RaceFuel85

That's correct. However keep in mind it is up to the services choice if they want to give it a F/A designation. The F-4 was always intended to be able to haul bombs, yet it was never the F/A-4, since there was already an A-4... It's simply not consistent, and it likely never will be.

Not necessarily true. Originally there was going to be an F-18 and A-18, two distinctly different aircraft. Prior to introduction to service they were combined.

Because the USAF doesn't want to

Show me a Block 50 carrying triple Mavericks operationally and I'll concede the point that you're right and I am wrong.

In multiple posts people have explained the history of the LAU-88's and double/triple loads of Mavericks, some people simply don't care to listen. To put it simply: The triple Maverick load was never authorized for actual combat use as the exhaust plume from the inboard Maverick would scorch and damage the tail. The LAU-88 itself was always problematic and even double Maverick loadouts were rare. Eventually the LAU-88 itself was removed from F-16 service in 2005. ED has elected to model an F-16C *Block 50* from 2007/2008 and want peoples that the Block 50 never carried (IE the Aim-7) and configurations that it was never cleared for (LAU-88's with triple Mavs) or racks that were not used in 2007/2008 (LAU-88's)

As one F-16 pilot told me.. "The only people who call the F-16 the "Fighting Falcon" are idiots and news reporters" So..yeah

Uh...what? The Hornet was released into EA less than a year ago

Folks.. I get we're all super excited, and we all have features we want, are disappointed if we don't get, they're delayed, they're changed... But can we just please stop the perpetual outrage cycle that has been building in this group for the last week? It's exhausting for us as a community and I'm sure for the devs and ED folks who have to deal with this.

What's true for the Hornet isn't necessarily true for the Viper.

A block 40 from 1990/1991 would be bad ass...full LANTIRN suite, TFR, etc...

"How about block 40 that has lantirn and I kinda like fancy bigger HUD, which one is that?" Well the only two F-16 variants with the WAR hud is the Block 40/42 and the Turkish Block 50

They're running into available info walls and thus the Sniper is in limbo at the moment.

120's on the tips do cause stress. They are also flown that way all the time.

ED is going for it to be a study sim, which means it's between hard core USAF simulator and video game.

Check the CSL's for 2007 then.

Because the USAF started phasing out the JSOW-A in 2005

If people don't like EA programs they can wait until it's declared in full release and feature complete Just don't gripe when you're not getting to enjoy it while everyone else is.

You all do understand the information to do a full fidelity Block 50/52+ like the HAF and Polish AF has isn't available, right? The reason why ED is doing a 2007 Block 50 CM is it's the latest version for which there is sufficient public information for it so it can be simulated to ED's standards. Give it up on the F-16I, Block 50/52+, HAF, Polish, etc dreams... Be happy with what we're getting

Not in the style you’re thinking of

I mis-spoke, I believe it is going to be Tape 4.2

Yes indeed

One of the things people have to keep in mind.. CCIP was a *USAF*/ *ANG* project only. There are no CCIP F-16's in non-US service. Now there are F-16's that have gone through upgrades that more or less are the equal to the CCIP program, but they are not the CCIP's that ED is modeling. What we're getting is a Tape 4.1 F-16CM Block 50 from 2007(roughly). You need to temper what you read on the web and forums with that fact.

I'm sure the F-16 will follow ED's standard practice of having the discount available until a few days before release. Some people just find it easier to get it paid for and done with and not have a last minute scramble

Well my link won't do any good for people who cannot take more than 10 seconds to look beyond face value. If you were to go by the one-paragraph summary of the Block 50 you'd think it always had JASSM, JSOW, SDB, Harpoon's, Amraams, Sparrows, Aim-9X's and such from it's arrival nearly 30 years ago. I provided the link so that people can go "Oh, XYZ isn't being included because Wags says it's inaccurate...I better go look and see why he says that" instead of launching into orbit and claiming that ED is screwing people, etc.