:rolleyes:

Kinetics! That is maintaining & creating/regaining energy (speed), not instantaneous turn performance.

Yes the greater weight of later block F-16s notably degrades their instantaneous turn performance, sustained turn performance not as much AND they able to maintain & regain energy (speed) better…

If a Block 60 (or ANY block F-16 for that matter) is flying at “full weight” agility isn’t the primary concern…In a typical air-to-air mission the Block 60 isn’t anywhere near “full weight” yet STILL has has 19,000 lbs of military (dry) & 32,500 lbs of afterburning (wet) thrust.

A Block 60 in ANY COMBAT (with the exception of point defense ATA)configuration will have a massive problem in “maintaining & creating/regaining energy (speed)”, against the odd MLU…
It´s not just the bloody weight, it has a massive induced drag by every antena/CFT/sensor that protrudes from the airframe, and before someone starts “you can remove the CFT´s and the external tanks…”, fine, then you bomb the end of your own runway, because that´s an aircraft with a dreadfull internal fuel fraction coupled with a very powerfull (and thirsty) engine and one of the worst (if not the worst) thrust/drag relation of every fourth generation designs…
You dont need to go to the MTOW, you just need to go any combat configuration and you are in “Phantom Country”.

Even the Block 50/52 can suffer the same “fate”. The variation between a USAF, a Hellenique Air Force and a IDF/AF F-16 50/52 can be has much as 60% of the entire airframe (that´s a strong selling point of the Viper).
I would be the first to say that one of those new Greek Vipers will be dam fast, but that surely doesnt apply to an Israeli “Soufa”.

Its none the less a claim till supported by ample sources and facts.

For example how do the Emiraties use their Block 60s ?

That claim is pure guesswork.

Guesswork?

How about Roy Braybrook?
How about Spey, Riccioni and the rest of “light weight fighter mafia”?

How about getting a calculator and doing a bit of maths?

It may not turn as well, but for missile kinematics, it’s improved straight line performance shouldn’t be discounted.

Agreed.

So let’s build a F16XL with block 60+ electronics, RF selective radomes and stealthy inlet :diablo:

Nic

Nic

That would be a fine plane, but with the F-35A right around the corner, it would also be a grand (albeit beautiful) waste of money.

Cheers

Given that the F/A-18E/F did not improve on the kinetics of earlier F/A-18s but the later block F-16s HAVE improved on the kinetics of earlier F-16s which already had a kinetics advantage…

Exactly the oposite.
The Block 50/52+ albeit having better acceleration are out turned at any altitude by any MLU Viper or block 25.
The Block60 his a flying brick, a ten ton behemoth flying on a 7 ton wings.
At full weight it has the worst weight/wing area relation of any NATO tactical fighter ever, and that includes the F-104G.

A bit of pilot bragging, but this will give you an idea…

You asked for my impressions of the Mk.6. They were all good. I had flown F-86Ds, F-94B and Cs, F-89Js, F-104s, F-100s, F-86Fs, F-102s and F-106s. In the UK, I flew air-to-air against F-4s and F-104Gs. At no time did I lose a 1 v 1 or a 1 v 2. And I was not very good at air to air. Yes, short legs, but a great turning radius and excellent acceleration, especially when you can unload a little.

Maj Bill Beardsley USAF exchange pilot with the “5 Squadron” RAF

http://www.lightning.org.uk/archive/0507.php

Lot´s and lot´s of other Lightning pilot´s making coments like this one, now try to get a RN or RAF Phantom driver saying the same thing, bloody dificult…

The MK6 out climbed, out raced, out turned and at short ranges, out-gunned the Spey Phantom´s. The F-4 pilot´s had a lot more fuel, a vastly superior radar and two set´s of eyes, a good Phantom pilot would avoid contact until the Lightning´s got the “bingo fuel” level and had to return home, then he was a simple target.

Cheers

If a Lightning would try to win air superiority the 1960ies way versus MiG-17 and MiG-21, it would fail. Against MiG-23 there is no hope either.

Schorsch

Actually it was the exact oposite.
When the Lightning´s sqn´s in Gemany got to receive the Phantom, it was a disappointment, a lot of pilots were very vocal about what they feel was a “backward step”.

More often than not, in exercises, the Spey equiped Phantom´s got on the wrong end of high speed slashing attacks coming from above, and when trying to engage the Lightning´s they would be left behind in a zoom climb.
These tactics were only countered on an efective way when the BAE Sky Flash got to perform has it should.

And i would dare to say that these vertical “slashing attacks” would be quite efective against any Mig, at any altitude.

Shorts Belfast…