Re: green flag mid air collision


Message posted by Magoo on August 11, 2000 at 22:14:11 EST:

As for the loss rates on the F-16...I couldn't agree more. The original basic design in 1974 was for a lightweight day dogfighter, with a secondary air-to-ground capability. 25 years later, the design has now almost doubled in weight in late Block 50 versions, and the new Block 60 version for the UAE Air Force, and is now an all weather medium-bomber with a secondary SEAD capability. It has been badly bugged by engine troubles in the P&W F-100 engined version (so badly that Korean and Taiwanese aircraft have been grounded on several occasions), whereas the GE F-110-100, -220 and -229 engined versions have much higher rates of reliability!

However, at the end of the day in a single engined aircraft that is inherently unstable and needs triple redundant computers just to stay in the air, if you lose that engine, you've got to punch out. There is NO CHANCE of recovery in an F-16 if you lose the engine. Throw a brick out of a first floor window, and that is what an F-16 trying to glide looks like!

In the F-15/F-14/F-111/Tornado/F-22/Su-27/MiG-29, if you lose an engine, you will still get home unless there are other complications!

These issues will also surround the JSF! If LM/Boeing/P&W can make its F-119 engine virtually bullet proof, then it should be OK. But the USMC and RAF versions will be doing alot of low level work, and will be vulnerable to small arms fire and frag ingestion! Will be interesting...

Magoo


In Reply to: Re: green flag mid air collision posted by Richard C on August 11, 2000 at 03:11:46 EST:

Replies:



[ Discussion Forum Index ] [ FAQ ]