| Ykpf02Tmw Ykpf02Tmw login404 vanynarm, e-mail, 12.09.2023 19:54 O4P dv XtxPQ9sU login404 vanynarm
|
| sven, 20.09.2013 17:18 The 'missing'u/c gear is normal practice .It allows a view of the stbd ventral fin that would otherwise be obscured. since the aircraft is roughly symetrical you have all the info you may need
|
| sven, 20.09.2013 17:17 The 'missing'u/c gear is normal practice .It allows a view of the stbd ventral fin that would otherwise be obscured. since the aircraft is roughly symetrical you have all the info you may need
|
| JetRep, e-mail, 20.09.2013 15:57 Hey, Did anyone notice that one of the main landing gear is missing in the line drawing... strange to post a drawing that was incomplete....
|
| Herb Hutchinson, e-mail, 13.03.2013 22:56 I was the USAF Chief System Engr for the Lightweight Fighter Program (General Dynamics YF-16 and Northrop YF-17), and stayed on to become the Chief System Engr for the F-16As and F-16Bs. Some of the information in the basic write-up for the F-16 and its variants is incorrect but a number of you have sent in corrections so I won't repeat all that. If any of you ever want to have me come to a meeting of your F-16 devotees (or F/A-18 devotees which was derived from the Northrop YF-17 design) I would be glad to come and tell you some hair-raising incidents in the LWF Program and the REAL reason the YF-16 was chosen by the USAF over the YF-17. I totally agree with those of you who think the F-16 was/is a great multi-mission aircraft - a lot of careful thinking and planning went into it becoming the awesome flight system it is.
|
| Lauren Eastwood, e-mail, 01.12.2012 16:55 First saw the F-16A/B at Hill AFB, Utah in late 77 to July 77 while assigned to FTD 533. There were two of us instructors, once I learned the hyrdaulic system I was assinged to the 311th FTD at McDill AFB, Florida Aug 79 to May 83. The hysraulic system was faily easy to work on, hardest to change were the flight control actuators.
|
| GARY BEDINGER, 13.10.2012 08:08 MY FATHER TOOK ME OUT TO THE FLIGHT LINE AT GENERAL DYNAMICS WHICH WAS IN FT.WORTH,TEXAS WAY BACK IN 1973 WHEN I WAS NINE YEARS OLD TO SEE ONE OF THE VERY FIRST YF-16 PROTOTYPE JETS FLY.I REMEMBER THE TEST PILOT WAS COMING IN FOR A LANDING AT THE VERY END OF HIS FLIGHT IN THE YF-16,AND THE MAIN LANDING GEAR WOULDN'T COME DOWN PROPERLY.THE PILOT IN THE YF-16 HAD TO GLIDE THE YF-16 IN FOR A LANDING ON THE SIDE OF THE MAIN RUNWAY AT CARSWELL AIR FORCE BASE IN FT.WORTH,TEXAS.ALL OF THIS WAS CAUGHT ON THE EVENING NEWS.THE F-16 HAS TURNED OUT TO BE AN EXCELLENT LIGHT WEIGHT TACTICAL FIGHTER.
|
| Lewis Godfrey, e-mail, 19.08.2011 22:57 My first encounter with this airframe was when I was assigned to the 63 AMU, 4456 AGS at MacDill AFB, Fl from Sep 1984 to May 1985. I was on my last enlistment in the active duty Air Force and was headed to the Reserves afterwards. I worked as a Weapons Loading Crew Chief on F-16A/B, Block 10 & 15 models. We were mainly a training unit for new F-16 pilots.
|
| Naga, 01.08.2011 06:13 I was surprised when America reequipped the Jordanians with the F-16
|
| Tom, e-mail, 17.05.2011 02:17 The XL was a version the USAF should have purchased, just like the AFTI. Awesome aircraft. Neither made it beyound testing such a shame
|
| Tom Shafer, e-mail, 16.05.2011 16:02 The F-16 NEVER was equipped with a 101 turbofan from the B-1. The B-1 motor was way too large for that airframe. It was equipped with a F110-GE-100 turbofan, and later block aircraft with the -129 General electric engines
|
| Larry "L/D Max" Danner, e-mail, 12.12.2010 19:25 Actually, the initial crashes were primarily engine related for a number of reasons (including the one I jumped out of). The Flight Control Computer issue reared it's head after a couple years of operation. Since then, the crashes have been due to a scattering of causes; as with any military aircraft.
Regards to all,
L/D Max
IOC Viper Pilot #26
|
| Ron Moore, e-mail, 27.10.2010 23:54 The early crashes weren't due to the stick freezing... It didn't move anyway! They happened because when a generator failed and the emergency power unit would overspeed and produce too much voltage to the flight control computer. It would shut down and command the elevator to the zero volt or null position which, depending on airspeed, would result in a pitching the nose down, sometimes in excess of 20 G's. The problem was resolved by adding additional speed controllers and eventually, an additional generator.
|
| Chuck Raybon, e-mail, 01.10.2010 14:25 I worked as a weapons specialist on these when they replaced the F4 in Tampa Florida. They were great to work on while the bugs were getting worked out. They were all grounded for a while when they had to figure out why the stick would go dead and crash into the ground with pilot. A couple of them were smart enough to punch out and a couple weren't you can't fight a stick with no cables attached to it. Still a great aircraft and was fun to work on.
|
| Steve, e-mail, 18.12.2009 19:50 The fighters of the '70s essentially corrected the faults of the fighters of the '50s: What are the F-15 and F-16 but the F-101 and F-104 with adequate wing area and the horizontal tail in the right place?
|
| paul scott, e-mail, 18.08.2009 19:20 One of the world beaters no doubt. America got it right, with a simplistic effective fighter. Today's Mustang? I think when they originally unrolled it they quoted it as today's Spitfire.
|
| paul scott, e-mail, 18.08.2009 19:19 One of the world beaters no doubt. America got it right, with a simplistic effective fighter. Today's Mustang? I think when they originally unrolled it they quoted it as today's Spitfire.
|
| Luis, e-mail, 06.09.2008 23:23 It is a simple design, not too high tech or anything, so it is my favorite of all modern fighters...
|
| Ben Thurston, e-mail, 18.08.2008 19:47 On Friday the 13th of November, 1992, I had the pleasure of flying a F-16D at Shaw AFB as part of aircraft orientation in order to develop "train like we fight" procedures to be used in Bulldog MOA, these procedures were from lessons learned from the desert war.
|
| justin sheehan, 14.07.2008 00:37 the nax speed of this aircraft is mach 2.2 not 1.2.
|
| stephen russell, e-mail, 16.06.2008 01:16 Love 2 fly in the 2 place model they made.
Now that plane is Decomm, what to do with those spare F16s (minus guns & fire control)
Fee rides over the US.
Wow.
& same for other decomm warplanes since Cold War end.
|
| jetplaneguy, e-mail, 01.08.2007 06:28 ±èmy first korean name letter thing:)[lol iam a noob on planes but still is it simmialliar to a f-14:P
|
| jetplaneguy, e-mail, 01.08.2007 06:26 lol retirded?
|
| paaksimaa, e-mail, 29.06.2007 09:47 Hi ! Dear Bert van der Loo ! Please make a website with correct informations ! OK !
It'll be better for you !!!
|
| Muhammad Babar Bhutto, e-mail, 04.02.2007 16:33 World's Most depending relaible multirole world class fighter & most beautiful by its impression
|
| Bert van der Loo, e-mail, 15.11.2006 09:05 The maximum speed will be a lot higher than Mach 1.2 that you mentioned. The correct maximum speed is above. Mach 2.0
Best regards: Bert van der Loo
|
