F-16 over-performing at low altitude

[falcon_120]

It would be nice to have some kind of penalty for exceding those limits during enough time or repeatedly, like increasing the ods of in flight failure.

 

Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

[Dee-Jay]

Also guys please make a difference of going over the limit up high and down low on the deck, too different things.

 

Agree.

[oldtimesake]

From a former F-16 and Fulcrum pilot (the name is Fred Clifton):

 

Speed

 

Both aircraft display good performance throughout their flight regimes in the comparison configuration. The MiG-29 enjoys a speed advantage at high altitude with a flight manual limit of Mach 2.3. The F-16’s high altitude limit is

Mach 2.05 but this is more of a limit of inlet design. The MiG-29 has variable geometry inlets to control the shock wave that forms in the inlet and prevent supersonic flow from reaching the engine. The F-16 employs a simple fixed-geometry inlet with a sharp upper lip that extends out beyond the lower portion of the inlet. A shock wave forms on this lip and prevents the flow in the intake from going supersonic. The objective is to keep the air going into the engine subsonic unlike a certain ‘subject matter expert’ on this website who thinks that the air should be accelerated to even higher speeds than the aircraft is traveling. Supersonic air in the compressor section? That’s bad.

 

Both aircraft have the same indicated airspeed limit at lower altitudes of

810 knots. This would require the centerline tanks to be jettisoned. The placard limits for the tanks are 600 knots or Mach 1.6 (Mach 1.5 for the MiG-29) whichever less is. It was the researcher’s experience that the MiG-29 would probably not reach this limit unless a dive was initiated. The F-16 Block 40 will easily reach 800 knots on the deck. In fact, power must be reduced to avoid exceeding placard limits. The limit is not thrust, as the F-16 has been test flown on the plus side of 900 knots. The limit for the F-16 is the canopy. Heating due to air friction at such speeds will cause the polycarbonate canopy to get soft and ultimately fail.

[FoxAlfa]

I am still waiting for anybody to provide a FLIGHT MANUAL Diagram that says Viper can safely go over 800 kts on the deck, Lockheed engineers don't spit on their fingers, rise them in the air and set the limit... they have their reasons... if you can't everything else is a hearsay and useless.

Edited September 13, 2020 by FoxAlfa

[DrBackJack]

I am still waiting for anybody to provide a FLIGHT MANUAL Diagram that says Viper can safely go over 800 kts on the deck, Lockheed engineers don't spit on their fingers, rise them in the air and set the limit... they have their reasons... if you can't everything else is a hearsay and useless.

 

Who is saying it can go safely above 800 knots? It seems like you're arguing yourself :lol:

[ZHeN]

haven't read the whole thread, but this thing goes M1.21 no problem even with 4x120, 1x9X on the deck...

[Glide]

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

 

 

Thanks for that excellent link! Love the images of FLIR reflected on the HUD thanks to the LANTIRN......