F16Ds with CFTs - degraded performance?
-
Anyone know if the CFTs mounted on the F16Ds 52+/60s degrade the overall performance of the plane?
Although I know the CFTs were designed to increase range without affecting the overall aerodynamics. But can't imagine the bulky things not increasing drag and manourverability.
Also very stupid question probably, is it possible to drop the CFTs in mid flight? Like in the drop tanks under the wings. Or is it possible to refuel the CFTs in mid-flight?
Just curious. Assume the info is out the in public domain.
-
No e CFT cant be drop or refuel in midair i think n they dont really degrade performance. An F-16 can only pull 7g when carrying a centerline droptank but with CFT it can still pull 8g, e others advantage u can fig. out liao
-
BUT F16 clean or with just wing-tip missiles (not tat it would usually fight like that) is supposed to be able to pull 9G.
Also with the significant added weight it will affect the weight versus thrust ration. -
Yap 9g when it clean but things change when u carry a centerline droptank
-
ha ha ha... Even if no centreline drop tank, you still have bombs, missiles, etc, hanging under the wings...
-
Is the CFT connected to the internal fuel tanks of the F-16D? If so then i supposed the CFT will be fill up along with the internal fuel tanks during in-flight refueling.
I don't think the CFT can be drop as it will most likely hit the fuselage in the process unlike the fuel tanks carried under the fuselage on pylons. -
Nothing is free. Yes CFT causes some drag. But it has been area ruled so quite minimal. Better performance than drop tanks.
If the large ferry tanks are carried, it limits the g loading and store carried. Particularly so on CAP.
For the F-15 it is called FAST not CFT, as it can carry stuff over than fuel. -
i guess the RSAF thinks that being able to stay in the air for longer periods of time is better than dogfighting ability. since there are so few airplane battles do get into dogfights.
-
along with the usual advantages of having more fuel (eg. added range, increased CAP durations etc.) having more fuel would have an added advantage in BVR combat, as they can use the afterburners more liberally.
That would add extra range to BVR missiles (higher launch velocity), added ability to attempt to outrun missiles fired at the aircraft.
Also, in an unlikely scenario that they're caught in WVR situations, where aircraft lose airspeed and altitude rapidly in turning fights, the added fuel would allow them to last longer in the fight and bring the bird home. -
so it's actually a trade off
-
Trade off? Not really, its a huge advantage to have more fuel for less drag. If u carry external fuel tanks instead of CFTs, u'd have more fuel and more drag. CFT allows the aircraft to have more fuel, and less drag!
Internally, the F-16 has about 7000lb of fuel. With CFTs, its abt 11000lbs of fuel! Full afterburners of an F-16 consumes abt 58000lbs of fuel per hour. Imagine with just 7000lb of fuel, u only can engage the AB for 7 mins...
With External tanks, got slightly more fuel, but u will have more drag and its harder to break the sound barrier with the external fuel tanks attached. Drag increases exponentially in the transonic region if i am not wrong. -
hmm.. free up pylon space for more ordnances~
-
Not to mention cost involved. To dog fight or achieve any speed, you will need to ditch the tanks. Or risk tearing them off and causing other fuselage damage.Originally posted by Shotgun:Trade off? Not really, its a huge advantage to have more fuel for less drag. If u carry external fuel tanks instead of CFTs, u'd have more fuel and more drag. CFT allows the aircraft to have more fuel, and less drag!
Internally, the F-16 has about 7000lb of fuel. With CFTs, its abt 11000lbs of fuel! Full afterburners of an F-16 consumes abt 58000lbs of fuel per hour. Imagine with just 7000lb of fuel, u only can engage the AB for 7 mins...
With External tanks, got slightly more fuel, but u will have more drag and its harder to break the sound barrier with the external fuel tanks attached. Drag increases exponentially in the transonic region if i am not wrong. -
I think a comparison between a CFT and a drop tank is a off -topic! A comparison between a normal F-16 and a F-16 with CFT sure be a better one! If they encounter a Su-30MKK,definitely F-16 with CFT will lose out in a dogfight! I am worry abtg this kind of scenario how it will affect the dogfight with Sukhoi plane....or a Mig-29!Originally posted by Shotgun:Trade off? Not really, its a huge advantage to have more fuel for less drag. If u carry external fuel tanks instead of CFTs, u'd have more fuel and more drag. CFT allows the aircraft to have more fuel, and less drag!
Internally, the F-16 has about 7000lb of fuel. With CFTs, its abt 11000lbs of fuel! Full afterburners of an F-16 consumes abt 58000lbs of fuel per hour. Imagine with just 7000lb of fuel, u only can engage the AB for 7 mins...
With External tanks, got slightly more fuel, but u will have more drag and its harder to break the sound barrier with the external fuel tanks attached. Drag increases exponentially in the transonic region if i am not wrong. -
Well, as stated, the amount of drag induced, according to Israeli engineers is negligible.
Also, dogfights are definitely a situation to be avoided since it consumes too much fuel and time. Ideally, everything should be handled BVR.
Coming close would really depend on who shoots first nowadays due to high off boresight helmet systems. U don't really need to get ur plane in a crunching turn to bring ur nose onto the enemy to shoot a missile. Just put him somewhere in front of ur 3-9 and let the python4 take care of the rest.
Also, maintaining the highest possible turn rate in dogfights is crucial. To do that, u need ABs to push up ur airspeed into the corner airspeed of the jet quickly when it drops below the corner airspeed. ABs need lots of fuel, and having CFTs, gives u more fuel at ur disposal for u to maintain the highest possible turn rate.