f-16

Is it true that f-16 is an insecure aircraft to fly with?

"SuperBLUE" wrote in message
...
Is it true that f-16 is an insecure aircraft to fly with?

It's a bit more secure if you're actually flying IN it.

Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
For personal email, please replace
the z's with e's.
dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt

In article et,
"Dudley Henriques" writes:

"SuperBLUE" wrote in message
...
Is it true that f-16 is an insecure aircraft to fly with?

It's a bit more secure if you're actually flying IN it.

I wouldn't say it's insecure - just a little overshadowed by its bigger
smarter brother. Pay attantion to it, listen when it talks, and don't
ask it to do more than it can and it'll do fine.
A Mirage, now... There's insecure for you. The only airplane I've
ever seen where one of the Maintenance Specialties was Systems
Psychologist.


--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster

I remember constant crashes due to equipment failiure. Is that just military
propaganda in war actions?

Actually, as I seem to remember reading recently, it has one of the better
safety records for a single engine fighter.

Early on it was 'struggling' with engine and electrical power failures (with
resulting flight control problems), but most have been worked out.

Can still chalk alot of mishaps to pilot and/or maintenance error

Mark


"SuperBLUE" wrote in message
...
I remember constant crashes due to equipment failiure. Is that just
military
propaganda in war actions?

Are the used export versions any good?
What is the oldest block number still in use?
Can you compare f-16 technical aspect to a Grippen and who wins?

Exports from the production line are (opinions vary) pretty decent jets (not
the best radar, not the greatest range, but adequate by most standards).
The 'used' models (A/B models) aren't all that bad wrt capability.
Certainly the basic air-to-ground functions are comparable. The radar
(APG-66) is kind of behind the times (although it can support AMRAAM). The
basic airframes are normally inspected to ensure some sort of service-life
remains before they are handed over.

Don't know if there are any pre-Block 15s (i.e. 1/5/10s) out there in
service any more. Certainly the Block 15 is still in use, albeit with new
avionics (MLU for example). There still might be some Block-10s running
around....

I won't get into the comparison question. Too subjective in many ways.
Depends on how you look at it. Both are certainly very fine fighters.

Mark


"SuperBLUE" wrote in message
...
Are the used export versions any good?
What is the oldest block number still in use?
Can you compare f-16 technical aspect to a Grippen and who wins?

After an exhausting session with Victoria's Secret Police, "Mark"
confessed the following:

Actually, as I seem to remember reading recently, it has one of the better
safety records for a single engine fighter.

Agreed.

Early on it was 'struggling' with engine and electrical power failures (with
resulting flight control problems), but most have been worked out.

Well even in my Block 10 and Block 15 (ancient history) experience I
don't recall more than a couple flight control mishaps. At one point
in time I had a print out of every F-16 Class A mishap report from
1978 to 1986. ISTR a jet going into Aviano that had an AoA probe
malfunction, (decided the jet was now exceeding the AoA Limiter), a
couple Tower Shaft Failures (or maybe PTO Shafts) at Nellis and
Hill...the last flight control mishap I recall was at Moody in 1988.
Squadron mate had his jet try to fly sideways just after lifting
off...he jettisoned the jet.

Can still chalk alot of mishaps to pilot and/or maintenance error

Heh heh, indeed...rarely does the ground simply rise up to smite thee.

Robey