If an item is stated to be(come) in-service by X-date then that is evidence for the “plan” for the item to inter service by X date only, Evidence that an item has entered service can only exist when or after the item does or has intered service.

Things running to a prescribed plan are not newsworthy, a diversion from the plan (delay/cancellation) is news. In the absence of proof that it was delayed, then the evidence is that it’s in service.

Lukos- there is nothing about a joint force either, and I have not a clue who “my mate” might be. So once again you have made a definitive statement- “Turkish F-16s were in the test” – and when asked for evidence you change the story – joint? Polish? Greek? – and provide no evidence for that either.

Are the Mods paying attention?

First line.
http://aviationweek.com/defense/f-35-unscathed-hostile-fire-green-flag

Lukos – BFZ about Turkey in U.S. exercises on the linked page. Evidence of your statement please.

Ask your mate: Does say joint force. Poland also have F-16s and ordered the AGM-154C. You’re as able as me, go find out who was there, I don’t have access to the full article. and the fact that they’re on Polish and Turkish F-16 is probably a good indicator they may well be on USAF F-16s. Especially when it’s the same damn bomb but with a seeker pre-programmed with an image that the aircraft doesn’t need to know anything about.

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?134882-F-35-News-Multimedia-amp-Discussion-thread-(2015)-Take-two/page15&p=2235017#post2235017

Oh Greece has them on F-16s too, seems like a heck of a lot of people do.

http://hellenicdefencenews.blogspot.co.uk/2009/11/new-air-to-ground-weapons-for-hellenic.html

And singapore, hell seems everyone does:

http://www.deagel.com/news/FMS-Singapore-Seeks-AIM-120C-AIM-9X-JSOW-Missiles-and-Guided-Bombs_n000004703.aspx

I believe someone else mentioned it whilst trying to intimate that USAF F-16 weren’t involved. Here we go, one of your buddies mentioned it.

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?134882-F-35-News-Multimedia-amp-Discussion-thread-(2015)-Take-two/page15&p=2235017#post2235017

Too small for a manned fighter but for UCAVs maybe. I expect a lot to change between now and then.

More on the UK/US skijump trials and PWIV weapons release:

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/f-35b-demonstrates-short-take-off-capability-413986/

Interesting bit.

The 500lb dual mode weapons were dropped over the Atlantic Test Ranges at Pax River, marking the first weapons separation test of the Paveway by the ITF. The passive bombs safely separated from an internal weapons bay within the F-35B, Lockheed Martin says, and maintained the stealth characteristics of the aircraft throughout.

Nonsense.. An article saying an item will be in service by X date is NOT evidence.
A confirmation of an item actually being in service after that X date, that is evidence.. Do you have it? No…
No evidence provided = no right to demand counter-evidence from others.

Nope, you’re wrong and that’s all there is to it. If the item wasn’t delivered by X date, it is up to you to find proof saying that it was delayed/cancelled/etc. Otherwise the logical assumption is that it was.

M31 – you are correct in that all kinds of active jammers are available for the F-16. However, the only option taken up by the USAF is a pod, and the most modern pod in existence is apparently the ALQ-131A, but nobody can produce evidence that it is in service.

Likewise, the US digital RWR offering for the F-16 is the ALR-69A, but as far as I am aware it’s not on USAF F-16s yet. I may not be correct on that point but, again, nobody has provided contrary evidence.

And as the 2009 NDIA paper cited by all and sundry makes clear, on p5, AGM-88D was discontinued in 2002.

The conclusion, which none of the F-35 fans have factually challenged, is that the most likely USAF F-16 lineup in GF would have been limited to analog RWR (aside from limited capes in HTS R7), non-DRFM jamming, and 1990s AGM-88B/C variants, possibly with a GPS upgrade. Therefore the notion that they would be targets by threats that the F-35 would evade, while quite probable, is not high praise for a newer airplane with $80 billion in investment behind it, nor does it say much about what other jets today could do.

ENDEX.

Now, a final forum-related point: any posters more upset about my treatment of Lukos than by Lukos’ outright, flaming porkies (USAF AGM-88E, USAF F-16s using AGM-154C/HTS in combat) belong among the f-16.net loonies and not in civilized society.

And thanks, in a way, to all the liars. You have helped build the case that the presentation of GFW 2015 was a PR campaign.

Turkish F-16s were in the test and they do have AGM-154C.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/agm-154c.htm

And okay, it turns out the USAF have the 88F.

As for your claim the F-16 didn’t have active EW, that was definitely the biggest BS of all.