F-16 Co-designer's take on the F-35

[Breckey]

To get more thrust you need either higher mass flow or higher temperatures. The higher temperatures can be achieved by improved materials and aerodynamics, the higher mass flow is airframe limited. Doing some public math on the F414 results in a 17% higher mass flow than the F404. This is easily seen while looking at the intake differences between the legacy Hornet and the Super-Bug. The increase in mass flow is probably what gives the F414 the majority of its thrust/fuel efficiency advantage over its older cousin.

All of this quibbling aside, I bet if there was a market need for an F-16 with a F11X engine and the developers could get their investment back then it would proceed. Re-engining any aircraft is a lot of engineering work, especially those with tight clearances and specific interface requirements.

[busdriver]

The higher temperatures can be achieved by improved materials and aerodynamics, the higher mass flow is airframe limited.

GE is claiming something like a 20% increase in thrust on top of the 414's increase on the 414-EPE due to improved hot section durability blisk magic, well according to wiki anyways. i know I've read some Navy articles lamenting about the Navy not buying the EPE engines.

[Lawman]

GE is claiming something like a 20% increase in thrust on top of the 414's increase on the 414-EPE due to improved hot section durability blisk magic, well according to wiki anyways. i know I've read some Navy articles lamenting about the Navy not buying the EPE engines.

The only reason they got EPE engines on the legacy 404 equipped Hornet was the Kuwaitis paid the bill for R&D.

Guess they are hoping the Aussies or somebody will pick it up along with conformal tanks and the weapons bay.

Edited July 16, 2014 by Lawman