in USAF and NATO precision bombing competitions against dedicated strike/attack aircraft, it immediately placed very high and then started winning them as the norm, much to the surprise of everyone outside of the initial F-16A pilots from 388th TFW at Hill AFB. The dot of death CCIP HUD mode driven by the bombing computer was simple and quick to use, with dumb bomb accuracy that allowed the Israelis to drop 2000lb bombs through the same hole in the Osirak nuclear reactor dome in Iraq.
It was clear that there was even more growth potential for the F-16A, and plans for an improved model/Block upgrade from 1/5/10/15 began with lots of feedback from the initial operational pilots in the USAF and NATO MSIP partners. The F-16C Block 25 ushered in major changes to the cockpit with dual MFDs, a better APG-68 multi-mode radar, the PW-220 motor as a standard, and expanded Air-to-Air and Air-to-Ground weapons employment. Block 30 brought in the new GE F110-GE-100 motor with 29,000lb thrust, Level IV multi-TGT employment for the AIM-120A, expanded memory, secure comms radios, and HARM missile employment capability.
The F-16 just from 1977 to 1987 underwent a massive transformation into a far more capable multirole fighter than the fighter mafia ever envisioned.
Absolutely LOVE the MapMen-esque humor in the introduction! Made me laugh out loud
The aggressor squadron F-16s for both USAF and Navy are the coolest F-16s around even if they are the oldest! Love all the Nevada F-16 aggressor footage!! Great vids love all of them!!
The F-16XL Delta had a fantastic increase in overall performance.
As always a well made and informative video.
The F-16, love of my life (I know, it's sad ;)). But seriously: the lines are so smooth, the shark-like appearance and once you've seen a Viper perform on an air show or at a firing range (the Brrrrrt of the M-61 Vulcan). I Remember back in the late 1970ies, being a young kid and my dad took me to an open day at a RNLAF base and seeing the red, white and blue prototype fly! The thunder unlike anything I've ever heard. Never looked at a sportscar again in my life. Seen RNLAF perform DACT over my small hometown against 32nd TFS F-15s from Soesterberg airbase multipkle times back in the 1980ies, my kid brother and I watching with binoculars. The F-15s were like angry lions harassed by enoying wasps, they just couldn't shake them. A good friend of mine, a retired RNLAF colonel and Starfighter/Viper jockey said the F-15's - which they called flying tennis courts - never stood a chance in WVR. Gonna miss the aircraft as F-35s are taking over. It's an OK fighter but not nearly as spectacular as the Viper.
The f35s regularly beat f16s in WVR
@@Aaron-wq3jz Probably. But I still find the F-16 the better looking one. :D
@@Pincer88 fair enough 😂
We went from Edwards AFB in 1980 to München, West Germany after seeing the YF-16 and FSD development early F-16s. F-4s and F-104s were still prominent in the air back then in USAFE/NATO. Every F-15C and F-16C pilot that has transitioned to the F-35A says it's unfair fighting the F-35 against the older jets. It humiliates them all in BVR, and does more than hold its own in BFM (while carrying up to 2000lb bombs internally and makes no difference). RNLAF F-35A pilots did a bunch of BFM sorties against Red Air Aggressor F-16Cs out at Nellis after some campaign work in large joint exercises. On Day 1, the Aggressors showed up with 2 External Fuel Tanks since they had heard a family model F-16D beat the F-35A easily. After losing repeatedly (RNLAF F-35A pilots at the time were all senior F-16A MLU Viper drivers), the Aggressors showed up with only the centerline 300 gallon tanks the next day. Same thing, more defeat. On the next sorties, they showed up slick with only CATM AIM-9 and ACMI pods on the wingtips to try to even out the fight some, with a more even exchange range. You would never take a Viper into combat configured with 2 AIM-9s on the wingtips and nothing else, and it still wasn't as dominant as they thought they would be.
The Aggressors RTB'd, and the RNLAF F-35As didn't follow them. While the Aggressors were waiting for debrief, the F-35s went out to the test ranges for something else, then came back later. F-16 pilots said, "Where did you guys go?"
RNLAF F-35A pilots: "We had do go drop JDAMs and GBU-12s in the test ranges. This plane is amazing. Yeah, we were carrying bombs the whole time we were doing BFM with you."
F-16 pilots were stunned. A lot of them requested F-35 after doing their IP time at Luke so they could end up in operational F-35A squadrons.
A former TOPGUN FWS instructor USMC F/A-18 pilot who converted to the F-35B says he looks back at the Hornet and says, "Damn you're ugly."
A Navy Super Hornet pilot who converted to F-35C said if he never sees the inside of a Super Hornet again, he couldn't care less.
@@LRRPFco52 Don't mind me. The F-35 will stand more than its ground when push comes to shove, but I just can't get the same warm, fuzzy feeling looking at it when compared to the F-16. It's like comparing a 1970ies Ford Mustang to the present day Bugatti Chiron. The latter checks all the boxes in terms of high performance and technology, but it appears to be inanimate. Too much perfection for my taste (and certainly for my budget). The roar of the V-8 get's me ticking while the Chirons engine makes me smile wearily. And I guess that's all part and parcel of having passed 53 and realizing you're being overtaken by progress.
As for all those who fly the F-35, service it and may have to fight in it one day, I have nothing but respect. So forgive my Archie Bunker act. ;)
First I press Like and then Play
And it’s been the testbed and deployment platform for auto GCAS, which has saved the lives of a number of pilots. Particularly important in a 9+ G airframe.
The F16 might just as well be the best and most durable designed single engine fighter jet ever. The exact reverse of the F117. A good video indeed.
that is a funy whay to sai mirage 3
@@anuvisraa5786 legendary.
XL my favourite version!
Thanks another brief and well made video on a great aircraft. I remember the LFA programme and the YF16 and 17 and recall the emphasis being stated on money saving but their approach to upgradeability was eye-opening, 4k units later for the F16 variants alone along with the successful F18 programme is quite an achievement almost 50 years later. The conformal leading edge extensions on the F16 still pleases my eye.
Cool video, as always. Le'ts not forget the Mitsubishi F-2 "Viper Zero", that is based on this trusty jet
Very true!
Great video! Just discovered the channel. Excellent content! With the popularity of modern combat flight simulations like Digital Combat Simulator (DCS), you will probably find a large audience with that crowd. Any chance you could produce a video like this for the F/A-18 Hornet and Super Hornet?
Do a Gripen C vs Gripen E. Would be nice to see a video about the difference.
F-16 is not old untill 2060's. It will fly around decades to come.
Another great video man
Saying that F16 performance is still adequate is a gross understatement
What you say about Chinese j10. I think it's definitely need a video
2:50 most upgraded plane in history... I've heard the final Starfighters were over twice as heavy as the first service craft. It was also used by a wide range of countries so may be similar.
Thank you, this video is informative as always, yet I believe you could explain more about F-16 + F-15 if you did it in a series. I would really like to know how did american government and designers come to idea of such a mafia fighter, including some description of EM strategy (I believe it is energy management strategy, isn't it?).
And of course like is a must!
Thank you for making these awesome videos! You talked about the potential of a delta-canard F-16, but what about THE delta-canard F-16 that is in actual service? I'm talking about the J-10 of course, haha!
Viper block 70 with trust vector and canards whould just be the best in the world but also not cheap... one can dream still it kill mig 29 and mig 25 with no loss agaisnt those planes and only lost one plane to mirage from Greece and one from india ? So not bad only f 15 eagle has 100 air combat wins with zero loss has better war performance... so far
Bravo, Thanks !!! I hope in a future you can analize the F16XL, the best F16 ever built and so good that they don't want to produce (cheper faster high range, good for Italy that was with F104)
F-16XL would have accomplished most of what the USAF uses the Viper for, except it lacked sufficient thrust-to-weight ratio. Every single test pilot stated this in their reports-how they liked the aircraft payload/range, but were concerned about its lack of thrust compared to the F-16A and F-15. They saw it as a step backwards in the trend of 1:1 or better T/W in the 4th Gen fighters.
If an engine like the F119 had been available, with carbon fiber and other weight reduction materials for the structure, it could have been more viable.
We were at Edwards AFB when the initial F-16XL testing was being done. The test pilot reports are now available online.
F16: I'm OLD but still a deadly Viper!
MiG21: say what b*@ch?
Well done, what a great video!
Why is this channel so good
Thanks for another great video! Would love to hear what you think about Gen 4 upgrade programs like the F-15EX program and how they fit into the near-future strategic picture.
Great content!! Please make a video on Mig-29
He doesn't look 52. Well done that man.
Great video as always … plz also make a video on J10C.
The new conformal fuel tanks for the F-16 are not an intuitive shape but I'm sure there is a very good and interesting aerodynamic reason for them being so square looking.
Anyone else think this would make an interesting video?
Absolutely! I wonder how they interfere with the vortexes generated y the leading edge extensions.
i would love to see this topic in the Q&A! :)
I wish that my country would upgrade it's fleet of F-16's. Poland has only 48 F-16 C/D Block 52. We could refit them and buy at least 24 F-16 V. Some dedicated EW planes would also be useful.
You guys are getting F-35s. You don't need new F-16s or dedicated EW planes.
@@EEEEEEE354 What? I'm serious - you do know that Kaliningrad region is one of the most militarized in the World? They do have s-400's etc there. And best Russian AESA radars. And Su-35 with IRST. If you think that 32 F-35's are gonna handle dozen SAM batteries and about 400 fighter and fighter-bomber planes that would come in the first attack - and that without Electronic Warfare planes and a large number of weapons platforms - than you must be one of those Americans that think that anything American is flawless and perfect and cannot be even endangered by "other's" technologies.
I'm sorry, but do you have actual knowledge of Military Operations, Logistics, Tactics, Strategy etc. like I do? Or are you just a "fan"?
Because my American friends from USAF, USN, USMC and many other branches and agencies of your Military and Government - tell me opposite. Sure. Military Industrial Complex wants to sell us F-35's. But they say - wait couple of years - you will still be getting them very late, because of the waiting list - in the meantime have Airforce that exceeds 100 (Ideally around 250) Fighters and Fighter Bombers, plus EW planes at the very least. I won't go into details, but given I know this people from Afghanistan and Iraq - I will trust them more than your "judgement".
@@jannegrey593 Well, that was a lot in response to my small comment... You made a lot of assumptions about what I was insinuating here.
No, i do not think your country can handle Russia with 32 F-35s. Thats why Poland is in NATO. There is no way you guys are matching the Russians pound for pound, even if you have a very limited number of the most capable fighters. One on one the SU-35 is no match for an F-35, but they have a fleet that dwarfs yours. Even if you upgraded those F-16s and bought dedicated EW platforms (how do you suppose the waiting list for all of those unsigned contracts will be any shorter than just acquiring more F-35s??). And when did I ever claim our equipment is flawless or cannot be challenged by other technologies? Whats with all the hostility? Why are people like you on the internet so quick to jump to conclusions based on very simple and short statements. Is it because im american?
Don't assume i'm "one of those" americans. I simply believe spending your money in a hopeless uphill battle against a country with 3 times your GDP is a waste of time. I understand military operations, logistics, tactics, and strategy I assure you. I know them well enough to know that you will never win against russia. Not with your economy, not with your military. Upgraded F-16s won't do the job. Dedicated EW platforms wont do it either. Those 32 F-35's aren't there so you can fight russia alone, they are there so you can be well equipped to contribute to a joint NATO effort. So no, you don't need those other planes. There is no need to militarize the world even further than it already is. Money is best spent on more important things like healthcare, infrastructure, education. You know, things that don't involve killing people...
Now, don't go putting words in my mouth.
@@EEEEEEE354 I apologize. Frankly I felt bad, 2 minutes after writing that comment. You're correct. Amount of Hostility (which I was surprised myself at after re-reading my comment) and assumptions are unfair on my part. I can only offer an "excuse" that I have just finished with.... let's say very gung-ho American Commenter to my other Comment - this one was on Binkov's channel - that basically claimed the same as you did, but with "32 F-35's is ALL you need" and "pshaw - those Russian SAM's are shit, American is the best" - and it was like 50th this type of comment I've had to deal with in short order. So I basically vented on you, which was not only rude, but unprofessional of me as a military analyst.
Again this is just excuse, which DOESN'T excuse me venting on you.
I agree with your Sentiment - spending more on healthcare and helping people. However remember that Poland has had military poorly funded for decades now. And we're frontline country. I also have knowledge of local "politics" - and I know there were plans to spend this money better and in a way that would make not only Polish army be able to hand threats better, but at cheaper costs. They were thrown out, because our Government has a boner for buying American, while completely ignoring possible co-operation with European Industries.
As for NATO - we still tend to remember 1938 and 1939 - of course I know we can't handle Russia alone. But if the attack happens we have to be able to buy enough time, before our allies sign a peace treaty that makes Russia not to go into Germany. And fight well enough in other ways that if our allies decide to help, the have support. Which brings me back to F-35's - there will be no transfer of technology, our deals with European governments on other aerial vehicles (such as attack helicopters) were broken, when our new and fascist government came into power (and miracoulously cancelled a deal that would actually benefit the poorest region of Poland - which is their base. As long as they are poor the keep voting nationalists in). They also tend to forget about logistics etc.
I would love if the Wars all over the world stopped. But given recent War in Armenia I cannot say I'm optimistic about that. So military is still needed, unfortunately.
BTW did you know that a year ago there were 6 countries leading development of drone swarms, with only US, Russia, Israel and Poland having some Demonstrators? Polish one was de-funded, even though it was better than US and Russia's. You know why? Our government decided that with F-35's we will be able to beat Russia - some of those morons actually believe that "American stuff is so OP that it will obliterate Russia".
I want to again apologize to you. My behavior was unacceptable - do you wish me to do something with my previous post? Or leave it as testament of my stupidity and as evidence of my mistake? I leave the decision entirely to you.
@@jannegrey593 I would much rather an F-35 to face Russian SAMs than F-16, and I am NO fan of the F-35. In that environment, radar stealth would be a minimum criterion for survivability.
Are you pissed that Germany wants Russian gas? What is the point of a defensive military if you give your enemy the ability to shut down your heat in winter? May as well not spend the money on defense anyway because the Germans will give in to any Russian demand once they are freezing in the winter. I guess Angela Merkel is pining for her happy youth under the Soviets.
The USN, wore out their F-16 aggressor airframes, very rapidly, pulling high G's in their Top Gun program.
Awesome stuff !! Keep then coming
6:20 delta vs. traditional wing. I've heard deltas lose energy very quickly in turns? I think I've heard that in Vietnam, Phantoms were told to get in circle fights with MiGs; while the MiG could initially maneuver faster, it bled off energy much faster as well and within 720 degrees of turn the Phantom could always end up on the MiG's tail.
As soon it was acquired by the Israel AF, it was sent to destroy Iraq's nuclear plant, very far away and difficult target, thanks to its superb design already in its first version.
The F-16 is the backbone of IAF. It is heavily modified, new radar, new avionics, electronics, pods...
Although details were never released, it was test bed for stealth capabilities not included in the original design. Its structure was also modified for support of extra bombing capabilities, as well as extra range. A squadron of F-16i is like a spec ops team, with different specialized units for different scenarios.
Another excellent video 👍.
The best fighter plane ever. Super agile, fast, smart, indefinitely upgradable, moderately priced with greatest bubble canopy.
I don't like the conformal fuel tanks though. F-16 is a fighter not a mule.
🤔if memory serves me correctly it's the first jet with no hydraulic actuators AND fly-by-wire ..and it looks COOL 💪👍
Not old, vintage. A great desing and evolution as are your videos. Great
Interesting that airframe life could be extended from 4000 hours to 12000 hours. I am curious as to how much weight that added to the structure. My guess is, probably not that much. On a different note, I like the F-16 aesthetically, but it's almost too pretty, kind of like the P-51. I'm more of a P-47 man.
Any war around the world will include an F-16. That's how successful it is. The poster boy of 4th generation fighter era.
F-16 and the F-15, the old planes no one wants to face in battle
can you do a video on how supercruise works?
Supercruise means going over Mach 1 without afterburner.
In the grand scheme of things, I predict stealthy airframe will be like popup cameras for smartphones.
There was a time when it seemed like the only way forward. But quickly we realised that the future was about software and electronics not hardware. Popup camera mechanism took up too much space inside a phone only to increase a dot worth of screen in the front.
In future with the help of different bands of radars and predictive software so as to make the radar prediction more accurate, the benifit of stealth is not as much as compared to the problems it brings in regards to payload and maintanance.
So in conclusion, a plane that just works, might be upgraded electronically to the point that stealth and other things don't matter.
Excellent contet as always. What about a second part with the lessons learn in the battle? Israeli F16´s are the much heavily modified one´s flying around... Thanks!
F-16 is a great light fighter and is still capable. However, the scenarios where a light fighter is appropriate is becoming more restricted over time. Advances in sensors, off bore sight targeting, highly manueverable missiles, long range missiles, and missiles with better sensors are pushing likely fights further out and making dogfights less likely. If a dogfight does happen these advances would make a double kill of both sides a more likely outcome. But, there remain some areas where it is appropriate such as in Taiwan, where combat will likely be at short range anyways because of the close proximity of opposing forces.
Ever hear of the Gripen E? Arm that with 4 Meteors, and it will probably knock down anything in the sky. Gripen E is in the same size category as the F-16, just more modern and capable.
@@kostaskritsilas2681 Gripen E is a capable light fighter but it is limited by the size of the radar antenna in the nose and the total number of hardpoints and total stores weight. While it has a high quality radar, a fighter with a larger radar for the same level of technology will have an advantage in detection, track, and lock ranges. To take advantage of the full potential capability of the Meteor missile, a bit larger radar is required. They will still function on Gripen E but the ability to guide them to a target at maximum range is somewhat reduced.
A medium weight fighter of similar technology level and layout such as Rafale will be more capable at extreme range. It will have a larger radar and can carry more missiles. This makes such medium to large fighters far more likely to get first look, first shot, first kill. The size of the radar antenna and number of missiles available make a huge difference in BVR combat.
Yet another informative video that explains the Viper's success to this day. Although I must admit that I find the Viper a bit boring compared to many other 4th gen fighters, its just so generic.
it's only generic because it is the quintessential 4th gen fighter that all the others are measured against.
Excellent video again. My heart leaps up as soon as I see you've uploaded a new video. May I ask an impertinent question? Could you tell us more about your background? Or did I miss the episode in which you did exactly that?
And please, please, please, could you do an episode on the Italian/Brazilian AMX one day? There's so little on that little gem. The lightweight fighter maffio certainly loved that design. I'd love to see/hear your take on that aircraft.
czcams.com/video/KZwVmHzfP_0/video.html
@@Millennium7HistoryTech Thank you kindly/ grazie tanto (?) Maybe you will do a few lectures on the beautiful Italian language as well (big grin)?
I was hoping tht one day you will do a video on F16 because the content and info found on your channel can't be found anywhere else on the Internet, that's why it is held in such high regard among aviation enthusiast community. F16 has always been my favourite plane the Russian Flanker series is beautiful but the viper is just a notch above the rest.
the title is beautiful. I see what you did there.
You should do a video on the F-16XL
Please consider making video on Japanese fighters.
Again an awesome informative video. Thanks! Could you do a video on the NF 5 a i.e. the aerodynamic improvements. Same problems as with the F16 AMRAAM. And the start of the ever longer strakes at the intake of a same low tech fighter technology. The f5 forerunner of the yf 17 fly off to the yf16 and thus f18.
While the added weight of the AMRAAM mounted on the wingtips caused fatigue problems like you mentioned, the choice to mount heavier missiles there reduced flutter and cut down on the related metal fatigue in the wing.
Correct. Good point.
@@Millennium7HistoryTech yes, Amraams not Sparrows.
The Fighter Mafia were smart men but they were trying to build a fighter to fight past wars. Even by the end of Vietnam, which they based their ideas off of, long ranged missiles were becoming a mature and effective technology. Had the F-16 been the fighter those guys wanted, it would have been obsolete by the 80's.
11:34 what's the thing on the nose of the missile in between the AMRAAM and the AGM-88? And what missile is the middle one?
I enjoy watching videos made by people who truly love aircraft. You're videos have many bits and pieces not offered by other channels. Nice job. The corny 'Dad' humor is absolutely dreadfully funny and if left out of these videos would be a huge disservice and utter catastrophe for viewers everywhere.
One question which fighter jets are aerodynamic balanced design
Please mention a few , at least 4 best
Very good! From Brazil´s deep south
Conformal fuel tanks are sexy
Should it be called something different f-161/2? Nothing is old about the f-16 , it's the best multi-purpose fighter old out there!
Thank you.
Regards,
Geoff. Reeks
you aged better than the f16 dont doubt yourself bro
Question for you. That bit of footage starting at 1:45: the YF-16 is 'waddling' down the runway. Is that an early FLCS error or a deliberate mishandling of the plane? Or something else?
Question: 10:07 I see upgraded F-16s with sidelobes on the airframe. That will be usefull to store additional fuel and electronics. But is it still supersonic? It seems it doesn't meet the Whitcomb area rule.
one of the best
Right on
QUESTION:
Funny, that it was a problem to carry the AIM-7 instead of the AIM-9 on the wingtips and that the AIM-7, due to the much heavier weight created cracks in the outer wing section.
Why is it todays USAF standard to carry the heavy AIM-120 on the wingtips instead of the AIM-9? Did LM strengthen the wing structure?
Yes, they did
@@Millennium7HistoryTech thanks for answering. I heard this question many times in the last year, but never heard a satisfying answer. Structural enhancement makes the most sense. Best aviation channel ever 👍🏻
Nice summary of how the F-16s have evolved over the years to remain up to date/ relevant, but I'm confused about your statement late in the video suggesting the F-16 V has an IRST sensor. I don't believe that's the case though LM has developed an IRST 'Legion' pod that can be carried by both the F-16 & F-15. www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/products/legion-pod.html
what is the track running in the background?
Great video about the F16. In your opinion, assuming US congress allow a country to purchase either an F16 or F35a. Which is better? Given the unit cost of F35a is cheaper than a F16 but maintenance costs F16 is cheaper. Hope you do a video comparing about this.
The F-16 is probably the best "bang for the buck" combat aircraft in the world in terms of capability....
Damn! You look not bad for 52!
Colombia has old KFirs you think the F-16 could be a good plane to buy or better to buy a Grippen?
MiG-21 next man thanks
It just needs to have what it pioneered. Thrust vectoring and a new engine like the F119 with super cruise
Can you please do a video on the F-21 as well
and it still has the best cuppola of all today's fighters. I wonder why only the F22 adopted a frameless canopy. Anyway the F16 turned into the successor of the F5 (since the F20 was killed by politics)
Think of the types the F-16 has replaced: F-104, F-105, F-106, F-4, F-5, A-4, A-7, Mirage III/V, Draken. And in some cases the MiG 21. It's little wonder such a massive production run was achieved.
@@michaelkeller5008 To be fair that has everything to do with cost and nothing to do with capability. In Italy it was replaced by the Typhoon...
Perfect. An interesting spinoff was the famous leaked report where the Gripen was deemed unfit. The conclusion has been generalized to saying that the Gripen is rubbish... It is simply the plane with the lower SEP and no wonder it is not suited for the alpine environment.
@@michaelkeller5008 I would have thought the Swedish environment The Gripen E is designed for was pretty close to Austrian/Swiss environment, or am I missing something?
0:51 soemeone?
Funny how prototype colours were that of Russian aerobatics teams.
For me, this fighter is the Manny Pacquiao of the skies. They both may have been around for a while, but both are superb at what they were put on this planet to do. Look at how Manny put 'The Young Pretender' Keith Thurman away not so long ago. World Champions at 40. With all the modern day talent strutting their stuff? Unheard of? Yeh right.
That takeoff at 1:50 gave me a lot of anxiety... what is that guy doing? He clearly lifted off way too early.
Unofficial first test flight. He was trying to do a high speed taxi and got a bit more lift than he wanted.
Can you make a video on kill switch ?
Here Vipers are just normally deadly if you are allergic. Same with Hornets.
Is it trou that Belgium received the first f-16? Even before the USA?
0:32 You just need some _"upgrades"_ (plastic surgery), like the F-16 has had.
english subtitles must be seen in your videos. Some of your international viewers are unable to understand your pronunciation🙏🙏🙏
Who is this person? I like the videos.
With the F16 (a beautiful bird), is everything about history. It´s time to retire the F16. It´s obsolete.
Great video , it would be interesting if you could focus on Russian designs aswell .
Make video on jf 17 and j 16
You're fifty-two?? Wow, I hope I look as good.