Question:
Is the F-16 (or a modernised F-16) better/be better than the F/A-35?
kaptainfelix
2012-06-20 10:27:35 UTC
Yes the F/A 35 has vertical take off but the F-16 is still an extremely versatile and maneuverable fighter with superb cockpit field of view and muti-role capability.
Why not update the F-16 to include more RAM, new radar, new avionics, new engine ? Would have been cheaper than the F-35.
Or is it about defense contracts ?
Eleven answers:
TomB
2012-06-20 10:38:13 UTC
Aircraft airframes have a life expectancy due to the extreme stress placed on them, the current crop of F-16s is near theirs. In order to make the F-16 as versatile and state of the art as the F-35 it is more time and cost effective to just build the F-35. The F-16 can not operate from Carriers because it wasn't built to, the airframes and landing gear can't take the stress, also the F-16 is not designed for vectored thrust and a new engine won't fix that so the other countries involved in the development of the F-35 that have slope decked carriers would be S.O.L. (and those are just a couple of reasons)
The Sheepdog
2012-06-20 14:05:56 UTC
The A-variant does not have VTOL capability, and frankly, you don't want it except in specific circumstances. Having that feature greatly reduces the range and maximum payload that the plane can carry, and can also have an adverse affect on the overall flight performance.



- There was a joke about the Harrier: "You can either carry two bombs three miles or three bombs two miles."



The Navy C-variant also has an increased wingspan, which increases its range, but also has some adverse effects on flight performance.



The Air Force A-variant has the highest performance in terms of maneuverability and speed, which are slightly better than the Block 50 F16C. The F16 is one of, if not the single most heavily upgraded aircraft in the world in terms of how it has evolved since its inception, but it's old tech and needs replacement. While the F22 is an interceptor like the F15E, the F35 is a multi-role fighter like the F16 and F18.



Both the F16 and the F35 are made by Lockheed Martin.
lana_sands
2012-06-20 10:56:35 UTC
Basic question? In some ways....

There are 3 models of F-35. A's for the USAF,Vstol B's for the USMC & Royal Navy FAA, C models for the USN. All are still in flight test. The F-16 is a 1970's design & the most used plane arround. Time for the next generation. Biggest plus for the newer planes is internal weapons bays. Leaving wings clear for better aerodynamics & less radar return. Most F-16's have been updated once or twice already. Time to move on. Is the F-16 a better plane? In some aspects of performance. Yes, contracts matter.
☦ICXCNIKA ☦
2012-06-20 11:03:51 UTC
No- the selling feature of the F-35 is not VTOl but the fact it was built from the ground up to be stealthy while an F-16 was not. The reason that modernizing the F-16 to a 4.5 standard could maximize commonality with 5th generation aircraft and lengthen the service life.
Scott
2014-12-28 09:19:09 UTC
I think the a combination of the F 15 silent eagle with the vectored eagle with canards would be an overmatch for any Russian Su 35 -47 but the People that make these decisions all have been bought .
Mark F
2012-06-20 10:49:20 UTC
The F-16 was engineered to a specific set of requirements in the early 1970's. The world has changed so the F-35 was designed to a dramatically different set of requirements to meet modern demands.



New wine, old bottles and all of that.
?
2012-06-20 10:38:25 UTC
Would it have been cheaper than the F-35? Absolutely. So would updating a Sopwith Camel. The F-16 doesn't have the payload capacity or stealth ability to do what the F-35 is supposed to do.
Yahoo Jedi
2012-06-20 10:34:51 UTC
The F35 has some clearly way seriously better stuff on it.



You're comparing a WWII Mustang against the F-4 Phantom.
anonymous
2012-06-20 10:29:46 UTC
f35 was designed to be a replacement, superior in almost every way conceivable.

Only thing I see the f16 having an advantage is maintenance costs and reliability
User commited avatar suicide
2012-06-20 10:33:13 UTC
why not put a new paint and some new wooden parts on your vintage Ford T?



put simply, at some point, refurbishing and maintaining old machines in airworthy condition may cost more than producing new ones, better suited to today's needs.
ingsoc1
2012-06-20 10:29:46 UTC
We are not building the f 35 never made it into production


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...