It should be noted regarding every test combat of F16 vs F35 where the F16 won, it was only in tests where the F35 was forbidden from using it's Distributed Aperture System, which allows it to target and fire missiles at targets directly behind it, or anywhere else (it does NOT need to face it's target to fire a missile at it, making it's lack of maneuverability irrelevant). The F35 was never defeated by F16s when it was allowed to use the Distributed Aperture System. It was intentionally handicapped in those mock dogfights and not reprepresentative of how the aircraft would actually kill air targets in a real fight.
The key is in the summary though; "its successors are not built to handle the off-script, messy aerial engagements..." Sure, it lacks stealth. It lacks all the wiz-bangs. But there is still great value in that "high-low mix" the fighter mafia was talking about. Its a plane that the pilot can jump in and go (not totally, but its fast to get on the runway). There's no software issues. No "logging in" to complex systems before flight. Super simple to operate and fly. relatively low cost. and it still outperforms most other planes in multiple categories. So the F35 is a better missile shooter. Great. The F16 is a better dog fighter. In most highly technical things, there is a selectivity triangle. You can generally only have two out of three. They compliment each other well, and with good training, can be deployed together to support each other and cover the other's weaknesses.
I was about to say this. Thanks for beating me to it. What would be fun in computer simulation would be the newest F-35 against a fully modernized F16-XL with both flown by AI. [We likely won't hear much about that result for a while.]
@@epremeauxWasn't attempting to de-value the F16, it is a battle tested and proven with blood fighter and clearly still has it's place in any respectable air force. I just was pointing out the erroneous assumption people glean from the story that F16's "beat" the F35... when the F35 was basically crippled and never when it wasn't handicapped. The F16 is still clearly a very valuable fighter, but anyone who thinks it a superior air-to-air fighter based off that terribly simplistic example of "it beat the F35!" is overselling the F16 in modern day and underselling the F35.
And a distributed aperture system cannot be retrofitted onto an F-16… why? That’s the problem most people have with these kinds of analogies. Comparing upgraded weapons systems is beside the point.
When someome mentions Boyd as though he was a genius I die inside a little. He did serve in Korea but he never served in vietnam. He was a flight instructor. An instructor whose students would either have to come back to retrain, because he'd done it badly, or came back in boxes, again because he'd trained them badly.
boyd prevented the air force bullcrap artists like you from installing a ladder on the fighter. no, literally john boyd prevented liars like you from literally putting a ladder on the greatest airplane on the planet.
It's just BFM. Your planes good at it or not. You also need to fight your fight. If you go into one circle and your aircraft is bad at it you'll lose. Keep in mind missles weren't as good. You also have to now figure out the enemies aircraft.
Thank you Simon! I'm a USAF vet where my job was as an F-16 crew chief. We typically know the nitty gritty of getting the Viper in the air for the mission, but we never got the behind the scenes story about the "making of" the F-16. I really enjoyed this video for the background aspect and the achievements of the airframe over the decades, but please keep in mind all the ground maintenance that goes into keeping these fighters in the skies. There are many man-hours of inspections and maintenance by various specialists for each system if the aircraft- including, but limited to the crew chief, munitions, avionics, fuel, phase docks, and so many other logistical support technicians as well. Without maintainers, the planes dont fly. That's just my little shout out for the maintainers. Again- thank you for this great video, Simon!
Former weapons myself, worked 16s a bit as a reservist at Luke but I learned my job on the F-15E, that jet is a monster. From a strictly munitions standpoint, I'd take the 15 over either the 16 or the 35, unless the 35 is in "beast mode" maybe. I'm probably a bit biased though, I got to fly the 15 once in the back seat, so much fun 👌🏻
I’m currently an F-16 crew cheif, I love the jet but they can be very stubborn. Especially as the ones we have get up there in age, but I always love seeing them fly
Thank you for contributing your own story, adding to the whole picture. Greetings from Denmark - proud of our F-16s, and proud of now passing them on to Ukraine.
Well said! Ground crews don't get enough recognition for keeping warbirds in the air. Plus the amount of time and money it takes to service / repair and re-arm them is a huge factor in their combat effectiveness.
@@chaosXP3RT I hate to be that "wellakshually" guy, but, well, actually: it's relatively _affordable_ American garbage. Especially by Lockheed standards. At $63 mil, the block 70/72 F-16 is considerably cheaper than every fighter that can hang with it, because they all need thrust vectoring to match it. I mean, the Gripen is a bargain, but besides that, nothing else on the market comes close in bang-for-the-buck. And the avionics are the pricey part. If you only need them to be good enough to beat Russian forces, then a Turkish-built block 50/52 is listed at $34m. The F-16 is a lot of things - a fighter, a bomber, an ejection-seat-test-vehicle; but expensive isn't really one of those things.
Test pilots really don't get the praise they deserve. Accidentally taking off a completely new aircraft with very unfamiliar controls and being able to cruise it around and safely land it must of been one hell of a hellraising experience. Kudos to that man!
@@badluck5647 Come on man. For all the test pilots that have died whilst testing new aircraft, don't you think that comment is in very poor taste. Just a little bit of respect wouldn't go far amiss.
@@justandy333 Not really. I grew up around the test pilots who ended up working for NASA. They said their generation was more like crash test dummies instead of engineers.
ahh yes because none of us was army brats an thats why we love this shit simon makes aswell as having our own tour of duty, grow up kiddo@@justandy333 some of us have run aroun with special forces as if they were all our uncles. others worked with them for short or longer time in their regular service.
One side note about the comment regarding the dogfight between the F16 and F35. My understanding is that this was prior to the F35 being cleared to 9Gs and wasnt able to use its full capabiliy. Those restrictions have since been lifted but that story is often used to say the F35 cant turn. Pilots ive heard have said exactly the opposite
This is correct, I just wrote something similar but you said it better, its really not hard to find that info and it is Well known among nerds like us, Im not saying the F16 is bad, but the fact is that modern stealth Fighters shoot down older planes before they can spot the stealth fighter on thier radar. I love the F16 for what it is, but times have changed. Also we should listen to the pilots and not keyboard worriors, if pilots hated the F35 we would have heard about it by now.
@@Pilsnorno one's making the claim that pilots hate Fat Amy. She's a great long range JSF, and a 'good' dogfighter (not awesome, but still good). The Viper is just far more agile in a dogfight, predominantly in a rate fight, and because of its lightweight, nimble airframe is able to recover energy faster than larger, heavier fighters. It doesn't do so well in the vertical, though, especially against the likes of the F-15C. I don't know why you feel like the 'keyboard warrior' label only applies to others and not yourself... in the way you're using it, it sounds like, in your estimate, anyone voicing an opinion that differs from yours is a keyboard warrior, by default. If you're engaging with others in a discussion on a comment section, and arguing against other's opinions, you're no less a keyboard warrior, by your own definition. You're using it incorrectly to begin with. Keyboard warriors aren't labelled so because they have an opinion, they are labelled so because of their habit to aggressively fight with others online, often times presenting themselves as tough and formidable with zero evidence. That's what a keyboard warrior actually is. Not just a person with a 'wrong' opinion.
I seriously cannot wrap my head around 9gs being survivable for anything. Your physiology is so far past the point of breaking, passing out, vision going white, even just moving your hands. And can you imagine the relays and servos for that kind of environment? I'm a granola eating lefty hippy, but I would be lieing my rear off if I didn't admit to utter fascination with planes, rockets, and applied science that should be impossible :) 🚀🧑🚀✈️🛫 heh, doesn't hurt that a great uncle was an engineer for the shuttle. He was a very cool guy
the f35 in the early trials against the f16 was the 002 (literaly the second f35 ever produced) version it was still handicapped in g loading by computer limited controls, the f35 still scored a kill even though it was heavily limited. the limits were removed as the structure was analyzed under load in tests like the one quoted. nowadays f35 pilots who flew the f16 have said the f35 is more agile specialy when it comes to roll at high angles of attack
@@jg3000 point being again that WVR is extremely high risk in a more current context where national air forces are geared towards BVR engagement and are building aircraft where they can to suit.
@@Skidracer21 It's not the end of WVR. If you can shoot your missiles and go home. Saving the jet and the pilot. Hopefully wrecking the other guy. But they'll always be something WVR. Like pesky helicopters in a CAS mission. Or orders to get visual ID.
@@jg3000 most pilots who have flown both say the f35 has an advantage in bfm over the f16 and with aim 9X and its distributed aperture detection system it doesnt even have to manuever to fire the missile and get a kill
Thank you for this great look at this amazing aircraft. I recently had the honor to design a special tail for one of our Belgian Air Force F-16's. FA-95 reached it structural design limit of 8000hours, making it the first European Viper to reach this milestone thanks to the amazing work of the maintenance crews, keeping this plane flying since the 80's. I spoke to the pilot after and he said 'She flies just like a brand new viper'. A true testament to this amazing jet.
Its pilots and crews often use the name "Viper" instead, because of a perceived resemblance to a viper snake as well as to the fictional Colonial Viper starfighter from the television program Battlestar Galactica, which aired at the time the F-16 entered service.
Weird, I've only ever heard the f16 called "viper" in the past 10yrs or so. And always the "falcon" or "fighting falcon" before that.. always loved the f16 and it was my favorite aircraft as a kid. Still love it really..
It looks like a viper who is about to bite. However there is nothing in common in terms of looks with Battlestar Gallactica (1978) vipers (aside the name). A Mig-3 may have more communality with Galactica vipers, since the pilot sits closer to the tail than the nose.
I was aircraft refueler at Edwards AFB in 1974. I fueled all the YF16's in test status at that time. It was recognized as an amazing aircraft by all us at that time.
I'd like it to be known as I'm from the town where the F16 was designed and built, it wasn't the 'Fighter Mafia' it was the 'LIGHT Fighter Mafia'! America HAD fighters but they were ALL multi-role, the Viper was never designed for that it was initially designed to ONLY dogfight. The fact that this frame is amazing at everything is a testament to the true passion and dedication of these truly genius gentleman.
I saw a video of a pilot taking a journalist up in an F16 and they were going through an example of the fighter school training process, one on one combat scenarios, and the pilot said that he loved the falcon, it was a great plane with a great radar, but the f35 could draw a bead on it before he would even know it was there. I do think that is a very good thing to have the falcon as a measuring stick for any new design aircraft that might come into the inventory. Interesting to me how when the designers think in terms of simple, stripped down, elemental designs like the "Heinneman Hotrod" A4 Skyhawk and the F16, wonderful designs result rather that the kind of bloated cram it all in complexity of the Phantom, Tomcat, and F22. I'm not saying the Skyhawk and F16 are superior aircraft, just that there is definitely a place for basic, clean and economical designs, and I think we (and the contractors) forget that.
I was on a deployment in Korea in early 1990 when one of these things came ripping down the valley that we were advancing through. He was at maybe 300 ft. Next thing we heard was " tanks, halt in place. Your dead." That's one seriously bad ass plane. And way effective
I live ten miles away from Mountain Home airbase in Idaho, you can hear one of those beauties coming from over 5 miles away, and they are loud as hell, even when they're flying at 20 or 30 thousand feet.
Simon, I love/hate the weird/adorable/awkward thing you do when you bring up hypothetical situations, it's fantastic! Thanks for being you and giving us awesome stories homie!!!
One of the big things the F16 has in its favour is its availability. With so much operational use over such a long time, they've had all the reliability issues they ever had worked out, and with so many in service the logistics chain for spares is good. If an air force buys 50 F16s, it can keep most of those available. If it buys something else, it'd need to buy many more and a lot of spares up front to maintain the same level of availability. So the F16's military effectiveness is very good. You can have your planes *and* fly them.
I never get tired of hearing about the F-16 and the F-15. These designs go back 50 years but are so good that with modern avionics and other tech are not only relevant but dominant. The late Chuck Horner (cmndr Air Force) called the F-16 "the last of the sports models". It's fly by wire is such an excellent system it's now in the F-15 EX. Very fast and wickedly maneurably it's a dogfighter's dream.
Nobody is saying its the best fighter. What the article is saying is its the ultimate MULTIROLE fighter. The combination of the relatively very low price, reliability, kinematics and arguably the best cockpit layout make this thing top notch. Edit- No shit the F35 is better in many ways, hence why I said "relatively very low price". Not every country is America, and not every country can afford the F35.
it is possibly not the best at anything, but it is top 3 for everything. this makes it far more usable than any one trick pony specialist plane and overall there are not many competitors for the cost, ability, flexibility and reliability combination. I would rather have 100 f16 than 25 ground attack, 25 high level bombers, 25 sead and 25 air superiority. You have as many as you need of whichever role you need at the time, and it will be different tomorrow
@@davidfuller581 no its not anymore, F-35 was literally designed to perform SEAD better than any other plane in service - its basically F-16 with added stealth which is PARAMOUNT in SEAD today
Not coming from a Navy family, my favorite Navy jet has always been the F-14, from receiving my GI Joe Skystriker at Christmas as a kid to watching it in The Final Countdown and Top Gun, it's my favorite fighter from any of the services!
Coming from a country that can't afford significant numbers of anything (6 million people) my heart lies with the F-16. Never the top dog in any category, but in the top 3 in every category. I'm proud that our F-16s are going to Ukraine as we switch to F-35s, but I do wish we would adopt the "hi/lo mix" approach and get a few less F-35s in exchange for twice as many F-16Vs. Especially now where several countries are reporting that their radar tech has advanced to the point where the F-35s "magic trick" is a lot less impressive. Having a backup plan that includes stupid high agility doesn't seem like a bad idea if the F-35 one day gets demoted to "not a stealth plane after all".
Grew up a navy brat in the 80s and 90s and I bucked the trend and fell in love with the f-4 phantom. To this day it's still my favorite, but that doesn't stop me from oggling the f-16 whenever I see one like I'm a high schooler enjoying the eye candy at the beach.
When I was a young boy I build model planes and fighters. The F-16 Falcon was my favorite. I read magazine articles on this wonderful fighter. It was groundbreaking and dubed the Porsche of fighters.
I thought the event with F-35s was testing it's capabilities without stealth or advanced targeting systems? The F-35 can shoot targets without pointing its nose and this feature wasn't used in the test. If an f-35 has to dogfight, things have gone horribly wrong for it.
I've always wondered how well an F35 is going to shoot down a similar stealth aircraft. Neither aircraft can get a missile lock until they are in each other's face and at dogfight range. I think the entire concept of never needing to dogfight again because we will detect the enemy at long range and shoot it down before they can see us is total BS. That will only work if you are engaging a non-stealth aircraft.
@@perryallan3524 I guess it depends what you consider dogfights to be. Stealth doesn't mean they are invisible on radar, it means they are harder to identify. So far, no other country has anything comparable in terms of stealth. Regardless, that's also why the F35 pilots can lock on targets by looking at them instead of pointing the aircraft's nose at it. It doesn't need to outperform the other plane to win.
@@fredbyoutubing Not just harder to identify, but also harder to TARGET at long range. When adversarial nations get stealth tech up to actual operational capacity we are going to see close up dogfights again for the simple fact that neither side can target the other at long range. And while it is good that the F-35 and future planes can target off-boresight, the increasing lack of ability to maneuver is concerning for the future.
@@alexwalker2582 Neither of us are experts, but I think the F35 is misunderstood in general. The capabilities I'm talking is for visual range too. I'm saying it's also more capable than we think. It lacks the qualities of old dogfighters because it doesn't need them. Plus, by the time adversaries get to that point, there will be a replacement for air supperiority fighters like F-22s and F-15s.
Simon, great video about one of my very favorite planes, thank you! One thing, I actually live right next to Hill Air Force Base, but I live in the state of Utah and not in Europe. It's true that we have two fighter wings that primarily consist of F-16s that we're quite proud of. But we are here on Utah. We have a very large maintenance and repair depot on base and we are replacing older falcons with F-35s and the plan was to convert over completely to the lightning II but between all the snafus they had in producing the F-35 and the fact that the updated F-16 s are so good I think they're going to hold onto them for awhile yet.
Yesterday, our first F16 is retired from the Belgium air force, also because we're changing to the F35. I still think the F16 is the most elegant fighter ever built.
The f15 is a great plane no doubt. Probably understated a little outside of its air/ air record. (The f16 is a better dog fighter though) The f16 advantage is its like half the cost which is why it was conceived in the first place. Quantity has a quality of its own.
"The woods are dark and deep and I have many promises to keep. Many miles to go, before I sleep." That should be the mission statement for all US made aircraft. C130, B 52, F 16, F 15, F 18, C 5, and the B 1B. Yeah, still flying.
Should also include the a10. One of the best planes ever designed to do what it was meant to do. Getting down and dirty is scary with any plane now. That mission is dangerous with man pads and better done with a targeting pod 15k feet in the air lol. Which the a10 also has and excels with.
Hill Air Force Base is in Northern Utah and not in Europe, but it's nice to hear it's name in your video. Our family home is a mile off the southern end of the main runway at Hill Air Force base in Layton, Utah and HAFB was the world-wide headquarters for the F-16 program and home of the 388th and 419th Fighter Wings both now equipped with F-35 Lightning IIs.
The years of my time in the USAF as a aviation mechanic the F-16 was known as the 'Fighting Falcon', or just 'Falcon'. As maintainers we would just refer to an aircraft by it's tail number. I think it was towards the end of my career that 'viper' seemed to start creeping in. Now 'viper' seems to be set in stone.
I got many tshirts in the Greek airforce and they all say fighting falcon,but we got our first full squadron of vipers today with 4 more squadrons coming so soon we ll call em vipers too.
And Lazerpig would be upset because these two planes can not be compared because they were both designed to 2 totally different things. Comparing those 2 planes would be like comparing Steven Seagal with Bruce Lee.😂
The F-16 is my favorite jet, with the A-10 Warthog as a close second, and the F-15 Eagle third. One of my favorite game series is Ace Combat. I think I'm just a big kid because I love planes and trains.
If you look into that story about that mock dogfight it was early in the f35 development and it was restricted electronoicly so they would not damage the plane
I always loved the Viper. It was light years ahead of its time when it was developed. Small and light. Lots of power. Fly by wire. It had the goods. Now it has more power and great radar . It did very well dropping bombs without any fancy laser guidance. I think the F16XL would have been awesome also
The F-16 will always be my favourite just because to my eyes it's the most beautiful looking plane ever designed. I also love the Swedish Gripen, the Eurofighter and Rafale since they are similar looking in many ways.
I’m proud to say for four years I serviced and maintained her, and glad to see her still relevant to this day. Also when I was in we still called it the falcon plus kinda hard to to call a snake a bird
I've been Avionics on her the past 14 years. Currently on a mod team upgrading a bunch of them. Got enough to keep me busy the next 3 years. Funny enough, at 13:12 in the video, that the next jet in line when I'm done with my current jet lol
It's a jack of all trades and master of none. It can accomplish 90+% of missions at a very affordable price, this is why seemingly everyone wants or wanted it when their current aircraft aged out.
The MiG-25 was a copy of a Canadian design, the Arrow. Like most Soviet [& later, Russian] designs, it was over-hyped; as learned when a Soviet pilot flew one to Japan and requested asylum. The U.S. Air Force returned the airplane to the USSR upon request and in crates. The avionics were described as slightly less sophisticated than the game Simon that was then popular. On the positive side, it was built like a tank.
@@kdrapertruckerthat's the Mig 31 - which, with the AESA radar would make it (in the hands of a competent pilot) a handful at BVR. WVR the 31 had zero chance against a Viper. Now, the AESA upgrade for the Viper and the latest AMRAAM would take any advantage a 31 had away, even moreso once the AIM-260 is in service.
@@CCPJerBear 31s radar is PESA not AESA its PASSIVE electronically scanned array a technology from late seventies - the difference being the PESA radar can only send and receive in ONE frequency at any given time where AESA can do so from each segment separately making it far superior in detection especially against targets with reduced radar cross section. secondly no the latest AMRAAM is still far shorter range than R-37M the MiG-31s seem to like slinging at extreme ranges against Ukrainians Meteor on the other hand ...
. MIG 25 literally had steel hammered on its leading edges to handle the heat at Mach 3. It was a hunk of junk. Fast yes. Maneuverable no. Burned up its engines to fly that fast.
It's not a 1 v 1, "Top Trumps" style comparison. The F16 is a fully mature aircraft system. It's cheaper, it's easier to maintain, it's cheaper to operate. It is fully multi role. So for some customers, it's the better choice for purchase. Yes, a F-35 will beat an F-16. But some customers may prefer to operate 24-30 F-16s rather than 12 F35s.
4:30 If you are making a point about unmanuverable, missile only fighter, don't show a picture of two F8 crusaders. The best fighter the Navy had in Vietnam. Known as THE LAST GUNFIGHTER!!!
I think history will show that the "teens" designation of aircraft are some of the best all around designs of all time. Be it the F14, F15, F16 or F18.
The F14 when adjusted for inflation had the cost of the F22, and like the F22 never had a confirmed enemy plane in US inventory iirc However its worth pointing out the goal of the American aircraft programs are to be so over the top that no enemy would want to go to conventional war. All the teens did so admirable during an era when there was consistent stiff competition from Russia. Meanwhile the F22 will retire without a near competitor being fielded by any one in the world. Ultimately American fighters operate no in a vacuum, but as one part in a massive web of organisations and destruction, that has only ever become more intricate and smart over the decades, including the changes to the planes. The teens are still just a stepping stone. Newer computer modeling, new manufacturing designs, newer materials can all continue to push the envelope. N
I was born at Carswell AFB back in 71 my father was a full bird Col 33 yrs USAF & I live on Plover Circle off Cahoba Dr in Ft Worth. If I haven't seen every single F-16 (including the F-16XL prototypes) I've heard them fly over. Since I was a kid, whatever the military has flown I've seen it. Even today you don't have a clue what it's like fishing from a boat at the end of the runway having an F-35 (name your variant) flying so low the jet blast pushes your boat several feet. Life is good in Ft Worth
The f16 flies extremely well with extremely streamlined controls and cockpit that make the plane very easy to operate under stress. However, the f16 cannot hold as many AMRAAMs or fuel as the f18 or 15 which can be deadly when air to air combat begins to draw on.
I think something that goes over most of people's heads when it comes to F-16 vs F-35A in terms of BFM, is that F-16 might be a better dog fighter, but only if it's clean. Combat-load, not so much. But gen4 planes generally carry more munitions than the gen 5's since they're not designed with stealth in mind. So there's give and take, and to be honest, who cares--they're gonna be working together more often than not because US and those with the F-35 aren't just gonna send one plane to deal with something. The F-35 is a force multiplier, and not just for air assets. They're even capable of taking an interceptor fired from a Patriot system, grabbing it with it's sensors and guiding it into a drone meant to simulate a cruise missile. Absolutely nothing else has the capabilities (so far) in the sky. I don't feel the "jack-of-all-trades, master of none" fits the F-35 at all. It does more than any single platform out there at the moment. I am a big fan of the F-35s obviously, but honestly, I'm not much of a hater. I love the F-16s, but I gotta defend the F-35.
The fighter mafia has been proved completely wrong. The F16 continues to survive due to the upgrades to the avionics. Modern missiles have been faster than any plane and advancements in missiles makes them far more reliable. In this the F35 is superior with near 360 degree missile lock compared to the narrower F16. All this however doesn't mean the F16 hasn't been successful. It didn't really push any technologies in development and has been realitively low cost compared to modern newer planes. It's low prices likewise makes it attractive for foreign markets as well, especially with updates to avionics. Considering the limited numbers of adversary stealth systems to this day doesnt face overwhelming enemies in the air just yet.
Budget f-15 became a masssive asset of being the wildest of weasels, air to air, ground support and close air support just because something is less expensive doesn't mean its a terrible tool! Oh the stories my older siblings told me during desert storm seeing them buzz oh wow the little brother does more than the big brother
The fact that the F-15 and F-16 are going to be in services way longer than anyone expected show how well designed they are not for the A-10 due to a getting better since then that A-10 will be a coffin or the F-22 that will be retired way sooner than anyone expected of net being able to keep up to date due to it very high cost
I was an assistant crew chief on F-16s at HAFB back in the late 80's. I loved working with it. It was the ultimate sports plane. The pilots had to gain hours so they were allowed to take it to fly on weekends. The funniest thing I saw was one pilot trying to fit his surfboard into the converted center drop tank the used as a luggage carrier. I loved that plane. Launching and recovering it are some of my favorite moments. It was also know as the runway Hoover with that huge under carriage intake.
In 1975 I was sent to the General Dynamics plant in Fort Worth, TX to review and edit technical documentation for the FB-111A fighter bombers (I was an in-shop avionics technician stationed at Plattsburgh AFB NY). One day they told us that one of the F-16 prototypes was going to be doing a practice session for the upcoming Paris Air Show, and we all went outside to watch. The previous week there had been an incident where the landing gear did not properly deploy, and the test pilot bellied the plane in on the grass strip between the runway and taxiway. They said he could not have made a better landing, but there was a pile of gravel at the end that damaged the intake, so they painted up the other plane in the red-white-blue color scheme they were using and we got to see their top test pilot take this one through the demo flight regime. At one point the pilot took the the plane at about a 45-degree climb angle into a cloud, but it didn't come out the other side...he did a 180 degree turn inside the cloud and came out the the same way he had gone in.
In late 70s I worked just up the road from GD’s entrance. On occasion they would demo an F16. Looked as if the whole show was in the vertical confines defined by Carswells fence line. I thought that impressive till an air show where an AVRO Vulcan danced around in similar confinement. But what really impressed was a SAC scramble. Cheers
I entered the USAF right out of HS at the time the F-16 entered operational status. I'm now 65 and a retired USAF veteran. Its amazing to see the F-16 fighter still flying in many NATO countries around the globe in 2024. A true testament just how remarkable the F-16 truly is.
One thing that this video didn't mention is that, whilst not the first FBW aircraft or even one of the first FBW fighters, the F16 was one of the first designed to take full advantage of FBW technology. It's deliberately designed to be somewhat less stable aerodynamically than is normally considered desirable. This would make it at best a handful and at worst impossible for a human pilot to fly, but the FBW system can cover this instability up by automatically making all the adjustments needed to maintain stable flight far faster than a human pilot ever could. The upshot of this is the plane is extremely manoeuvrable, with the upper limit set more by human factors than any technological limitations (the airframe and the flightcontrol systems could in theory both handle more than 9G in a turn, but the odds of the pilot blacking out are too high, so 9G was set as the upper limit). This is one of the big contributing factors to the manoeuvrability of the jet, combined with small size, light weight, and high thrust/weight ratio.
Note on the matter of the F-35: air-to-air combat performance isn't as important on a 5° gen fighter due to its stealth. The F-16, though a fantastic plane, both in terms of versatility, looks and efficency, would find itself with a missile on its tail without having detected the F-35 long before a dogfight starts. That said, it's an optimal weapon platform and like the F-15EX would work very well in tandem with its successor.
This is the thinking that got the air war in trouble in Vietnam in the first place. "A is no longer an issue to contend with, because we have perfected B". Once your opponent understands this, they then think of creative ways to make B no longer useful and force you to rely on A. Enemy pilots aren't stupid, flying around with a death wish. Once they figure out the game, they change it. This thinking relies on the absolute faith that B will ALWAYS work perfectly for you, forever in your favor. Most of the time, it will. Sometimes it wont. I'm quite confident that all the USAF pilots are regularly running through thought experiments and trying out ideas to defeat the F=35 etc. Even taking loss after loss against an F35 gives them an edge against anything Russia or China could put up. And it gives the 5th gen pilots an edge against potential enemy forces that would be constantly trying to find an angle. Who better to find your weak spots than your teammates? All it takes is a little over-confidence, laxidasical risk taking, an improved radar technology, or someone inadvertently slipping into a sensor blind spot and reporting that angle of attack back to his buddies. Warfare is constant technological and tactical evolutions in an attempt to defeat someone else's technological and tactical evolutions. And it has proven many times over, that when you cant defeat high tech, try going low tech. The one truth that remains constant though, is there are no absolutes.
Several countries have reported that they can get a radar lock on the F-35 at distances it was not designed to be detected at. We may soon find ourselves in the situation that every compromise that was made to get the F-35 to be as stealthy as possible were in vein, and that once again, the only combo that works is speed, agility and awareness. This would, incidentally, still make the F-22 viable, but turn the F-35 into an air boat that sails drop bombs to target once the F-16s have done the Wild Weasel missions and cleared a path.
@@andersjjensen doubt it will occur, especially since in the future drones will most likely enter the scenario in place of human pilot. Personally, I'm of the opinion that dogfighting, though it's a bit sad, since I don't dislike seeing such action, is dead as it was mean in the past and doubt that relying of agility and speed will be viable in per set. They may play a good role but will become secondary to other aspects.
@@gandora0738 Especially drones makes me think that having fighter aces that throw a plane around like a leaf in the wind is a good idea. Drones and drone counter measures will have their own arms race with temporary losers and winners. But until the day where drones are practically missiles with jet engines that can go at speeds we can't build a human-containing-plane that can match, a skilled pilot in a fast and agile plane is a good last line of defence.
@@andersjjensen swarm tactic, drone may not subplant completely human pilots but it's true that our bodies and our brains are inefficient in this environment. We're not designed to sustain high Gs and technically, not even fly. The human body is efficient in bringing us to this point, but when you compare it to the efficency of specialized animals, we fall behind. Moreover, economically speaking, it's cheaper to produce pilotless drones with remote guidance or I.A. while having a smaller group of humans in command aircraft, optimized for electronic warfare, stealth and serving as spotting platform. As a final note: speed is important for a munition, yes, extremely so, but even deadlier is not being seen. You are fast, but if you are detected, with the right countermeasures, you can be intercepted, one of the reasons why the YB 58 and 70 where turned down. But, what can you do when you can't see or know that an enemy or munition is coming?
Been on the 16 since just out of high school. I'm 44yr old now, she is a beast and second to none. With a little hardwork a rub on the stab she will never stop. Code 1 for days the Viper has a serious bite, no one can clip the falcons wings...this is the knife you bring to a gunfight!
How did the Falcon get the nickname viper? I love the falcon as it is the fastest bird in the air. One young falcon ended up in my backyard. Still too young to fly above 1 foot off the ground, but man, those wings were huge compared to the tiny body. I was in the U.S. Air Force when it came into service. Luckily I was assigned to a couple of TAC bases where many were stationed, along with F-15 and other fighter aircraft. It is the most beautiful fighter aircraft in the world. In automobile terms, this is a Ferrari.
The F4 is my favorite. It blasted the guys that were shooting at me with a mortar. When two Phantoms came streaking in a tree top level, the mortar went quiet real quick.
Not a single pilot or crew member involved with the F-16 will ever call it a Fighting Falcon. It's real name is the Viper. This is similar to how the A-10 is officially called the Thunderbolt ii but is actually known by literally everyone as the Warthog. When the Air Force picks silly names for it's planes the crews will always come up with something that stick better. This doesn't always result in a cooler name because some planes like the F-35 named Lightning ii is most commonly called "Fat Amy" these days.
@Xenomorphine I've heard many Air Force people, including pilots saying Fat Amy. It might be the case that there's a few nicknames going around. I think we can all agree though that Lightning II was really lame.
@@blueskiestrevor5200 There is one cool thing about the name Lightning -- the ability to call the Marines' STOVL carriers Lightning Carriers. But it's still awkward to say "the Lightning" the way you'd say "the Eagle" or "the Viper." Panther is a cool sounding nickname that's appropriate for an aircraft designed for stealth. Battle Penguin is a much better joke nickname than Fat Amy. And I've always thought that it would be cool to call it the Kestrel due to its ability to hover.
Been an aviation enthuiast for years, only recently have I read up on the real Top Gun, dog fighting and fighter aircraft. Your videos are great for bringing me up to speed on half a century of fighter plane technology.
The F-14 was not underwelming, it was saddled with crappy bomber engines, and it was too big to safely operate from the smaller conventional powered carriers the zu.S. Navy was still operating at the time. The hornet was to replace A-7 and F-4 aircraft. The A-7 on all carriers and the F-4 on smaller carriers. The F-14 outperformed the F-15 in speed and could attack from far outside the F-15's sensor range.
it was also way too expensive to operate. it doesn't make sense why the f15 doesn't have a long range missile like the phoenix because the f15 has an incredible radar too
When I was about 11 years old we heard a loud noise approaching very fast when we were in class in our small village in Belgium. 2 F 16'ns buzzed the church tower across the street from our classroom. That's how low they got flying their then brand new jets in Belgium. Some kids where actually in shock. Teacher stopped lessons and told us to go to the olayground to unwind from this ordeal. I, on the other hand, and some friends, wanted to see it again.....
When I was a kid, I saw the documentary Iron Eagle. It featured rare, declassified footage of a pair of F16s completely dismantling an integrated air defense system, while dogfighting state of the art Soviet jets. One of the pilots was a 16-year-old, which demonstrates the ease of flying and technological domination of this fighter.
If you want to see why half the names mentioned in this video are idiots i direct you to Laserpig's channel. The F-16 is a great plane, for sure, but that's despite most of the names in this video, not because of them. Also, the F-16 would never shoot down an F-35 without the F-35 pilot literally letting it happen.
I mean I think that goes without saying. I'd be pretty disappointed if newer shit doesn't dominate older shit lol That said i know there are idiots who don't understand that. The f16 is amazing. The f35 is better. That takes nothing away from the f16... it's just true. The fact that a plane first flown in 1974 is even still in the conversation says it all
@@KuyaHandyKap because is obsolete, the only advantage it has left is the price due to manufacture cost being so low due to its barebones design and the scale of its production that lowered the costs as low as they will ever go. its "good enough" but if you gave any pilot between F-16C and F-35A NOONE sane would ever choose the F-16
@@KuyaHandyKap I agree but everyone has their favorites, of course. The F-16 is not the World's best-selling fighter in history without reason. It's multi-role perfection!
As always, an amazing video and very in-depth analysis/descriptions of various aircraft, whether it is civilian or military, which always draws me back to your videos (as well as all the other topics and engineering feats that you cover). But there is always one thing that I am always curious on and think a lot about, which again popped up in this video, and that is the logistics of transporting a large amount of aircraft across the globe to serve in various bases in a short amount of time. I am not sure whether it is extensive enough to warrant its own 'Megaprojects' video or if it can be included amongst other military logistics topics. But I would be very interested in viewing a video on either 'Megaprojects' or on ' Sideprojects' that covers such a topic or topics.
The name originally applied by the civvies in charge often do not stick and are replaced by more colorful nicknames. BUFF, SLUF, Warthog, BONE, and others come to mind. And what are they calling the Marine's replacement for the AH1W?
Oh if you stop at 7:43 and see the YF-16 hanging in the museum, that's the Virginia Air & Space Science Center in Hampton, VA. I recognized it immediately 🙂
IMO, the comparison between the F-16 and the F-35 did an injustice to the F-35. The same organizations and many of the same people who designed the F-35 had worked on the F-16 Block 60 and the F-22 (except for Boeing). They are brilliant people and made wise trade-offs based on the technological progress in the last 40 years. Sure, they traded some maneuverability for stealth and then traded some of that stealth (versus the F-22) for producibility, maintainability, and foreign sales. IMHO, the F-35 will be fantastic in combat.
When you hear that a F-16 can hit an enemy from 500 miles away, its hard to register just how far that is. I live in Minneapolis, MN. If an F-16 was flying past the Sears Tower in Chicago, it could launch a missile and hit the US Bank Stadium downtown Minneapolis. That blows me away (and would also blow away the stadium). Kind of like a nuclear sub hitting a house in Minneapolis, because they were in Lake Superior. The US can reach out and touch you, no matter where you are.
I'm from Scotland if you were to drive from the east coast to the west coast it would be roughly 120miles. Meaning you could fire a missile four times the distance of a small nation.
@@MadKieranMI've seen a quote that I assume applies to Scotland, to the effect that in the US 100 years is considered a long time while in England 100 miles is considered a long distance.
Falcons - _the bird_ - are smaller than Hawks. Probably that's why this was named the way that it was, as opposed to the larger "Eagle", which is _definitely_ a big bird-of-prey.
boyd didnt even invent energy manueverability theory : Although Boyd appears to have come up with these ideas independently, he was not the first to do so. A decade earlier, in 1954, an aerodynamics engineer working for Douglas named Edward Rutowski had the same concept. Rutowski’s work did not apply to dogfighting, but to calculating fuel ranges of various types of aircraft.[4] However, the equations and the charts are almost the same as Boyd’s, who later admitted to copying the charts after denying it for years. he also didnt design the f16 he was part of the push to make a lighter fighter yes but hes didnt design it although his idea did become fleshed out as the f16 the f16 has over time evolved away from his original idea which it did not fullfill in the first place entirely, boyd wanted a plane with no radar no afterburner no ejection seat, only enough fuel for the dogfight, only one big cannon, no missiles, no tech, only off the shelf simple flight instruments, all of which was rejected as the f16 is an all weather fighter with all the same tech used in the f15. if you go by boyds deffinition of a lightweight figter th f16 fails but it is the single most sold fighter jet ever made boyd only later took credit after complaining about the results of the program, the fighter mafia did this with the f15 and f16 they sent a list of things to remove from the f15 tht included: radar, ejection seat, fuel tanks, afterburner (making the plane subsonic), missile carrying capability, any ability to carry or deploy bombs. in general the fighter mafia is just a cult of lies in fact boyd wanted to replace all f15 and f16 with the f5 tiger because it fit his clowded idea of a light cheap fighter. all that said the f16 is still a great fighter just not because of john boyds flawed ideas. it became what a fighter needs to be to succeed in its time and nowadays thats what the f35 is
probably too expensive to maintain/operate and not so friendly to new pilots. top gun definitely helped boost public perception of it though. not so say it's a bad aircraft, but there's more to warplanes than benchracing
Surfshark VPN at Surfshark.deals/mega - Enter promo code MEGA for 83% off and 3 extra months for free! Thank you for your sponsorship!
Make a vedio on JF-17 blk 3.
If you want the answer, just ask Pierre Sprey….Well, at least reference his interviews or stuff on TH-cam about the topic.
@@Av-vd3wk Feel free to reference any of Sprey's many appearances on Russia Today (RT).
Yeah, about the so called fighter mafia. th-cam.com/video/rZDfdCj61dY/w-d-xo.html
"The Fighter Mafia" were vapourware salesman full stop.
It should be noted regarding every test combat of F16 vs F35 where the F16 won, it was only in tests where the F35 was forbidden from using it's Distributed Aperture System, which allows it to target and fire missiles at targets directly behind it, or anywhere else (it does NOT need to face it's target to fire a missile at it, making it's lack of maneuverability irrelevant). The F35 was never defeated by F16s when it was allowed to use the Distributed Aperture System. It was intentionally handicapped in those mock dogfights and not reprepresentative of how the aircraft would actually kill air targets in a real fight.
The key is in the summary though; "its successors are not built to handle the off-script, messy aerial engagements..." Sure, it lacks stealth. It lacks all the wiz-bangs. But there is still great value in that "high-low mix" the fighter mafia was talking about. Its a plane that the pilot can jump in and go (not totally, but its fast to get on the runway). There's no software issues. No "logging in" to complex systems before flight. Super simple to operate and fly. relatively low cost. and it still outperforms most other planes in multiple categories. So the F35 is a better missile shooter. Great. The F16 is a better dog fighter. In most highly technical things, there is a selectivity triangle. You can generally only have two out of three. They compliment each other well, and with good training, can be deployed together to support each other and cover the other's weaknesses.
I was about to say this. Thanks for beating me to it. What would be fun in computer simulation would be the newest F-35 against a fully modernized F16-XL with both flown by AI. [We likely won't hear much about that result for a while.]
@@epremeauxWasn't attempting to de-value the F16, it is a battle tested and proven with blood fighter and clearly still has it's place in any respectable air force. I just was pointing out the erroneous assumption people glean from the story that F16's "beat" the F35... when the F35 was basically crippled and never when it wasn't handicapped. The F16 is still clearly a very valuable fighter, but anyone who thinks it a superior air-to-air fighter based off that terribly simplistic example of "it beat the F35!" is overselling the F16 in modern day and underselling the F35.
Sounds like you took the click bait literally.
And a distributed aperture system cannot be retrofitted onto an F-16… why? That’s the problem most people have with these kinds of analogies. Comparing upgraded weapons systems is beside the point.
When someome mentions Boyd as though he was a genius I die inside a little. He did serve in Korea but he never served in vietnam. He was a flight instructor. An instructor whose students would either have to come back to retrain, because he'd done it badly, or came back in boxes, again because he'd trained them badly.
Thank you, I am not the only one. You said it better than I just tried to explain.
every time someone mentions boyd in a bad light we all know you are a bullcrap artist
boyd prevented the air force bullcrap artists like you from installing a ladder on the fighter. no, literally john boyd prevented liars like you from literally putting a ladder on the greatest airplane on the planet.
Thank god someone else said it. The fighter mafia is a joke and its concepts are long outdated.
It's just BFM. Your planes good at it or not. You also need to fight your fight. If you go into one circle and your aircraft is bad at it you'll lose. Keep in mind missles weren't as good. You also have to now figure out the enemies aircraft.
Thank you Simon! I'm a USAF vet where my job was as an F-16 crew chief. We typically know the nitty gritty of getting the Viper in the air for the mission, but we never got the behind the scenes story about the "making of" the F-16. I really enjoyed this video for the background aspect and the achievements of the airframe over the decades, but please keep in mind all the ground maintenance that goes into keeping these fighters in the skies. There are many man-hours of inspections and maintenance by various specialists for each system if the aircraft- including, but limited to the crew chief, munitions, avionics, fuel, phase docks, and so many other logistical support technicians as well. Without maintainers, the planes dont fly. That's just my little shout out for the maintainers.
Again- thank you for this great video, Simon!
Did you ever know a guy Robert Villarreal he was one the vista program out of edwards then went to the 22 and 35 later?
Former weapons myself, worked 16s a bit as a reservist at Luke but I learned my job on the F-15E, that jet is a monster. From a strictly munitions standpoint, I'd take the 15 over either the 16 or the 35, unless the 35 is in "beast mode" maybe.
I'm probably a bit biased though, I got to fly the 15 once in the back seat, so much fun 👌🏻
I’m currently an F-16 crew cheif, I love the jet but they can be very stubborn. Especially as the ones we have get up there in age, but I always love seeing them fly
Thank you for contributing your own story, adding to the whole picture.
Greetings from Denmark - proud of our F-16s, and proud of now passing them on to Ukraine.
Well said! Ground crews don't get enough recognition for keeping warbirds in the air.
Plus the amount of time and money it takes to service / repair and re-arm them is a huge factor in their combat effectiveness.
As a former lawn-dart avionics technician, I can confirm. The F-16 is, without-a-doubt, one of the planes of all time.
Thank you for the confirmation
I believe, all planes are one of the planes of all time.
It's expensive American garbage
@@chaosXP3RT in what way is it garbage? Compared to what?
@@chaosXP3RT
I hate to be that "wellakshually" guy, but, well, actually: it's relatively _affordable_ American garbage. Especially by Lockheed standards.
At $63 mil, the block 70/72 F-16 is considerably cheaper than every fighter that can hang with it, because they all need thrust vectoring to match it. I mean, the Gripen is a bargain, but besides that, nothing else on the market comes close in bang-for-the-buck.
And the avionics are the pricey part. If you only need them to be good enough to beat Russian forces, then a Turkish-built block 50/52 is listed at $34m.
The F-16 is a lot of things - a fighter, a bomber, an ejection-seat-test-vehicle; but expensive isn't really one of those things.
Test pilots really don't get the praise they deserve. Accidentally taking off a completely new aircraft with very unfamiliar controls and being able to cruise it around and safely land it must of been one hell of a hellraising experience. Kudos to that man!
It some ways, they are very expensive crash test dummies
@@badluck5647 Come on man. For all the test pilots that have died whilst testing new aircraft, don't you think that comment is in very poor taste. Just a little bit of respect wouldn't go far amiss.
@@justandy333 Not really. I grew up around the test pilots who ended up working for NASA. They said their generation was more like crash test dummies instead of engineers.
Just what was this guy doing in the aircraft in the first place, being admittedly unfamiliar with the controls?
ahh yes because none of us was army brats an thats why we love this shit simon makes aswell as having our own tour of duty, grow up kiddo@@justandy333 some of us have run aroun with special forces as if they were all our uncles. others worked with them for short or longer time in their regular service.
One side note about the comment regarding the dogfight between the F16 and F35. My understanding is that this was prior to the F35 being cleared to 9Gs and wasnt able to use its full capabiliy. Those restrictions have since been lifted but that story is often used to say the F35 cant turn. Pilots ive heard have said exactly the opposite
This is correct, I just wrote something similar but you said it better, its really not hard to find that info and it is Well known among nerds like us, Im not saying the F16 is bad, but the fact is that modern stealth Fighters shoot down older planes before they can spot the stealth fighter on thier radar. I love the F16 for what it is, but times have changed. Also we should listen to the pilots and not keyboard worriors, if pilots hated the F35 we would have heard about it by now.
The thing is the F35 isnt meant to dog fight its designed to shoot down targets from far away.
Not only can it turn, it also often doesn't have to, thanks to superior cute control system and off-bore firing capability
@@Pilsnorno one's making the claim that pilots hate Fat Amy. She's a great long range JSF, and a 'good' dogfighter (not awesome, but still good). The Viper is just far more agile in a dogfight, predominantly in a rate fight, and because of its lightweight, nimble airframe is able to recover energy faster than larger, heavier fighters. It doesn't do so well in the vertical, though, especially against the likes of the F-15C.
I don't know why you feel like the 'keyboard warrior' label only applies to others and not yourself... in the way you're using it, it sounds like, in your estimate, anyone voicing an opinion that differs from yours is a keyboard warrior, by default.
If you're engaging with others in a discussion on a comment section, and arguing against other's opinions, you're no less a keyboard warrior, by your own definition.
You're using it incorrectly to begin with. Keyboard warriors aren't labelled so because they have an opinion, they are labelled so because of their habit to aggressively fight with others online, often times presenting themselves as tough and formidable with zero evidence.
That's what a keyboard warrior actually is. Not just a person with a 'wrong' opinion.
I seriously cannot wrap my head around 9gs being survivable for anything. Your physiology is so far past the point of breaking, passing out, vision going white, even just moving your hands. And can you imagine the relays and servos for that kind of environment?
I'm a granola eating lefty hippy, but I would be lieing my rear off if I didn't admit to utter fascination with planes, rockets, and applied science that should be impossible :) 🚀🧑🚀✈️🛫 heh, doesn't hurt that a great uncle was an engineer for the shuttle. He was a very cool guy
Fighter Mafia....really? Are we going to continue to credit people who were NOT involved in this project?
That's what happens when your source is Wikipedia.
@@robertthomas3143Yupe!
You make a bloody video if you are so good,
I'm glad to see this as the top comment.
@@gazbags9136 I'm working on a script as we speak old bean
Nobody show this video to LazerPig or he will lose it
YES, GOOOOOOD lol
LoL,Lazer pig is awesome though. He makes me laugh so hard when he sings at the end. The Frozen song was hilarious.
honestly i doubt LP would care because its to obvious most of the info has came from Wikipedia but i could be wrong
Show it to him someone send him the link.
Make sure he’s had at least 3 bottles of wine and an emergency femboy before you do
To top it off, she's also a top tier work of engineering art.
And beautiful.
It is absolutely beautiful and dainty.
First time I saw the F-16 I thought how futuristic it looked. 40 years on, it still does.
the f35 in the early trials against the f16 was the 002 (literaly the second f35 ever produced) version it was still handicapped in g loading by computer limited controls, the f35 still scored a kill even though it was heavily limited. the limits were removed as the structure was analyzed under load in tests like the one quoted. nowadays f35 pilots who flew the f16 have said the f35 is more agile specialy when it comes to roll at high angles of attack
So mistake was made. F-16 beats everything WVR. And still probably scores victories against F-35.
beats everything WVR ? No...not even close. The Eurofighter, F-15, F-22, su-35 and others would all like a word.@@jg3000
@@jg3000 point being again that WVR is extremely high risk in a more current context where national air forces are geared towards BVR engagement and are building aircraft where they can to suit.
@@Skidracer21 It's not the end of WVR. If you can shoot your missiles and go home. Saving the jet and the pilot. Hopefully wrecking the other guy. But they'll always be something WVR. Like pesky helicopters in a CAS mission. Or orders to get visual ID.
@@jg3000 most pilots who have flown both say the f35 has an advantage in bfm over the f16 and with aim 9X and its distributed aperture detection system it doesnt even have to manuever to fire the missile and get a kill
Thank you for this great look at this amazing aircraft. I recently had the honor to design a special tail for one of our Belgian Air Force F-16's. FA-95 reached it structural design limit of 8000hours, making it the first European Viper to reach this milestone thanks to the amazing work of the maintenance crews, keeping this plane flying since the 80's.
I spoke to the pilot after and he said 'She flies just like a brand new viper'. A true testament to this amazing jet.
Worked on this aircraft for 4.5 years, and it is so incredibly versatile. Also had some of the best coworkers.
Its pilots and crews often use the name "Viper" instead, because of a perceived resemblance to a viper snake as well as to the fictional Colonial Viper starfighter from the television program Battlestar Galactica, which aired at the time the F-16 entered service.
That's the Original BSG, everyone keep in mind. . .
I've only ever heard of the F-16 referred to as the Viper. Never the Falcon or Fighting Falcon.
Weird, I've only ever heard the f16 called "viper" in the past 10yrs or so. And always the "falcon" or "fighting falcon" before that.. always loved the f16 and it was my favorite aircraft as a kid. Still love it really..
It looks like a viper who is about to bite. However there is nothing in common in terms of looks with Battlestar Gallactica (1978) vipers (aside the name). A Mig-3 may have more communality with Galactica vipers, since the pilot sits closer to the tail than the nose.
F16 has always been my favorite ever since I was a kid. Beautiful looking aircraft.
Exactly. The “Iron Eagle” movies featuring F-16s may have had an influence on my younger self.
I was aircraft refueler at Edwards AFB in 1974. I fueled all the YF16's in test status at that time. It was recognized as an amazing aircraft by all us at that time.
I'd like it to be known as I'm from the town where the F16 was designed and built, it wasn't the 'Fighter Mafia' it was the 'LIGHT Fighter Mafia'! America HAD fighters but they were ALL multi-role, the Viper was never designed for that it was initially designed to ONLY dogfight. The fact that this frame is amazing at everything is a testament to the true passion and dedication of these truly genius gentleman.
I saw a video of a pilot taking a journalist up in an F16 and they were going through an example of the fighter school training process, one on one combat scenarios, and the pilot said that he loved the falcon, it was a great plane with a great radar, but the f35 could draw a bead on it before he would even know it was there.
I do think that is a very good thing to have the falcon as a measuring stick for any new design aircraft that might come into the inventory.
Interesting to me how when the designers think in terms of simple, stripped down, elemental designs like the "Heinneman Hotrod" A4 Skyhawk and the F16, wonderful designs result rather that the kind of bloated cram it all in complexity of the Phantom, Tomcat, and F22.
I'm not saying the Skyhawk and F16 are superior aircraft, just that there is definitely a place for basic, clean and economical designs, and I think we (and the contractors) forget that.
I was on a deployment in Korea in early 1990 when one of these things came ripping down the valley that we were advancing through. He was at maybe 300 ft. Next thing we heard was " tanks, halt in place. Your dead." That's one seriously bad ass plane. And way effective
I live ten miles away from Mountain Home airbase in Idaho, you can hear one of those beauties coming from over 5 miles away, and they are loud as hell, even when they're flying at 20 or 30 thousand feet.
One thing you can’t deny. That f-16 is one sexy mechanical contrivance.
Simon, I love/hate the weird/adorable/awkward thing you do when you bring up hypothetical situations, it's fantastic! Thanks for being you and giving us awesome stories homie!!!
One of the big things the F16 has in its favour is its availability. With so much operational use over such a long time, they've had all the reliability issues they ever had worked out, and with so many in service the logistics chain for spares is good.
If an air force buys 50 F16s, it can keep most of those available. If it buys something else, it'd need to buy many more and a lot of spares up front to maintain the same level of availability.
So the F16's military effectiveness is very good. You can have your planes *and* fly them.
I never get tired of hearing about the F-16 and the F-15. These designs go back 50 years but are so good that with modern avionics and other tech are not only relevant but dominant. The late Chuck Horner (cmndr Air Force) called the F-16 "the last of the sports models". It's fly by wire is such an excellent system it's now in the F-15 EX. Very fast and wickedly maneurably it's a dogfighter's dream.
Dollar for dollar, the best multi-role righter ever and likely will be for years to come, and a gem of a design aesthetically
Modern aircraft don't dogfight. They just pop missiles from 30 miles out and leave.
Finally after all this time! A Megaprojects video about the f16
Thank you for highlighting one of the finest aircraft ever placed in service.
Nobody is saying its the best fighter. What the article is saying is its the ultimate MULTIROLE fighter. The combination of the relatively very low price, reliability, kinematics and arguably the best cockpit layout make this thing top notch.
Edit- No shit the F35 is better in many ways, hence why I said "relatively very low price". Not every country is America, and not every country can afford the F35.
Yea maybe in Afghanistan against little to no air defense systems. It’s comparing Costco steak (good) to a5 wagyu (superior)
@@comacollosasa6282 Only fools send aircraft into air defense systems... use ground forces, artillery, or cruise missiles to deal with those.
@@terrafirma5327 It's literally our main Wild Weasel aircraft. They're _intentionally_ sent into enemy AA range to perform SEAD/DEAD missions.
it is possibly not the best at anything, but it is top 3 for everything. this makes it far more usable than any one trick pony specialist plane and overall there are not many competitors for the cost, ability, flexibility and reliability combination. I would rather have 100 f16 than 25 ground attack, 25 high level bombers, 25 sead and 25 air superiority. You have as many as you need of whichever role you need at the time, and it will be different tomorrow
@@davidfuller581 no its not anymore, F-35 was literally designed to perform SEAD better than any other plane in service - its basically F-16 with added stealth which is PARAMOUNT in SEAD today
0:55 - Chapter 1 - Development
2:20 - Mid roll ads
4:00 - Back to the video
11:40 - Chapter 2 - Specs & evolution
15:10 - Chapter 3 - Service life & deployment
18:35 - Chapter 4 - Present & future
Coming from a Navy family, my heart lies with the F-18, but the F-16 is a pretty good airplane, too. LOL
Not coming from a Navy family, my favorite Navy jet has always been the F-14, from receiving my GI Joe Skystriker at Christmas as a kid to watching it in The Final Countdown and Top Gun, it's my favorite fighter from any of the services!
Coming from a country that can't afford significant numbers of anything (6 million people) my heart lies with the F-16. Never the top dog in any category, but in the top 3 in every category. I'm proud that our F-16s are going to Ukraine as we switch to F-35s, but I do wish we would adopt the "hi/lo mix" approach and get a few less F-35s in exchange for twice as many F-16Vs. Especially now where several countries are reporting that their radar tech has advanced to the point where the F-35s "magic trick" is a lot less impressive. Having a backup plan that includes stupid high agility doesn't seem like a bad idea if the F-35 one day gets demoted to "not a stealth plane after all".
@@mikepatton8691 As long as it is a carrier capabe airplane.
@@andersjjensenWhat country are you from?🙂
Grew up a navy brat in the 80s and 90s and I bucked the trend and fell in love with the f-4 phantom.
To this day it's still my favorite, but that doesn't stop me from oggling the f-16 whenever I see one like I'm a high schooler enjoying the eye candy at the beach.
When I was a young boy I build model planes and fighters. The F-16 Falcon was my favorite. I read magazine articles on this wonderful fighter. It was groundbreaking and dubed the Porsche of fighters.
I thought the event with F-35s was testing it's capabilities without stealth or advanced targeting systems? The F-35 can shoot targets without pointing its nose and this feature wasn't used in the test. If an f-35 has to dogfight, things have gone horribly wrong for it.
Thought they also imposed an artificial G limit. They thoroughly hobbled the F-35 anyway, one way or the other.
I've always wondered how well an F35 is going to shoot down a similar stealth aircraft. Neither aircraft can get a missile lock until they are in each other's face and at dogfight range. I think the entire concept of never needing to dogfight again because we will detect the enemy at long range and shoot it down before they can see us is total BS. That will only work if you are engaging a non-stealth aircraft.
@@perryallan3524 I guess it depends what you consider dogfights to be. Stealth doesn't mean they are invisible on radar, it means they are harder to identify. So far, no other country has anything comparable in terms of stealth. Regardless, that's also why the F35 pilots can lock on targets by looking at them instead of pointing the aircraft's nose at it. It doesn't need to outperform the other plane to win.
@@fredbyoutubing Not just harder to identify, but also harder to TARGET at long range. When adversarial nations get stealth tech up to actual operational capacity we are going to see close up dogfights again for the simple fact that neither side can target the other at long range. And while it is good that the F-35 and future planes can target off-boresight, the increasing lack of ability to maneuver is concerning for the future.
@@alexwalker2582 Neither of us are experts, but I think the F35 is misunderstood in general. The capabilities I'm talking is for visual range too. I'm saying it's also more capable than we think. It lacks the qualities of old dogfighters because it doesn't need them. Plus, by the time adversaries get to that point, there will be a replacement for air supperiority fighters like F-22s and F-15s.
Simon, great video about one of my very favorite planes, thank you! One thing, I actually live right next to Hill Air Force Base, but I live in the state of Utah and not in Europe. It's true that we have two fighter wings that primarily consist of F-16s that we're quite proud of. But we are here on Utah. We have a very large maintenance and repair depot on base and we are replacing older falcons with F-35s and the plan was to convert over completely to the lightning II but between all the snafus they had in producing the F-35 and the fact that the updated F-16 s are so good I think they're going to hold onto them for awhile yet.
7:45 - LOL it looks like a Goose :D That F16 *REALLY* wanted to fly!
Let's not forget, F-16XL ~
That first Y16 story is LEGEND. I have a huuuge smile on my face
Yesterday, our first F16 is retired from the Belgium air force, also because we're changing to the F35. I still think the F16 is the most elegant fighter ever built.
They are leaving Danish service soon too
I would say the F-15E. A superior multi role aircraft in every aspect and an undefeated record in air combat.
A slick f16 is a beauty.
Looks bad ass armed up too but slick it just flies how it looks like it should.
The f15 is a great plane no doubt. Probably understated a little outside of its air/ air record. (The f16 is a better dog fighter though)
The f16 advantage is its like half the cost which is why it was conceived in the first place.
Quantity has a quality of its own.
@11:15, he mentions the 1st planes were delivered to Hill AFB in Europe. My only problem with that statement, is that Hill AFB is in Utah.
"The woods are dark and deep and I have many promises to keep. Many miles to go, before I sleep." That should be the mission statement for all US made aircraft. C130, B 52, F 16, F 15, F 18, C 5, and the B 1B. Yeah, still flying.
All legends all still flying cause they were amazing when new.
Should also include the a10. One of the best planes ever designed to do what it was meant to do.
Getting down and dirty is scary with any plane now. That mission is dangerous with man pads and better done with a targeting pod 15k feet in the air lol. Which the a10 also has and excels with.
Hill Air Force Base is in Northern Utah and not in Europe, but it's nice to hear it's name in your video. Our family home is a mile off the southern end of the main runway at Hill Air Force base in Layton, Utah and HAFB was the world-wide headquarters for the F-16 program and home of the 388th and 419th Fighter Wings both now equipped with F-35 Lightning IIs.
During my last deployment out there we still use American money thankfully! No Euros to be found....
The years of my time in the USAF as a aviation mechanic the F-16 was known as the 'Fighting Falcon', or just 'Falcon'. As maintainers we would just refer to an aircraft by it's tail number. I think it was towards the end of my career that 'viper' seemed to start creeping in. Now 'viper' seems to be set in stone.
I got many tshirts in the Greek airforce and they all say fighting falcon,but we got our first full squadron of vipers today with 4 more squadrons coming so soon we ll call em vipers too.
And Lazerpig would be upset because these two planes can not be compared because they were both designed to 2 totally different things. Comparing those 2 planes would be like comparing Steven Seagal with Bruce Lee.😂
If Steven segal was a plane he would be a papir plane and Bruce Lee would be the F22
@@Pilsnor Seagal wouldn't even be a paper-plane, he'd be a crash-site.
The F-16 is my favorite jet, with the A-10 Warthog as a close second, and the F-15 Eagle third. One of my favorite game series is Ace Combat. I think I'm just a big kid because I love planes and trains.
If you look into that story about that mock dogfight it was early in the f35 development and it was restricted electronoicly so they would not damage the plane
And if it wasn't it would still lose. Probably less. But F-16 beats everything WVR.
I always loved the Viper. It was light years ahead of its time when it was developed. Small and light. Lots of power. Fly by wire. It had the goods. Now it has more power and great radar . It did very well dropping bombs without any fancy laser guidance. I think the F16XL would have been awesome also
You didn't add that Lockheed Martin is currently building new block 70 models with even more upgraded avionics and radar for the export market
The F-16 will always be my favourite just because to my eyes it's the most beautiful looking plane ever designed. I also love the Swedish Gripen, the Eurofighter and Rafale since they are similar looking in many ways.
I’m proud to say for four years I serviced and maintained her, and glad to see her still relevant to this day.
Also when I was in we still called it the falcon plus kinda hard to to call a snake a bird
I've been Avionics on her the past 14 years. Currently on a mod team upgrading a bunch of them. Got enough to keep me busy the next 3 years. Funny enough, at 13:12 in the video, that the next jet in line when I'm done with my current jet lol
@@CerealPanic what are they adding now to the 50/52s, I know we don’t have any 60s because the af didn’t like the built in ecm pod.
It's a jack of all trades and master of none. It can accomplish 90+% of missions at a very affordable price, this is why seemingly everyone wants or wanted it when their current aircraft aged out.
There’s an old saying in aeronautical design, and that is if a plane looks right it’ll fly right. The Viper really does look right
Calling the foxbat "Highly advanced" is like calling a turd a diamond 😂😂😂
Maybe the perceived advanced mig-25.
The MiG-25 was a copy of a Canadian design, the Arrow. Like most Soviet [& later, Russian] designs, it was over-hyped; as learned when a Soviet pilot flew one to Japan and requested asylum. The U.S. Air Force returned the airplane to the USSR upon request and in crates. The avionics were described as slightly less sophisticated than the game Simon that was then popular. On the positive side, it was built like a tank.
@@kdrapertruckerthat's the Mig 31 - which, with the AESA radar would make it (in the hands of a competent pilot) a handful at BVR. WVR the 31 had zero chance against a Viper. Now, the AESA upgrade for the Viper and the latest AMRAAM would take any advantage a 31 had away, even moreso once the AIM-260 is in service.
@@CCPJerBear 31s radar is PESA not AESA its PASSIVE electronically scanned array a technology from late seventies - the difference being the PESA radar can only send and receive in ONE frequency at any given time where AESA can do so from each segment separately making it far superior in detection especially against targets with reduced radar cross section.
secondly no the latest AMRAAM is still far shorter range than R-37M the MiG-31s seem to like slinging at extreme ranges against Ukrainians
Meteor on the other hand ...
.
MIG 25 literally had steel hammered on its leading edges to handle the heat at Mach 3. It was a hunk of junk. Fast yes. Maneuverable no. Burned up its engines to fly that fast.
The F-16 couldn't FIND an F-35 in an air to air fight. So, it's hard to understand how it's "better."
Mostly, just a hype piece likely put together due to the pending delivery of F16s to Ukraine
Maybe looking purely at numbers, you could make some arguments. But that doesn't actually apply to reality so....
The F-35 has only started full production in 2021 so not much data to compare
It's not a 1 v 1, "Top Trumps" style comparison.
The F16 is a fully mature aircraft system. It's cheaper, it's easier to maintain, it's cheaper to operate. It is fully multi role.
So for some customers, it's the better choice for purchase.
Yes, a F-35 will beat an F-16. But some customers may prefer to operate 24-30 F-16s rather than 12 F35s.
Yeah if the F35 merges with the F16 in a dogfight, then the F35 must have screwed up badly.
As I have always thought, "SIMON WHISTLER" presents the information the best!
4:30 If you are making a point about unmanuverable, missile only fighter, don't show a picture of two F8 crusaders. The best fighter the Navy had in Vietnam. Known as THE LAST GUNFIGHTER!!!
This is exactly what I need in the background while contracting my 1/48 f-16 model kit.
I think history will show that the "teens" designation of aircraft are some of the best all around designs of all time. Be it the F14, F15, F16 or F18.
The F14 when adjusted for inflation had the cost of the F22, and like the F22 never had a confirmed enemy plane in US inventory iirc
However its worth pointing out the goal of the American aircraft programs are to be so over the top that no enemy would want to go to conventional war. All the teens did so admirable during an era when there was consistent stiff competition from Russia. Meanwhile the F22 will retire without a near competitor being fielded by any one in the world.
Ultimately American fighters operate no in a vacuum, but as one part in a massive web of organisations and destruction, that has only ever become more intricate and smart over the decades, including the changes to the planes.
The teens are still just a stepping stone. Newer computer modeling, new manufacturing designs, newer materials can all continue to push the envelope. N
I was born at Carswell AFB back in 71 my father was a full bird Col 33 yrs USAF & I live on Plover Circle off Cahoba Dr in Ft Worth. If I haven't seen every single F-16 (including the F-16XL prototypes) I've heard them fly over. Since I was a kid, whatever the military has flown I've seen it. Even today you don't have a clue what it's like fishing from a boat at the end of the runway having an F-35 (name your variant) flying so low the jet blast pushes your boat several feet. Life is good in Ft Worth
The f16 flies extremely well with extremely streamlined controls and cockpit that make the plane very easy to operate under stress. However, the f16 cannot hold as many AMRAAMs or fuel as the f18 or 15 which can be deadly when air to air combat begins to draw on.
I think something that goes over most of people's heads when it comes to F-16 vs F-35A in terms of BFM, is that F-16 might be a better dog fighter, but only if it's clean. Combat-load, not so much. But gen4 planes generally carry more munitions than the gen 5's since they're not designed with stealth in mind. So there's give and take, and to be honest, who cares--they're gonna be working together more often than not because US and those with the F-35 aren't just gonna send one plane to deal with something. The F-35 is a force multiplier, and not just for air assets. They're even capable of taking an interceptor fired from a Patriot system, grabbing it with it's sensors and guiding it into a drone meant to simulate a cruise missile. Absolutely nothing else has the capabilities (so far) in the sky. I don't feel the "jack-of-all-trades, master of none" fits the F-35 at all. It does more than any single platform out there at the moment.
I am a big fan of the F-35s obviously, but honestly, I'm not much of a hater. I love the F-16s, but I gotta defend the F-35.
this plane has a special place in my heart 52FW / 22FS ❤- 480FS ❤
Seek Attack Destroy 52 FW 23FS
The fighter mafia has been proved completely wrong. The F16 continues to survive due to the upgrades to the avionics. Modern missiles have been faster than any plane and advancements in missiles makes them far more reliable. In this the F35 is superior with near 360 degree missile lock compared to the narrower F16.
All this however doesn't mean the F16 hasn't been successful. It didn't really push any technologies in development and has been realitively low cost compared to modern newer planes. It's low prices likewise makes it attractive for foreign markets as well, especially with updates to avionics.
Considering the limited numbers of adversary stealth systems to this day doesnt face overwhelming enemies in the air just yet.
Budget f-15 became a masssive asset of being the wildest of weasels, air to air, ground support and close air support just because something is less expensive doesn't mean its a terrible tool! Oh the stories my older siblings told me during desert storm seeing them buzz oh wow the little brother does more than the big brother
The fact that the F-15 and F-16 are going to be in services way longer than anyone expected show how well designed they are not for the A-10 due to a getting better since then that A-10 will be a coffin or the F-22 that will be retired way sooner than anyone expected of net being able to keep up to date due to it very high cost
@@USSAnimeNCC- the f-22 is being retired because the US won the cold war. it's just not necessary
I was an assistant crew chief on F-16s at HAFB back in the late 80's. I loved working with it. It was the ultimate sports plane. The pilots had to gain hours so they were allowed to take it to fly on weekends. The funniest thing I saw was one pilot trying to fit his surfboard into the converted center drop tank the used as a luggage carrier. I loved that plane. Launching and recovering it are some of my favorite moments. It was also know as the runway Hoover with that huge under carriage intake.
Certainly one of the most beautiful jets of all time, only eclipsed IMO by the F-15.
In my eyes, not only is the F-16 more beautiful than the F-15 but I would argue the F-14 is, as well. But to each his own.
for me it's the F16 and the French Rafale. both sexy planes.
FA18 Hornet is prettier
In 1975 I was sent to the General Dynamics plant in Fort Worth, TX to review and edit technical documentation for the FB-111A fighter bombers (I was an in-shop avionics technician stationed at Plattsburgh AFB NY). One day they told us that one of the F-16 prototypes was going to be doing a practice session for the upcoming Paris Air Show, and we all went outside to watch. The previous week there had been an incident where the landing gear did not properly deploy, and the test pilot bellied the plane in on the grass strip between the runway and taxiway. They said he could not have made a better landing, but there was a pile of gravel at the end that damaged the intake, so they painted up the other plane in the red-white-blue color scheme they were using and we got to see their top test pilot take this one through the demo flight regime. At one point the pilot took the the plane at about a 45-degree climb angle into a cloud, but it didn't come out the other side...he did a 180 degree turn inside the cloud and came out the the same way he had gone in.
In late 70s I worked just up the road from GD’s entrance. On occasion they would demo an F16. Looked as if the whole show was in the vertical confines defined by Carswells fence line. I thought that impressive till an air show where an AVRO Vulcan danced around in similar confinement. But what really impressed was a SAC scramble. Cheers
The F16 is also the sexiest looking aircraft ever built. It's performance is stunning. Amazing plane, I want one just to look at it in the garden 😃
I don't know why but I like the f117 nighthawk 😅
@@Flowshow88 The F117 is beautifully ugly :-)
Admittedly I've recently betrayed the F16 by saying the SR71 is the most beautiful aircraft, Sorry F16, you come second 🙂
I entered the USAF right out of HS at the time the F-16 entered operational status.
I'm now 65 and a retired USAF veteran. Its amazing to see the F-16 fighter still flying in many NATO countries around the globe in 2024. A true testament just how remarkable the F-16 truly is.
a very capable aircraft but my favorite will always be the JAS 39 Gripen :)
The EPAF New Year's party at Bass Lake Lodge at Wright-Patterson AFB were legendary.
You failed to mention the F 16 XL.
One thing that this video didn't mention is that, whilst not the first FBW aircraft or even one of the first FBW fighters, the F16 was one of the first designed to take full advantage of FBW technology. It's deliberately designed to be somewhat less stable aerodynamically than is normally considered desirable. This would make it at best a handful and at worst impossible for a human pilot to fly, but the FBW system can cover this instability up by automatically making all the adjustments needed to maintain stable flight far faster than a human pilot ever could.
The upshot of this is the plane is extremely manoeuvrable, with the upper limit set more by human factors than any technological limitations (the airframe and the flightcontrol systems could in theory both handle more than 9G in a turn, but the odds of the pilot blacking out are too high, so 9G was set as the upper limit).
This is one of the big contributing factors to the manoeuvrability of the jet, combined with small size, light weight, and high thrust/weight ratio.
Which is why its so impressive that f35s dominate f16s in gun fights.
Note on the matter of the F-35: air-to-air combat performance isn't as important on a 5° gen fighter due to its stealth. The F-16, though a fantastic plane, both in terms of versatility, looks and efficency, would find itself with a missile on its tail without having detected the F-35 long before a dogfight starts. That said, it's an optimal weapon platform and like the F-15EX would work very well in tandem with its successor.
This is the thinking that got the air war in trouble in Vietnam in the first place. "A is no longer an issue to contend with, because we have perfected B". Once your opponent understands this, they then think of creative ways to make B no longer useful and force you to rely on A. Enemy pilots aren't stupid, flying around with a death wish. Once they figure out the game, they change it.
This thinking relies on the absolute faith that B will ALWAYS work perfectly for you, forever in your favor. Most of the time, it will. Sometimes it wont.
I'm quite confident that all the USAF pilots are regularly running through thought experiments and trying out ideas to defeat the F=35 etc. Even taking loss after loss against an F35 gives them an edge against anything Russia or China could put up. And it gives the 5th gen pilots an edge against potential enemy forces that would be constantly trying to find an angle. Who better to find your weak spots than your teammates?
All it takes is a little over-confidence, laxidasical risk taking, an improved radar technology, or someone inadvertently slipping into a sensor blind spot and reporting that angle of attack back to his buddies.
Warfare is constant technological and tactical evolutions in an attempt to defeat someone else's technological and tactical evolutions. And it has proven many times over, that when you cant defeat high tech, try going low tech. The one truth that remains constant though, is there are no absolutes.
Several countries have reported that they can get a radar lock on the F-35 at distances it was not designed to be detected at. We may soon find ourselves in the situation that every compromise that was made to get the F-35 to be as stealthy as possible were in vein, and that once again, the only combo that works is speed, agility and awareness. This would, incidentally, still make the F-22 viable, but turn the F-35 into an air boat that sails drop bombs to target once the F-16s have done the Wild Weasel missions and cleared a path.
@@andersjjensen doubt it will occur, especially since in the future drones will most likely enter the scenario in place of human pilot. Personally, I'm of the opinion that dogfighting, though it's a bit sad, since I don't dislike seeing such action, is dead as it was mean in the past and doubt that relying of agility and speed will be viable in per set. They may play a good role but will become secondary to other aspects.
@@gandora0738 Especially drones makes me think that having fighter aces that throw a plane around like a leaf in the wind is a good idea. Drones and drone counter measures will have their own arms race with temporary losers and winners. But until the day where drones are practically missiles with jet engines that can go at speeds we can't build a human-containing-plane that can match, a skilled pilot in a fast and agile plane is a good last line of defence.
@@andersjjensen swarm tactic, drone may not subplant completely human pilots but it's true that our bodies and our brains are inefficient in this environment. We're not designed to sustain high Gs and technically, not even fly. The human body is efficient in bringing us to this point, but when you compare it to the efficency of specialized animals, we fall behind. Moreover, economically speaking, it's cheaper to produce pilotless drones with remote guidance or I.A. while having a smaller group of humans in command aircraft, optimized for electronic warfare, stealth and serving as spotting platform. As a final note: speed is important for a munition, yes, extremely so, but even deadlier is not being seen. You are fast, but if you are detected, with the right countermeasures, you can be intercepted, one of the reasons why the YB 58 and 70 where turned down. But, what can you do when you can't see or know that an enemy or munition is coming?
Been on the 16 since just out of high school. I'm 44yr old now, she is a beast and second to none. With a little hardwork a rub on the stab she will never stop. Code 1 for days the Viper has a serious bite, no one can clip the falcons wings...this is the knife you bring to a gunfight!
How did the Falcon get the nickname viper? I love the falcon as it is the fastest bird in the air. One young falcon ended up in my backyard. Still too young to fly above 1 foot off the ground, but man, those wings were huge compared to the tiny body. I was in the U.S. Air Force when it came into service. Luckily I was assigned to a couple of TAC bases where many were stationed, along with F-15 and other fighter aircraft. It is the most beautiful fighter aircraft in the world. In automobile terms, this is a Ferrari.
The F4 is my favorite. It blasted the guys that were shooting at me with a mortar. When two Phantoms came streaking in a tree top level, the mortar went quiet real quick.
Not a single pilot or crew member involved with the F-16 will ever call it a Fighting Falcon. It's real name is the Viper.
This is similar to how the A-10 is officially called the Thunderbolt ii but is actually known by literally everyone as the Warthog.
When the Air Force picks silly names for it's planes the crews will always come up with something that stick better.
This doesn't always result in a cooler name because some planes like the F-35 named Lightning ii is most commonly called "Fat Amy" these days.
F-35 pilots, themselves, largely call it the Panther.
The FA thing was mostly made up by detractors.
@Xenomorphine I've heard many Air Force people, including pilots saying Fat Amy. It might be the case that there's a few nicknames going around. I think we can all agree though that Lightning II was really lame.
@@blueskiestrevor5200 There is one cool thing about the name Lightning -- the ability to call the Marines' STOVL carriers Lightning Carriers. But it's still awkward to say "the Lightning" the way you'd say "the Eagle" or "the Viper."
Panther is a cool sounding nickname that's appropriate for an aircraft designed for stealth. Battle Penguin is a much better joke nickname than Fat Amy. And I've always thought that it would be cool to call it the Kestrel due to its ability to hover.
Been an aviation enthuiast for years, only recently have I read up on the real Top Gun, dog fighting and fighter aircraft. Your videos are great for bringing me up to speed on half a century of fighter plane technology.
The F-14 was not underwelming, it was saddled with crappy bomber engines, and it was too big to safely operate from the smaller conventional powered carriers the zu.S. Navy was still operating at the time. The hornet was to replace A-7 and F-4 aircraft. The A-7 on all carriers and the F-4 on smaller carriers. The F-14 outperformed the F-15 in speed and could attack from far outside the F-15's sensor range.
it was also way too expensive to operate. it doesn't make sense why the f15 doesn't have a long range missile like the phoenix because the f15 has an incredible radar too
It was the only fighter we had that could fire the AIM-54 Phoenix, which was the only actual long range AAM the US has ever really deployed.
Thought the swipe at the Tomcat was a bit uncalled for. 😂 It had it's issues, but underwhelming aint it.
When I was about 11 years old we heard a loud noise approaching very fast when we were in class in our small village in Belgium. 2 F 16'ns buzzed the church tower across the street from our classroom. That's how low they got flying their then brand new jets in Belgium. Some kids where actually in shock. Teacher stopped lessons and told us to go to the olayground to unwind from this ordeal. I, on the other hand, and some friends, wanted to see it again.....
I do t think anyone has called the F-14 underwhelming….. ever
When I was a kid, I saw the documentary Iron Eagle. It featured rare, declassified footage of a pair of F16s completely dismantling an integrated air defense system, while dogfighting state of the art Soviet jets. One of the pilots was a 16-year-old, which demonstrates the ease of flying and technological domination of this fighter.
Don't forget it's classified ability to re-arm while in the air!
If you want to see why half the names mentioned in this video are idiots i direct you to Laserpig's channel. The F-16 is a great plane, for sure, but that's despite most of the names in this video, not because of them. Also, the F-16 would never shoot down an F-35 without the F-35 pilot literally letting it happen.
I mean I think that goes without saying. I'd be pretty disappointed if newer shit doesn't dominate older shit lol
That said i know there are idiots who don't understand that. The f16 is amazing. The f35 is better. That takes nothing away from the f16... it's just true.
The fact that a plane first flown in 1974 is even still in the conversation says it all
The F-16 is America's Kalashnikov. Just, you know, 100,000 times more expensive.
I consider myself a fighter aircraft afficionado and the Fighting Falcon a.k.a. "Viper" is for various reasons my personal favorite.
who wouldn't? fast, agile, long range, and multirole. also has the same unhindered bubble canopy as with the F22. kinda hard to beat.
@@KuyaHandyKap because is obsolete, the only advantage it has left is the price due to manufacture cost being so low due to its barebones design and the scale of its production that lowered the costs as low as they will ever go.
its "good enough" but if you gave any pilot between F-16C and F-35A NOONE sane would ever choose the F-16
@@KuyaHandyKap I agree but everyone has their favorites, of course. The F-16 is not the World's best-selling fighter in history without reason. It's multi-role perfection!
So good!!!! I'm really looking forward to the follow up F-16XL video now!
the F-16 is the ultimate fighter if your source is wikipedia and article headlines
As always, an amazing video and very in-depth analysis/descriptions of various aircraft, whether it is civilian or military, which always draws me back to your videos (as well as all the other topics and engineering feats that you cover). But there is always one thing that I am always curious on and think a lot about, which again popped up in this video, and that is the logistics of transporting a large amount of aircraft across the globe to serve in various bases in a short amount of time. I am not sure whether it is extensive enough to warrant its own 'Megaprojects' video or if it can be included amongst other military logistics topics. But I would be very interested in viewing a video on either 'Megaprojects' or on ' Sideprojects' that covers such a topic or topics.
No real F16 pilot calls it a "Fighting Falcon." It's the Viper.
The name originally applied by the civvies in charge often do not stick and are replaced by more colorful nicknames. BUFF, SLUF, Warthog, BONE, and others come to mind. And what are they calling the Marine's replacement for the AH1W?
Not even after a bottle of Jeremiah Weed
doesnt change the fact its official designation is Fighting Falcon not Viper which is just a nickname just like A-10 is Thunderbolt II not Warthog
@@Asghaad Copium.
@@Guysm1l3y its called facts kid :)
Oh if you stop at 7:43 and see the YF-16 hanging in the museum, that's the Virginia Air & Space Science Center in Hampton, VA. I recognized it immediately 🙂
Originally the F-16 was slated to retire in the 2030s
IMO, the comparison between the F-16 and the F-35 did an injustice to the F-35. The same organizations and many of the same people who designed the F-35 had worked on the F-16 Block 60 and the F-22 (except for Boeing). They are brilliant people and made wise trade-offs based on the technological progress in the last 40 years. Sure, they traded some maneuverability for stealth and then traded some of that stealth (versus the F-22) for producibility, maintainability, and foreign sales. IMHO, the F-35 will be fantastic in combat.
When you hear that a F-16 can hit an enemy from 500 miles away, its hard to register just how far that is. I live in Minneapolis, MN. If an F-16 was flying past the Sears Tower in Chicago, it could launch a missile and hit the US Bank Stadium downtown Minneapolis. That blows me away (and would also blow away the stadium). Kind of like a nuclear sub hitting a house in Minneapolis, because they were in Lake Superior. The US can reach out and touch you, no matter where you are.
I'm from Scotland if you were to drive from the east coast to the west coast it would be roughly 120miles. Meaning you could fire a missile four times the distance of a small nation.
@@MadKieranMI've seen a quote that I assume applies to Scotland, to the effect that in the US 100 years is considered a long time while in England 100 miles is considered a long distance.
Anticipating a call to action
I would love a video about the YF 17
Falcons - _the bird_ - are smaller than Hawks. Probably that's why this was named the way that it was, as opposed to the larger "Eagle", which is _definitely_ a big bird-of-prey.
Love the F-16. Incredibly elegant in its design and an absolute beauty to watch fly
boyd didnt even invent energy manueverability theory : Although Boyd appears to have come up with these ideas independently, he was not the first to do so. A decade earlier, in 1954, an aerodynamics engineer working for Douglas named Edward Rutowski had the same concept. Rutowski’s work did not apply to dogfighting, but to calculating fuel ranges of various types of aircraft.[4] However, the equations and the charts are almost the same as Boyd’s, who later admitted to copying the charts after denying it for years. he also didnt design the f16 he was part of the push to make a lighter fighter yes but hes didnt design it although his idea did become fleshed out as the f16 the f16 has over time evolved away from his original idea which it did not fullfill in the first place entirely, boyd wanted a plane with no radar no afterburner no ejection seat, only enough fuel for the dogfight, only one big cannon, no missiles, no tech, only off the shelf simple flight instruments, all of which was rejected as the f16 is an all weather fighter with all the same tech used in the f15. if you go by boyds deffinition of a lightweight figter th f16 fails but it is the single most sold fighter jet ever made boyd only later took credit after complaining about the results of the program, the fighter mafia did this with the f15 and f16 they sent a list of things to remove from the f15 tht included: radar, ejection seat, fuel tanks, afterburner (making the plane subsonic), missile carrying capability, any ability to carry or deploy bombs. in general the fighter mafia is just a cult of lies in fact boyd wanted to replace all f15 and f16 with the f5 tiger because it fit his clowded idea of a light cheap fighter.
all that said the f16 is still a great fighter just not because of john boyds flawed ideas. it became what a fighter needs to be to succeed in its time and nowadays thats what the f35 is
Not to be a stickler, but Hill AFB is in Utah.
Simon. Thank you for an informative video.
15:19 - F-16 losses
AT LAST!👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
Aaahh my childhood favorite jet!! It's still one of my favorites.
F-14 was underwhelming? I know they're not your words specifically, but you need to be yeeted off a carrier's catapult for such blasphemy.
probably too expensive to maintain/operate and not so friendly to new pilots. top gun definitely helped boost public perception of it though. not so say it's a bad aircraft, but there's more to warplanes than benchracing
When I was in the Air Force I was lucky enough to get an "Incentive" flight in one of these. Twin seat. What an experience.