F-16 Throttle response and engine performance

[Wicked.-]

First let me say I know this is EA, I simply want to add this to the wish list.

 

 

I ran across this blurb on the Lockheed Martin website about the changes to the Viper since the original production F-16A.

 

 

"The first Block 50/52 was delivered to the US Air Force in 1991. The Block 50/52 F-16 is recognized for its ability to carry the AGM-88 HARM in the suppression of enemy air defenses, or SEAD, missions. The F-16 can carry as many as four HARMs.

 

An avionics launcher interface computer allows the F-16 to launch the HARM missile. US Air Force F-16s have been upgraded to carry the HARM Targeting System, or HTS, pod on the left intake hardpoint so it can be combined with laser targeting pods designed to fit on the right intake hardpoint. The HTS pod contains a hypersensitive receiver that detects, classifies, and ranges threats and passes the information to the HARM and to the cockpit displays. With the targeting system, the F-16 has full autonomous HARM capability.

 

The Block 50/52 F-16 continued to be improved, and the current aircraft sold to the FMS customers is equipped with the APG-68(V9) radar, which offers longer range detection against air targets and higher reliability. The Block 50/52 now includes embedded global positioning system/inertial navigation system, a larger capacity data transfer cartridge, a digital terrain system data transfer cartridge, a cockpit compatible with night vision systems, an improved data modem, an ALR-56M advanced radar warning receiver, an ALE-47 threat-adaptive countermeasure system, and an advanced interrogator for identifying friendly aircraft.

 

In the cockpit, an upgraded programmable display generator has four times the memory and seven times the processor speed of the system it replaces. New VHF/FM antennas increase reception ranges. The Block 50/52 is powered by increased performance engines—the General Electric F110-GE-129 and the Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-229—each rated to deliver over 29,000 pounds of thrust in afterburner. Block 50/52 are the first F-16 versions to fully integrate the AGM-84 Harpoon anti-shipping missile.

The engines that power the F-16 have improved in more ways than in maximum thrust. Engines used in early F-16s required from six to eight seconds to spool up from idle to afterburner. Since then, electronic controls have replaced hydro-mechanical systems. The changes allow current engines to go from idle to full afterburner in two seconds. Engine reliability and ease of maintenance have also been improved significantly. Today’s F-16 engines can be expected to deliver eight to ten years of operational service between depot inspections."

 

 

I don't believe the current PFM models the above idle to afterburner time of 2 seconds. It would be very cool if it did. :D

[QuiGon]

I'm also curious about the throttle response in DCS to real life.

 

I just saw the following video, where the pilot adjusts throttle quite a lot too keep the formation and you can clearly see the RPM gauge and how it changes much more rapidly than it does in our DCS F-16:

 

How can there be such a big difference between the real life F-16 and the DCS F-16? :huh:

[Qiou87]

The problem is that there are so many different Block 50s. As they say: first delivery 1991, ours is ca. 2007, and this is on the LM website today (2020). They are probably speaking about the jet and its capabilities today. One example: they say the radar is APG-68 V9, whereas (according to Wags' post in this section) ours has APG-68 V5. Another one: Harpoon (not available to us). There is not a fixed set of characteristics for a Block 50, it has been upgraded year after year. Maybe ours in 2007 didn't have the same engine management system to allow for such rapid changes from idle to AB?

[Snake122]

I'm also curious about the throttle response in DCS to real life.

 

I just saw the following video, where the pilot adjusts throttle quite a lot too keep the formation and you can clearly see the RPM gauge and how it changes much more rapidly than it does in our DCS F-16:

 

How can there be such a big difference between the real life F-16 and the DCS F-16? :huh:

I've noticed that across several platforms videos, not just the Viper. Watch a F/A-18 Blue Angels or carrier landing video that shows throttle movement and you will see lots more throttle movement than what I could get away with in DCS. Some of this can be due to the effective "curves" on real life throttles. I know the piston engines I fly in real life has a far from linear response. But I definitely agree that the spool time seems excessive in DCS after watching these videos. Thanks for linking that one QuiGon!

 

[Glide]

Yes, I agree the engine performance is not correct. It's a slush box after 20000ft. I'm working on a series of guns-only missions, and it's too sluggish. Check out this article, it's a great read: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/3383/what-it-was-like-flying-and-fighting-the-f-16n-viper-topguns-legendary-hotrod