FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1983
1983 - 1269.PDF
STAR '83 GD has built two F-16XLs; a single-seat aircraft right) powered by the original FlOO turbofan, and a two-seat aircraft left) powered by GE's FllO a dramatic effect on the F-16XL's payload/range performance, enabling the aircraft to carry twice the payload of an F-16A to a 45 per cent greater combat radius. Penetration speeds are increased by up to lOOkt to around Mach 0-9. Air-to-air performance is also improved, with the 9g manoeuvre envelope doubling in size. Manoeuvre capability fully loaded is also improved from 5-5g to 7-33g. Instantaneous turn rate is increased. The F-16E would be a two-seat F-16XL with MSIP avionics, including Lantirn. GD sees the the back-seater as an assis tant pilot, helping overcome the task saturation in weather penetration. F-16E cockpit displays would echo those in the F-16C, with two slightly larger head-down CRTs plus a moving map in the rear position. The Air Force's evaluation involved four F-15s and two F-16XLs. The Eagles included a single-seat F-15C with conformal fuel tanks, two two-seat F-15Ds, and McDonnell Douglas' F-15B two-seat advanced fighter capability demonstrator (AFCD—nee Strike Eagle) with mission-oriented rear cockpit and SAR-mapping APG-63 radar. Of the two F-16XLs built by GD as a private venture, one is a single-seater powered by a Pratt & Whitney FlOO and the other is a two-seater powered by the General Electric FllO. If the F-16E is selected as the dual-role fighter, two F-16Cs would be modified to E config uration for development flight testing. The Air Force has requested cost data from the two contractors. Figures released to Congress suggest that the F-16E would cost more to develop than the F-15E, $473 million compared with $275 million, while the addition of a two-seat cockpit and mission avionics would add more to the F-16's lower basic price. The Air Force is scheduled to decide on its dual-role fighter in December, awarding a development contract in January. The chosen aircraft is to enter service by 1987. Another major decision to be taken, this time in early 1984, is on the re-engining of F-15s and F-16s. Improved durability, not increased thrust, is the primary require ment. The Pratt & Whitney FlOO turbofan in both aircraft is now lasting 1,800 TAC cycles (idle to full reheat to idle). The Air Force wants the new engine to achieve at least 4,000 cycles. Competing for the potential 3,000-engine, $14,000 million re-engining effort are General Electric with its F110 (nee F101X, derived from the B-l engine via the F-18's F404), and Pratt & Whitney with its PW1128 (bid as the F100- PW-220). Both are 28,0001b-thrust engines offering about 4,0001b more power than the FlOO. Both feature digital elec tronic engine control, not only for carefree throttle movement, but to eliminate the extensive, life-consuming, ground running required to trim an engine after repair or overhaul. By the mid-1980s a new generation of Soviet fighters will be in service. The Sukhoi Su-27 Flanker and Mikoyan MiG- 29 Fulcrum are near equivalents to the F-15 and F-16. Their appearance in increasing numbers will add impetus to the development of an air-superiority fighter to replace the F-15. Currently the Air Force plans to begin ATF full devel- F-16XL testing meets predictions General Dynamics' two arrow-wing F- 16XLs have logged some 400 flights. Flying rate has slowed since completing the contractual test programme in May, for which 240 flights were scheduled and 369 actually performed. The aircraft performed as predicted, says the USAF test report. Manoeuvrability is better than expected. According to GD the cranked-arrow planform exhibits none of the unfavourable drag character istics of the tailless delta. Instability, compound sweep, and vortex control combine to minimise trim drag, and in some conditions the aircraft is self- trimming, says GD. The XLs have flown in three config urations: air-to-air, with four semi- submerged Amraams and .wingtip AIM-9s; and air-to-surface with 12,5001b Mk82s or ten cluster bombs in addition to the six air-to-air missiles. Semi-conformal carriage resulted in minimum drag impact and no performance degradation, says GD. Testing included 60 flights from Nellis AFB by three USAF F-16 pilots, including one from Tactical Air Command. This operational utility evaluation included air combat, loaded and unloaded, against adversary aircraft, and low-level (500ft and below) penetration. There is no discernible difference in performance between the F100- powered and FllO-powered XLs. The choice of F-16E engine is left to the USAF, GD has demonstrated that the XL does not require any extra thrust. FLIGHT International, 16 July 1983
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
