F-16 max speed quetion

[Bjørnar Bolsøy]

http://www.f16falcon.com/facts/f16_1.html

"In order to save weight and complexity, the geometry of the
intake was fixed, which limits the maximum speed of the F-16 to
below Mach 2."


If this is correct, it begs the question: what possible max speed
could the F-16 have reached if a movable inlet was ever adapted?



Regards...

[Mark]

The general quote is correct.

wrt what if ??? question... Hard to say. Suspect that during the
aerodynamic design stages the "less than Mach 2" was factored in when
looking at wing sweep, aspect ratio, wing thickness, etc etc. I think it
safe to say that the current aero design probably isn't optimized for 'high
mach' and as such with a variable intake, the added speed capability may not
be that much. FWIW I think the fixed intake was/is a good choice for F-16.

Mark

"Bjørnar Bolsøy" > wrote in message
...
>
> http://www.f16falcon.com/facts/f16_1.html
>
> "In order to save weight and complexity, the geometry of the
> intake was fixed, which limits the maximum speed of the F-16 to
> below Mach 2."
>
>
> If this is correct, it begs the question: what possible max speed
> could the F-16 have reached if a movable inlet was ever adapted?
>
>
>
> Regards...

[tscottme]

Mark > wrote in message
om...
> The general quote is correct.
>
> wrt what if ??? question... Hard to say. Suspect that during the
> aerodynamic design stages the "less than Mach 2" was factored in when
> looking at wing sweep, aspect ratio, wing thickness, etc etc. I think
it
> safe to say that the current aero design probably isn't optimized for
'high
> mach' and as such with a variable intake, the added speed capability
may not
> be that much. FWIW I think the fixed intake was/is a good choice for
F-16.
>
> Mark
>

Well said. Remember the lawn dart's purpose for being was to be cheap
and numerous.

--

Scott
--------
"If Gen. Boykin had been caught giving talks to NAMBLA instead of church
groups, Democrats would be hailing him as a patriot for exercising his
First Amendment rights." Ann Coulter
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2003/102203.htm