mvsgas

That would be irrelevant, as of 2012 (last year I work on the aircraft) only a few books where affected by the CCIP update. A dozen books hardly matter in libraries containing hundreds of books in this specific context.

Here is some prof of how arbitrary the whole "designation" CG, CJ or CM is. Look at accident reports which have no distributions restrictions https://www.airforcemag.com/docs/type/accident/ In 2020, you can see two accident, both on updated block 50, yet one is label as CJ and the other as CM It depends more on the person writing or reading than the aircraft and its capabilities.

The F-16 have used 6 different engines with many subversion, not 2. Block 1 to 25 used F100-PW-200. Later block 32 and 42 used F100-PW-220. Early blocks where updated to F100-PW-220 and some users updated their PW-200 to PW-220 standards, those are called F100-PW-220E. Now IIRC, 2 units have converted their block 42 to F100-PW-229 ( Toledo ANG and Oklahoma ANG) Now, block 30 and 40 used the F110-GE-100, Block 50 uses the F110-GE-129, Block 52 use the F100-PW-229 and the block 60 use the F110-GE-132 There where many test aircraft, some with controllable nozzle for thrust vectoring and at least one with the J79

That is not the best way to tell early blocks apart since many early blocks have the updated horizontal stabs. We talk about here The early models (block 1 to 20) will have the smaller base for the vertical stab and smaller landing gear. There are many more external differences (RWR and other antennas locations, floods lights etc.) But the landing gear and vertical tail are the most common. Anyway, the corner was not cut, the entire horizontal stabs are bigger (more area)

AFAIK, Block 1, 5, 10 and 15 https://www.f-16.net/aircraft-database/view_airframes_byadvancedsearch/acshort/F-16/fy/0/plant/0/status/0/version/0/program/0/airforce/11044/unit/0/deployment/0/displayteam/0/actype/F-16/startnum/1

Blocks are a manufacturing label indicating a baseline for the aircraft, but it's rarely used in other aircraft besides the F-16. It's been used for years, even WWII aircraft had blocks. On the F-16 it is incorrectly used by people to define capabilities. This is incorrect because F-16 are in a constant state of upgrade/update and there are block 52 less capable than a block 20.

here is a link to the original photo, its from 2016 https://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/IMAGERY/igphoto/2001682736/

That picture is of a F-16C block 30, it is definitely not in 2007, since the 134FS started to receive F-16 in march 2008 from the 186 FS

I wrote this in Feb 2019 about the AIM-7, but the answer applies to this as well

According to the 1F-16CG-2-27GS-00-1 15 January 2009, page 1-31, paragraph 1.3.6. It takes 110lbs to fully deflect rudder pedals.

that is not how the RL pedals work

Direct link to PDF Crash Investigation Report https://www.airforcemag.com/app/uploads/2021/06/8-Dec-20-ACC-F-16-Michigan-AIB-Report-1.pdf

That switch is in front of the throttle and you can see it being press on the video before they use this switch

I keep meaning to ask this. I thought this has been ask before but couldn't find it in the forums. What is this switch for? I never seen it working on Block 25, 30, 40, 42 and 50 (Keeping in mind my time in the 25/30/50 is limited) Can't find any reference to it in the 1F-16CG-1, 15 August 2009 with supplement S3 included and S4 and S5 added. Or the 1F-16CG-2-00GV-00-1, 1September 2010 with supplement 1S-1 included. Nor on the 1F-16CM-34-1-1, 1 June 2010 with supplement 1S-5 and 1S-6 (just to mention a few) Is this something form the USAF simulator cockpit at Tucson ANG you guys added after visiting there? The reason I thought about it is because I saw this video on you tube Which to me is obvious is from a simulator, the panels seems to clean and new, plus the seat is arm, not something anybody will do on a real seat with the aircraft off. Forgot to mention It has a similar location to the "Reduce Idle Thrust" switch in the pit, but that switch looks like normal switch in the RL cockpit and I have not seen it in DCS. That switch is disconnected and no functioning in the RL aircraft also.

Is weird, by 2009, the -1 did not show any info from CCIP update so they would still be addressed as 1F-16CG-1 for block 40/42 and 1F-16CJ-1 for block 50/52. Then it would be a date on the bottom, for example August 2009 and finally a list of supplement, example: 1F-16CG-1S-4 and 1F-16CG-1S-5. But your saying you have 2007 -1 that is titled as 1F-16CM-1? Weird.

https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/214651-known-issue-sec-shows-signs-of-stagnationstall-ver-25236986/

True, but rather they go down in a fiery "Viking Death" and not sold for scrap metal for a few cent per pounds.

For store alignment. Do not verify coordinates. INS is trying to align from memory. It takes around 90 seconds. Should get status code of 10 but it should drift more and more often. For normal alignment. You do verify coordinate. INS is trying to align from current position and need your verification of the current position. The coordinate should be entered within 2 minutes of placing the INS knob to norm. It takes around 8 minutes. Should get status code 10 (in DCS you might get code 6) Full alignment (A.K.A. best possible alignment) is not really modeled in DCS (AFAIK). I do it anyway. https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/223107-ins-alignment/

Target Isolation (TI) and Geographical Specificity (GS) are not POS sub modes and will vary depending on the missile. TI should only apply to block III, IIIA, IV and V (missile block, not aircraft). Block IIIA and V will have additional options and different settings. Further more, TI is only available to some missile and not all (meaning some missile of the same block may not support the feature). GS is available only on IIIA and V. This setting affect the behavior of the missile and if ED does not plan to implement those behaviors on the missiles, this options are irrelevant for us as players.

I have no idea whether in RL or DCS the nozzle open the same amount. What I do know is that 89-2176 from 421 FS at Hill AFB ( at the time of the photo posted by Mudhen1 ) and 88-0170 (posted By Texac)are both block 40, using the F110-GE-100. DCS is suppose to model the F110-GE-129. I also know that F110-GE-100 at max AB in the ground, nozzle position should be 50 to 70%. In the Air, max AB nozzle pos is 50 to 95%. F110-GE-129: ground 50 to 70%. air 40 to 70% and both engine at high altitude and low speed should be 30 to 50% So, if you go to max AB, Nos Pos can be the same or different every time as long as they are within those limits.

I am hopeful that ED will handle this like the handle the LAU-88, just say they will do it and never actually implemented, touch it or bother with it. This way this "and hill" conversation will go away and like many other before this one and many upcoming ones. People that post here because " they need this" wont even remember they post this until the next time someone "pokes at it with a stick"and like an ant hill, they will all of a sudden remember they need this. I do caution, this will never end for ED. If they allow this or other configurations, the internet will always use that for their next wishlist. You allow LAU-88, and 4 HARM, why can't I get: - CFT, drag shoot, PIDS, PIDS +, MWS, PW engines, APG-XYZ, AN/AAQ-13, AIM-7/132/2000, Python, Harpoons, Penguins, SDIJ, GBU-15/32/39/49/54/, KH-22, etc