On Mon, 1 Dec 2003 16:48:22 -0200, "Vicente Vazquez"
wrote:

"Dweezil Dwarftosser" escreveu na mensagem
...
The successful failu the F-16.

Is it correct to say that the F-16 is also implicated on the failure of the
F-20 Tigershark project ??

In brief :

- F-20 should be an aircraft cleared for export for non-NATO countries
(F-16 weren't cleared for that)
- F-16 were cleared for export (Seems like General Dynamics was in deep
financial trouble)
- F-20 program went down the drain

Does that kind of affirmation have some veridical background or is it just
another BS that can be found in some "not very reliable" books and
magazines?

There's a lot of truth in the sequence. The policy, pre-Carter, was to
provide second level (similar to Soviet "export" version) aircraft to
third-world/developing nation AFs. These were the folks that were
principal customers for the NF-156 Freedom Fighter (AKA F-5A program).

Northrop developed a follow-on to the F-5 to sell to existing
customers who were not eligible for US equippage, i.e. F-15/F-16
aircraft. There were other contenders, such as the F-16/79--a Viper
without advanced avionics and pushed by a J-79 engine. It was a viable
market for an arguably competitive airplane.

When Carter breached the dike by contracting for F-16As to Pakistan
and then S. Korea, the list of potential F-20 customers disappeared as
they all demanded first level equipment, i.e. F-16s.

Later Northrop tried to flog the airplane to Air Defense Command and
as a potential diversification airplane for TAC, but it simply
couldn't compete against the already existing Viper base.

Having flown the F-20 cockpit (albeit not with F-20 flight models)
during F-23 Dem/Val, I would say that the F-20 was not ready to
compete with the ergonomics of F-16.

Throw in a couple of demo aircraft prangs and you have all the
ingredients of a failed program.