|
|
RDAF. Why F-16?
Last post 05-17-1999, 1:59 AM by anonymous2. 12 replies.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
05-12-1999, 11:04 PM |
-
anonymous2
-
-
-
Joined on 08-18-2002
-
-
Posts 1,543
-
-
|
*** Posted by Kim Nielsen ***
[History has shown though that we did make the right choise ;-)
I think F-16 was the "pilots choice" from the beginning!
xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Might bee! But:
I have been doing some road racing during the last ten years.
Due to the tight pupolation in Denmark is motorcircuits always a controversial subject and the overall posssibility is only two, more or less useable, circuits.
A possible way to compensate for this lack of training and competition-facilities is to involve the runways and like of the different airbases. But for very long have all danish airstrips been ment for deploying of the F 16's, and while F 16's are so wounerable to any little item (stone or bolt/nut is the same in that matter!) on the runway, due to the placing of the engine inlet, It is impossible to be aloud to use this alternative, wich for instanse is very popular in the F 16 less Germany!
Where I tend to with this tale, is the strategic mis-design of the F 16 in this matter! the problem in general, is well known of both sides of a conflict - we have all seen Iraqui airbases been clusterbombed to make them unusable - and I find it for a major handicap of the F 16, that it demands an newly broomed surface to take-off from.
Caused by the Swedes idea of "total defence", including layout of puplic streets to suit as alternative airstrips, and shelters blown out of the mountains hidden out in the woods, is one of the other contenders in "the veapon bargain of the century" the Saab Viggen much more useable while constructed to STOL take-off's from very rough airstrips (even plain ground!!).
Though I love the F 16, I think that the wars and conflicts in the time in between "the european weapon-trade", have shown that the Saab Viggen might have been the better trade!???
The last argumentation in this case is that the Russians also are focusing on the danger of being grounded by bad airstrips. The late MIG's and Sukhoi's are able to shut the engine inlets and take air from a kind of grill-opening on the upper surface of the wings during take-off!
Again - What use do You have of a perfect plane, if it's grounded for any reason!!?
Kim Nielsen
|
|
-
05-13-1999, 12:44 AM |
-
anonymous2
-
-
-
Joined on 08-18-2002
-
-
Posts 1,543
-
-
|
*** Posted by Rapier ***
[
Might bee! But:
I have been doing some road racing during the last ten years.
Due to the tight pupolation in Denmark is motorcircuits always a controversial subject and the overall posssibility is only two, more or less useable, circuits.
A possible way to compensate for this lack of training and competition-facilities is to involve the runways and like of the different airbases. But for very long have all danish airstrips been ment for deploying of the F 16's, and while F 16's are so wounerable to any little item (stone or bolt/nut is the same in that matter!) on the runway, due to the placing of the engine inlet, It is impossible to be aloud to use this alternative, wich for instanse is very popular in the F 16 less Germany!
Where I tend to with this tale, is the strategic mis-design of the F 16 in this matter! the problem in general, is well known of both sides of a conflict - we have all seen Iraqui airbases been clusterbombed to make them unusable - and I find it for a major handicap of the F 16, that it demands an newly broomed surface to take-off from.
Caused by the Swedes idea of "total defence", including layout of puplic streets to suit as alternative airstrips, and shelters blown out of the mountains hidden out in the woods, is one of the other contenders in "the veapon bargain of the century" the Saab Viggen much more useable while constructed to STOL take-off's from very rough airstrips (even plain ground!!).
Though I love the F 16, I think that the wars and conflicts in the time in between "the european weapon-trade", have shown that the Saab Viggen might have been the better trade!???
The last argumentation in this case is that the Russians also are focusing on the danger of being grounded by bad airstrips. The late MIG's and Sukhoi's are able to shut the engine inlets and take air from a kind of grill-opening on the upper surface of the wings during take-off!
Again - What use do You have of a perfect plane, if it's grounded for any reason!!?
Kim Nielsen]
Hello Kim,
You have raised some good interesting points, but as well as being the pilots choice, I think it was a matter of cost when they also made their decision to use F-16's. The Saab Vigen would have cost to much to look after for the long term. The F-16 is good for running costs and comes at very good value for money.
I have seen some F-16's (very few) with a grill at the front of the intake to guard from foriegn objects flying into the engines and damaging the engine, but I have talked to RUN about this before and it seems that the RDAF dont use them. I will try to find a picture of these protective grill's to show what I mean.
Regards
Rapier
|
|
-
-
05-14-1999, 3:28 AM |
-
anonymous2
-
-
-
Joined on 08-18-2002
-
-
Posts 1,543
-
-
|
*** Posted by Rapier ***
[
I've noticed Your coversation, but dont think that any grill woudt prevent objects with the size of a bolt or nut to be sucked into the engine, and its here the problem is.
I've talked with some baseguards, who told that during base inspection they had to get out of their car to check the tire treads for picked up stones, wich had to be disposed before crossing the landingstrip.
If You gets the chance to see a F 16 which is taxiing or starting in wet conditions, check out the whirlabout of water going into the engine inlet to be visualised of the suck downwards from the engine!
Kim]
Hi Kim,
I understand what you are saying and you are right maybe the air inlet does suck up all the bits off the runway. Personally I would like to see the state of the engine after something like this has happened but I think the grill's that are used on some F-16's do try to minimise this. Could this be some kind of design fault with the F-16? I guess the ground crew's have got their work cut out for them if they have to keep sweeping up the runways frequently. I read somewhere that an F-16 squadron had been grounded because of a problem like this. They were grounded because an F-16 pilot went missing shortly after take off and they only found the wreckege of the plane, no pilot as they could not see if he ejected it was smashed up that bad. On inspection of the engine fragments they discovered that the turbo fans had strange chip marks on them caused by some kind of projectile being forced into the engine, so you could be right. What I cant understand though is if it is a problem why has'nt it been solved?
Regards
Rapier
|
|
-
05-14-1999, 5:26 PM |
-
anonymous2
-
-
-
Joined on 08-18-2002
-
-
Posts 1,543
-
-
|
*** Posted by Kim Nielsen ***
[
I've noticed Your coversation, but dont think that any grill woudt prevent objects with the size of a bolt or nut to be sucked into the engine, and its here the problem is.
I've talked with some baseguards, who told that during base inspection they had to get out of their car to check the tire treads for picked up stones, wich had to be disposed before crossing the landingstrip.
If You gets the chance to see a F 16 which is taxiing or starting in wet conditions, check out the whirlabout of water going into the engine inlet to be visualised of the suck downwards from the engine!
Kim
Hi Kim,
I understand what you are saying and you are right maybe the air inlet does suck up all the bits off the runway.
........I guess the ground crew's have got their work cut out for them if they have to keep sweeping up the runways frequently
.........What I cant understand though is if it is a problem why has'nt it been solved?
Regards
Rapier]
xxxxxxx
A freind of mine was once working on a factory, wich in fact was very busy and earned good money on large rotating brooms/sweepers (?) for the RDAF! It might have been in connection with the, at then, newly buyed F 16's!?
Solve the problem at this point? Isnt it a little late to replace the inlet beyond the cockpithood? :-)
Beside, i've noticed that the Delta winged so called F 16 XL, still has the inlet flaced underneath the body in front of the wing!
Kim
|
|
-
-
|
|
|
|
Copyright©1998-2004 Avitop Our Privacy Policy - Aviation
|
|