Lockheed Martin F-16 Fighting Falcon Developments

GTX said:
More details here:

www.twz.com

F-16 Officially In Ukrainian Service, Self Protection Pods Included

After years of work, F-16s have officially entered service with Ukraine's Air Force, and they are already sporting some interesting features.
www.twz.com www.twz.com
Click to expand...

In regards to the ECM pods they will be equipped with no doubt due to the wreckage of an unexploded AA-13 Axehead that Ukraine obtained in February, 2023 these F-16s will be able to spoof any AA-13s fired at them, Another thing is since they will be equipped with AIM-120s (I wonder if the Ukrainians will get the long-range AIM-120D variant?) which have active seekers unlike the AA-10 Alamo's semi-active they will have a much better time dealing with Russian fighter jets (The Russians have been using the AA-12 Adder with its' active radar-seeker).
 
NMaude said:
In regards to the ECM pods they will be equipped with no doubt due to the wreckage of an unexploded AA-13 Axehead that Ukraine obtained in February, 2023 these F-16s will be able to spoof any AA-13s fired at them, Another thing is since they will be equipped with AIM-120s (I wonder if the Ukrainians will get the long-range AIM-120D variant?) which have active seekers unlike the AA-10 Alamo's semi-active they will have a much better time dealing with Russian fighter jets (The Russians have been using the AA-12 Adder with its' active radar-seeker).
Click to expand...
Whats the point of longe range Aim-120Ds? The radars limit should sit at below a 100km range for a armed fighter sized target like those hughe flankers. They would be mutch more needed for NASAMS than really anything else.
 
kqcke for you said:
Whats the point of longe range Aim-120Ds? The radars limit should sit at below a 100km range for a armed fighter sized target like those hughe flankers. They would be mutch more needed for NASAMS than really anything else.
Click to expand...
These F-16s will essentially function as airborne NASAMS batteries except for also launching CMs against the Russians. They could at most threaten Su-24s & Su-34s that are tasked with the dirty work; they can't threaten the Su-30s, Su-35s and Mig-31s and the West knew this when they handed over the jets to Ukraine.
 
kqcke for you said:
The radars limit should sit at below a 100km range for a armed fighter sized target like those hughe flankers.
Click to expand...

The Ukrainian F-16s won't be operating in isolation, for example Sweden has recently donated two Saab 340s modified as AWACS aircraft so the F-16s can be cued by off board sensors where to point and shoot AIM-120Ds, targets of course would be aircraft such as Su-30s, Su-34s, Su-35s and MiG-31s (The ones modified to carry the AS-24 Killjoy ALBM).

What would be nice is if the USN does have some E-2Cs in storage at Davis-Monthan AFB then refurbish them, train Ukrainian air and ground crews to operate them along with all needed spares, having those would enable the Ukrainian airforce to more effectively utilise their new F-16s.
 
snne said:
These F-16s will essentially function as airborne NASAMS batteries except for also launching CMs against the Russians. They could at most threaten Su-24s & Su-34s that are tasked with the dirty work; they can't threaten the Su-30s, Su-35s and Mig-31s and the West knew this when they handed over the jets to Ukraine.
Click to expand...
Well the F-16s could also be used for SEAD/ DEAD given the the relativ extensive suite of the danish fighter. To shoot down drones and CM they don't need them.
NMaude said:
The Ukrainian F-16s won't be operating in isolation, for example Sweden has recently donated two Saab 340s modified as AWACS aircraft so the F-16s can be cued by off board sensors where to point and shoot AIM-120Ds, targets of course would be aircraft such as Su-30s, Su-34s, Su-35s and MiG-31s (The ones modified to carry the AS-24 Killjoy ALBM).
Click to expand...
Still we would need to integreate them first. It would also put there only 2 awacs in a dangerous place
 
kqcke for you said:
Still we would need to integreate them first.
Click to expand...

Both the Saab 340s and F-16s should already be equipped with Link 16 datalink and JTIDS so that shouldn't be an issue.

kqcke for you said:
It would also put there only 2 awacs in a dangerous place
Click to expand...

Not really, the AWACS aircraft would be a large distance from hostile targets and they would almost certainly have their own armed escorts.
 
NMaude said:
Both the Saab 340s and F-16s should already be equipped with Link 16 datalink and JTIDS so that shouldn't be an issue.
Click to expand...
No AIM-120D/D-3. I don't know or believe that any AM can carry or was ever cleared for them
 
kqcke for you said:
I don't know or believe that any AM can carry
Click to expand...


With the hardware and software upgrades done to these particular F-16s over the decades they should be able to fire the AIM-120D.

kqcke for you said:
or was ever cleared for them
Click to expand...

Now that is another question but if the US is serious about giving the Ukrainians a proper chance at fully utilising their new F-16s then they will approve the transfer of AIM-120Ds to Ukraine.
 
NMaude said:
With the hardware and software upgrades done to these particular F-16s over the decades they should be able to fire the AIM-120D.
Click to expand...
Thats the question. Do they have to software for it. Same question when some suggested the integration of leftover APG-68's..
NMaude said:
Now that is another question but if the US is serious about giving the Ukrainians a proper chance at fully utilising their new F-16s then they will approve the transfer of AIM-120Ds to Ukraine.
Click to expand...
Yeah tought i would guess this may not happen until a good amount of them are there.
 
yahya said:
You're right. New reports are surfacing that these UAF F-16A ADFs are in non-flyable condition, with opaque canopies. They are lacking the Vulcan cannon (LH side), as claimed on sm.
Click to expand...

The gun is installed on the side not visible in your pic. Here we can see the gun port on the other F-16ADF.
But yes, I wouldn't be suprised if these non-flyable ADFs don't have guns installed, it would be just dead weight.
 
A photo of an UAF ADF variant was circulating yesterday and I cannot find a good quality one to enhance the colors around the Vulcan gun port. Below is a low quality one that has surfaced during search on sm. Hard to say if the gun is out there or not.

photo_2024-08-05_22-27-47.jpg

Anyway, it seems that the Ukrainians are happy with the F-16 as the Ukrpost issued stamps sporting the jet dated yet 2023.

photo_2024-08-05_22-27-33.jpg
 
They seemed to have packed quite an extensive upgrade into what were originally rather "basic" F-16As. The weight figures published for the F-16AM don't seem to suggest much weight growth over the original F-16A however, which seems rather surprising when you consider the weight gain the F-16C accrued over the years. This was offset to some degree with the higher power GE-129 or PW-229 engines being introduced with the Block 50/52.
 
Colonial-Marine said:
They seemed to have packed quite an extensive upgrade into what were originally rather "basic" F-16As. The weight figures published for the F-16AM don't seem to suggest much weight growth over the original F-16A however, which seems rather surprising when you consider the weight gain the F-16C accrued over the years. This was offset to some degree with the higher power GE-129 or PW-229 engines being introduced with the Block 50/52.
Click to expand...

Published weight figures for the F-16AM might not be accurate.
They got lots of upgrades not only avionics wise but also various structural upgrades to keep them flying.
On the other hand, they retain the lighter -220 engines and lighter landing gear.

Deino said:
These maybe but not all
Click to expand...

I was replying to the post with F-16ADFs pictured.
Obviously the F-16AM are flying. It has been hard to miss. :D
 
Forest Green said:
Wonder if they've issued APKWS pods for the drones?
Click to expand...

It would be good if the new F-16s could be issued with laser-designator pods so that they can use the APKWS, between that and its' internal M61 Vulcan cannon it should be able to take care of drones such as the Shaheed 136.
 
NMaude said:
It would be good if the new F-16s could be issued with laser-designator pods so that they can use the APKWS, between that and its' internal M61 Vulcan cannon it should be able to take care of drones such as the Shaheed 136.
Click to expand...
The M61 would not be a good idea, as well as the increased risk of collision with the drone, there's also the certainty that not all those SAPHEI 20mm rounds are going to hit the traget and those that miss will hit the ground and things on the ground unless over the sea.
 
Interesting discussion. I wonder if the MLUed F-16A were again updated before giving them away to UAF? An IFF update would be a usual suspect.

Some old F-16 MLU manuals claim that the MLUed jets were LANTIRN capable (AGM-65D/G etc.), and that the helmet mounted sight was rather the Helmet Mounted Cueing System (HMCS) on a modified HGU-55P helmet shell. It employed an old-fashioned CRT just like the very old TV sets.

Some sources on sm claim that the UAF F-16s are based in Romania to prevent them being destroyed by Russian forces. That would explain a nearby overflight over Odessa a few days ago.
 
NMaude said:
It would be good if the new F-16s could be issued with laser-designator pods so that they can use the APKWS, between that and its' internal M61 Vulcan cannon it should be able to take care of drones such as the Shaheed 136.
Click to expand...
I assume main problem for f-16 MLU isn't how to kill a shahed, it's that an/apg-66 isn't good enough for the task.
I.e. final detection time problem, not a number of shots or a price one.
yahya said:
Some sources on sm claim that the UAF F-16s are based in Romania to prevent them being destroyed by Russian forces. That would explain a nearby overflight over Odessa a few days ago.
Click to expand...
Jets based outside of Ukraine are likely to be training/replacement pool only.
Operations from Romanian soil would be an extreme breach of neutrality.
 
Ainen said:
Jets based outside of Ukraine are likely to be training/replacement pool only.
Operations from Romanian soil would be an extreme breach of neutrality.
Click to expand...

Indeed. That would be equal to skating on thin ice.

By the way, what was the primary nav system of MLUed F-16s? Was that INS assisted by GPS, with the Terrain Referenced Navigation (TRN)? The MLU manual also mentioned TACAN, but I have no idea if there are enough TACAN ground stations in Ukraine.
 
It wouldn't be surprising if these jets were transferred via that country to Ukraine.
 
snne said:
These F-16s will essentially function as airborne NASAMS batteries except for also launching CMs against the Russians.
Click to expand...

They're not going to be launching cruise missiles unless the US supplies JASSM, which so far it has shown no interest in doing....

The Mirage 2000 from France may have a greater potential there as they could/should be able to fire Storm Shadow and take some pressure off SU-24 (truth be told Storm Shadow supplies will be increasingly limited though). The Mirage also have the ability to carry Exocet...which would need to be supplied, but if it was would effectively finalise the removal of the Black Sea Fleet from any operations in the Western, or even the Central, Black Sea...admittedly the Ukrainian USV's have already done this but it would definitely drive it home...
 
Forest Green said:
The M61 would not be a good idea, as well as the increased risk of collision with the drone, there's also the certainty that not all those SAPHEI 20mm rounds are going to hit the traget and those that miss will hit the ground and things on the ground unless over the sea.
Click to expand...

I doubt the F-16 would try to do a direct astern tail-chase gun intercept but instead coming in at an angle or a beam intercept to avoid being hit by debris the target. As for cannon-rounds missing striking into the ground that's a hazard of war also a 2.75" APKWS missile if misses will cause similar problems, however I think that a skilled pilot would very likely minimise problems with such an intercept.

Ainen said:
I assume main problem for f-16 MLU isn't how to kill a shahed, it's that an/apg-66 isn't good enough for the task.
I.e. final detection time problem, not a number of shots or a price one.
Click to expand...

The F-16 MLU upgraded its' AN/APG-66 to the AN/APG-66(V)2A:

  • APG-66(V)2A – AN/APG-66(V)2 with a new combined signal and data processor that provides seven times the speed and 20 times the memory of the older radar computer and digital signal processor line replaceable units. In this new variant, the displayed resolution in ground-mapping mode is quadrupled, and is reported to be close to that offered by SARtechniques. Used for modernization of F-16A/B fleet of Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Portugal and the Netherlands in the mid-1990s.
Click to expand...

I won't be surprised if both the fire-control radar hardware has had further upgrades and then of course there have been constant software upgrades at regular intervals. I don't think that one of the F-16AMs or F-16BMs will have any trouble intercepting a Shaheed 136 drone.
 
NMaude said:
I won't be surprised if both the fire-control radar hardware has had further upgrades and then of course there have been constant software upgrades at regular intervals. I don't think that one of the F-16AMs or F-16BMs will have any trouble intercepting a Shaheed 136 drone.
Click to expand...
Iirc the reason behind f-16v procurement for ANG was that a much more capable an/apg-68 set doesn't really hold up against those small targets, be it turbojet or propeller-driven cruise missiles.

An/apg-66 with a new (1990s) signal processor is still a incomplete 1990s PD radar against a near-stealth target.

With a targeting pod it's probably going to be overall better than Ukrainian Soviet jets without digital radar and very dumb irst processor, but that's a very low bar.
 
I don't think these F-16 would be very useful for air to air combat given how old they are, but they possibly very useful in air to surface role if they can somehow put ATACMS on them
 
NMaude said:
I doubt the F-16 would try to do a direct astern tail-chase gun intercept but instead coming in at an angle or a beam intercept to avoid being hit by debris the target. As for cannon-rounds missing striking into the ground that's a hazard of war also a 2.75" APKWS missile if misses will cause similar problems, however I think that a skilled pilot would very likely minimise problems with such an intercept.
Click to expand...
TSC’s sensor is integrated into an L3Harris-developed proximity fuze to enable BAE Systems’ APKWS® laserguided weapons to be fired from any Hydra 70 launcher, including integration into L3Harris’ VAMPIRE™ multipurpose weapons system for C-UAS.
Click to expand...
The fuze also includes a Height of Burst (HOB) mode...
Click to expand...
 
Ronny said:
I don't think these F-16 would be very useful for air to air combat given how old they are, but they possibly very useful in air to surface role if they can somehow put ATACMS on them
Click to expand...
Why not the have AMRAMs?
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom