mvsgas

The engine is not the limit, the intake is not. The limit is the canopy and the fact that it has not been qualified above those speeds. The only engine that had a problem was the PW-200, the F-16 stop using that engine over 20 years ago, so engine damage is irrelevant on the PW-220, PW-229 and all GE engines. Oh well, wish you would have reed the article, is very good. Oh well. Moving on.

Did you read it? The F-16 has been above 800knots. Did you read what he states as the speed limit or the reason that speed limit is in the manual?

I suggest reading Semper Viper; Don't stretch the limits. Al tho outdated in many ways, it does talk about the why that speed limit is in the manual. This is a direct PDF link to Semper viper, CODE One magazine. Page 88 has a good article about it. Keep in mind this is on old F-16, some of the details will not apply to the DCS F-16 https://www.codeonemagazine.com/images/C1_SemperViper_1_1271449318_9999.pdf

I do not understand the problem. Here is a screen shot of Mission Editor with NTTR and todays date, with temp at 46C. Here is one screen of NTTR set to June of 2020, with dynamic weather and temp set to 50C What version are you using? What is the date of the mission? what map?

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=244179

We (as in the forums members) have been talking about this for over a decade. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=249800 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=97938 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=56088

There are many problems with SEC and other engine details. To mention a few: Currently SEC causes Stagnations (non recoverable Stalls). Using NTTR summer temps in the mission weather, will always cause Hot starts and anticipated hot starts . https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=250834&highlight=engine https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=251863&highlight=engine

Misawa F-16s undergo upgrade program (may 30, 2008 ) https://www.misawa.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/403922/misawa-f-16s-undergo-upgrade-program/ Largest ever modernization program enhances F-16s (March 16, 2006) https://www.afmc.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/155570/largest-ever-modernization-program-enhances-f-16s/

I was told once:

Operational Flight Program (OFP) are a different thing from the Common Configuration Implementation Program (CCIP). CCIP was done over several years, so aircraft that went in at the beginning might have come out with OFP M3.4+, while aircraft that went through the CCIP update at the end of the might have come out with M5.1+. So it depends when the aircraft when through and where. Additionally on CCIP, https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3866125&postcount=459 Now, as to what seems to be modeled in DCS https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3918640&postcount=706 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=257206

I did mention NWS off. But it is at any speed with increase nose loading; which include breaking, TGP installed or if they used forward stick pressure. I know because every time we got new pilots or pilot not used to flying the block 40 we get NWS pulls to the right wright up. But I was told repeatedly that we (maintainers) don't use -1 for maintenance. We could not CND write ups so here we go troubleshooting brakes and NWS, finding nothing but having to change a part no matter what, normally the NWS potentiometer. Same thing would happen with "external tank slow to feed" or on the late 1990, on PW engine with AB no light MFL. All of this if irrelevant in DCS unless this is model at some point.

The real aircraft is suppose to want to drift right with NWS off as describe in the USAF manual 1F-16CJ-1, Form 15 August 2009, page 2-27, last note.

This is not new, this has been going for decades. And still not credible videos that show anything reliable nor definitive in term of aircraft dogfights in that region.

I hate those videos because in reality they do not show anything. That could be two Turkish F-16 training with each other or 2 Greek F-16 training with each other and any radio and sounds added. I have never seen any of those video that I believe to be real engagements.

Not the reality, at least not in my first hand experience while working the F-16. Is your first hand experience on the F-16 different? Or are you basing this on second or third hand knowledge? https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4443604&postcount=20 https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3601620&postcount=342 This conversation has happened before https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=248011 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=227363 https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4051284&postcount=22 Here is one from 2008, that was 12 years ago https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=31107

Another potentially interesting conversation mired by these post, including this very post... Oh well, I should know better by now.

Wide Angle Raster (WAR), Diffractive Optics Wide Angle Collimate (WAC), Refractive Optics Also, like everything else, it depends. Some WAC HUDs can project FLIR other can't. Depends on the Pilot Display Unit (PDU) used AFAIK.

USAF block 40/42 uses the Wide Angle Raster (WAR), Diffractive Optics HUD. USAF block 50/52 uses the Wide Angle Collimate (WAC), Refractive Optics HUD. But this is different on different F-16. For example some ROKAF block 52 had WAR HUD and as mention before Turkish block 40 use WAC HUD.

Additionally: So, looking at the USAF circa 2007. There where units with the AAQ-28, each of the pods have their own software. Old software, was not tested for laser masking zones with the AN/ASQ-213 HTS pod installed. Because of this, units with those LITENING pods could not carry both pods at the same time due to the danger of causing laser eye damage to the pilots. Some units had the AAQ-28, but no ASQ-213. Others, vice-versa had the ASQ-213 but no AAQ-28. Some pilot and maintainer where not train to use the equipment. So the missions stayed the same. There where several unit or bases closing or changing missions or aircraft, for example Cannon AFB and Moody AFB, so their aircraft where being send to different units. Several units had a good mix of aircraft with different capabilities.

Just keep in mind, if they would do a USAF 2007 block 40 after ccip, it would still not have AAQ-13. I mention this since most people asking for block 40/42 ask because they want TFR

DCS block 50 is a 2007 versions

If we narrow it down to just USAF block 40/42 from 2007 after CCIP upgrades with same OFP, then the radar, radios, cockpit arrangement, cockpit lightning, IFF and engines will be different.

Every F-16 is different, not only by block, also by year and country. Each country decides what they want in the original delivery and their own update/upgrade program. For example, this are Israeli Block 40 Notice the enlarge intake light with additional electronic warfare antennas. D models with extended backbone. It will have several other avionics and equipment, weapons capabilities are different, etc. Other will have different HUD, example Solo turk 91-0011 was a block 40 with WAC HUD and not the WAR HUD among my other equipment and capabilities differences. Different weapons and engine subversions. There are no weapons mode, there are many software versions. F-16 without MMC used System Capability Upgrades or SCU ( these include some block 5, 10, 15, 25, 30, 32, 40, 42, 50, 52) F-16 with MMC use Operational flight programs ( these include some block 10,15,20,40,42,50,52) Depending weather it was a SCU or a OFP and which one will determine many capabilities. Other equipment that are different at different time by different countries. Radars are different, radios, EW equipment, engines, cockpit panels will be arrange differently, external and internal lightning changes over the years and by country, IFF etc. Engine for example also have different subversions. For example, there are F110-GE-100 to -100D, F100-PW-220 will have different subversions also with different improvements. Lighting also have differences, for example Greek NVS capable F-16 tend to have a orange tint to the lighting while USAF is a blueish green.

This is about empty waypoints (WP)? Then I really do not understand the issue. WP/SP without Lat/Long and Alt are meaningless. There are not displayed and not used by any systems. In some software versions of the real F-16, specific WP/SP are used for specific things, than also ties into the link 16. But I'm not sure if ED will even modeled that, so it is all irrelevant until it is modeled. Well, I guess I do not have an answer to the original post nor do I see any meaning or need for it to be one way or the other. I have not read not ever heard any specific about empty WP/SP in real life. I have not seen anything describing how the look or why. Everything I seen talk about modified them, information that can be entered etc.

See first screenshot I posted