F-16 A, B, C, MLU

Sometimes, less is actually more.

because less [convenience] is always more [work]

shame it is lost on so many people that it is work that brings back true satisfaction

Speak for yourself, I quite enjoy the older versions without all the bells and whistles.

 

Aircraft from the 40's through to the late 70's tend to have some quirks which make them interesting to fly, plus you often have to think about how you're going to employ them due to various limitations compared to the modern ones.

 

Sometimes, less is actually more.

I will suggest then fly P51D :P

Regarding another Russian aircraft , i think it would be wise to add a more modern Variant of the SU-27, you know the variant that can use R-77's and has MFD pages.

Regarding another Russian aircraft , i think it would be wise to add a more modern Variant of the SU-27, you know the variant that can use R-77's and has MFD pages.

Do you mean a SU-35? The new one not the old one.

Speak for yourself, I quite enjoy the older versions without all the bells and whistles.

 

Aircraft from the 40's through to the late 70's tend to have some quirks which make them interesting to fly, plus you often have to think about how you're going to employ them due to various limitations compared to the modern ones.

 

Sometimes, less is actually more.

Wasn't stating my opinion, rather stating What i think is the dominant opinion in the community.

Give me a F-4, that I'd love.

Do you mean a SU-35? The new one not the old one.

Nope, i want the SU-27SM.

Nope, i want the SU-27SM.

I'm confuse, I thought you wanted R-77. :D

I'm confuse, I thought you wanted R-77. :D

the SU-27 was able to equip R-77's since the SU-27SK, so the SU-27SM can carry the R-77 :D

11 year old argument on this forums. My point, all those aircraft are suppose to carry it, yet only SU-35 is seen with them loaded in combat zone... Moving on.

11 year old argument on this forums. My point, all those aircraft are suppose to carry it, yet only SU-35 is seen with them loaded in combat zone... Moving on.

its because there aren't as many R-77's like there are R-27 has, plus there are images where the SU-27 carries them, where the ET's are suppose to be.

I wonder if they still have the new cockpit smell

click on image to enlarge

2014 Aeroexpo Marrakech Trade Show

Three F-16s from the Royal Moroccan air force link up with a KC-135 Stratotanker from the 191st Air Refueling Squadron based out of Salt Lake City, Utah to refuel during the 2014 Aeroexpo Marrakech Trade Show in Morocco April 21. The U.S. Air Force sent a C-130J Super Hercules from the 37th Airlift Squadron based out of Ramstein Air Base, Germany and a KC-135 Stratotanker to showcase air assets that are critical to the success of current and future multinational military operations in Africa. (U.S. Army photo/ Sgt. Nicolas A. Cloward)

Awesome

click on image to enlarge

Aggressors, maintainers take off to support Kadena AB exercise

An F-16 Fighting Falcon with the 18th Aggressor Squadron prepares to take off from Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska, shortly after sunrise Jan. 24, 2016, in transit to Kadena Air Base, Japan, to participate in training exercises. More than 150 maintainers from the 354th Fighter Wing will keep the Aggressors in the air and prepare U.S. Airmen, Sailors and Marines for contingency operations along with coalition partners in the Pacific theater. (U.S. Air Force photo/Staff Sgt. Shawn Nickel)

I would put my money at the f16, but so i also would at f18.

Right now i struggle with using my cold war jets for anything else than light air targets and coldwar / ww2 targets, however they can be fun to play.

For the more modern i always end up with selecting f15 and it would be fun with a little more diversity. To me the f16 is more iconic than the f18, as the danish airforce has used f16 for so long time.

I would put my money at the f16, but so i also would at f18.

Right now i struggle with using my cold war jets for anything else than light air targets and coldwar / ww2 targets, however they can be fun to play.

 

For the more modern i always end up with selecting f15 and it would be fun with a little more diversity. To me the f16 is more iconic than the f18, as the danish airforce has used f16 for so long time.

F/A-18 for me, Canada's fighter so i find it more iconic, and less generic than the F-16 personally, because its not as widely used around the world as the F-16.

Color MFDs on F/A-18C only provided limited color capability.....(Basic Green color....)

And we don't even know if DCS F/A-18C's final product can carry LITENING or can only carry AN/AAS-38....

But F-16C with high block have real colored MFD...and can even carry Sniper XR....And I think TAD on F-16C is much more better...

So I think it's still meaningful to develop F-16C with high block in DCS...

Color MFDs on F/A-18C only provided limited color capability.....(Basic Green color....)

And we don't even know if DCS F/A-18C's final product can carry LITENING or can only carry AN/AAS-38....

 

But F-16C with high block have real colored MFD...and can even carry Sniper XR....And I think TAD on F-16C is much more better...

So I think it's still meaningful to develop F-16C with high block in DCS...

The DDI's (what you call MFD's) on the F/A-18C are not color capable at all so I assume you are being facetious. The MPCD, on aircraft so equipped, in the middle behind the stick and below both the UFC and HUD control panel is though.

A late model/modified F-16 is more the equivalent of the Super Hornet than the Legacy Hornet so the comparison of accessories and furnishings between the two is not really a fair comparison. As far as the targeting pods are concerned, in US service only the Marines use the AAQ-28 Litening on their Legacy Hornets and not when operating off the boat (probably because they have to carry them on station five and catapult grease would be all over the front of the pod when they launched). The AAS-38A Nighthawk pod has not been used for many years but they were fairly common on legacy Hornets from 1993 up until the mid 2000's. The Navy only uses the ASQ-228 ATFLIR on both Legacy Hornets and Super Hornets now. The year they choose to model the Hornet in will decide whether we get Litening/ATFLIR or TFLIR.

If an F-16 is to be done I would prefer to see Block 25 or below aircraft in addition to a late model Block 50/52 CCIP jet. I wouldn't mind seeing a F-16A ADF either but I would still rather have any aircraft other than an F-16 modeled... like I said before, it's a bit overdone and I would rather see platforms that have rarely or never been the subject of simulation.

Maybe they should just do a F-16N for use in the aggressor role as a compliment to the F-5E/MiG-28... or better yet, a TF-16N. Need to do a trainer first to build experience.:thumbup:

The DDI's (what you call MFD's) on the F/A-18C are not color capable at all so I assume you are being facetious.

Well green is also a color :) .

The DDIs are monochrome, which means restricted to a single color but can display an image in shades of this(maybe thats what tifafan meant by "limited color capability").

Example of F-18C DDI image display attached.

Well green is also a color :) .

 

The DDIs are monochrome, which means restricted to a single color but can display an image in shades of this(maybe thats what tifafan meant by "limited color capability").

 

Example of F-18C DDI image display attached.

Interesting note the differences in engine temp and fuel flow despite both engines being at the same RPM... Is that normal?

Interesting note the differences in engine temp and fuel flow despite both engines being at the same RPM... Is that normal?

Yes. RPM, fuel flow, temp, nozzle position, etc. all change during flight due to many factors. That is why you only worry for the most part about maximum numbers or certain ranges of numbers. For example: RPM should not exceed "X", oil pressure should not go below "Y", nozzle should be between "A" and "B" etc.

TAD on F-16C is much more better...

What do you mean by TAD?

Yes. RPM, fuel flow, temp, nozzle position, etc. all change during flight due to many factors. That is why you only worry for the most part about maximum numbers or certain ranges of numbers. For example: RPM should not exceed "X", oil pressure should not go below "Y", nozzle should be between "A" and "B" etc.

Change compared to each other? I can understand physical differences in the engines causing this E.G one engine being freshly overhauled and the other getting towards the end of its TBO. Can you think of any other things that would cause this?

What do you mean by TAD?

I mean HSD.I forgot what it called so write a wrong name.

Change compared to each other? I can understand physical differences in the engines causing this E.G one engine being freshly overhauled and the other getting towards the end of its TBO. Can you think of any other things that would cause this?

Different engine parts wear, different versions of the engine ( there are subversions of the subversions) etc, etc. I have run engines before; same aircraft, same engine, same day and got different numbers.

Different engine parts wear, different versions of the engine ( there are subversions of the subversions) etc, etc. I have run engines before; same aircraft, same engine, same day and got different numbers.

Aha, fascinating.:thumbup:

I mean HSD.I forgot what it called so write a wrong name.

Ok, I'm not sure if HSD is "better" than TAD. It would depend on the year, block, country etc.

Most version of the HSD in the F-16 can be used on any MFD/CMFD but some are less capable than others and I do not think they have a moving map, at least in the USAF F-16 circa 2012, they could have gotten that capability and other countries might have it as well.

On another note, I just want to reiterate, higher block F-16 does not generally equate higher capabilities in term of avionics, weapons, etc. F-16 capabilities and updates are not linear nor sequential.

Absolutely LOVE the F-16 and would pay $$$$ to have it!