"King snake" is a great name for a fighter to replace the F-16, since king snakes (much like cobras) hunt and kill other snakes, such as vipers.

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

Indeed and thanks for commenting!

@RedHeadKevin

3 жыл бұрын

Or just actually officially name it the "Viper"

@robdawg7183

2 жыл бұрын

Yes it is!!!

@user-xr5vp6lx2s

2 жыл бұрын

@@PilotPhotog The F36 fighter appears in Taiwan and is scheduled to buy

@williamfieldsjr4144

2 жыл бұрын

I like the name as well but why not go all out and call it the king cobra king of all snakes but i do like king snake

So an F16 and a Draken had too much to drink one night...

@balazsbelavari7556

3 жыл бұрын

Hahaha

@tinture2822

3 жыл бұрын

kind of hot ngl

@juanguerrero9128

3 жыл бұрын

Is more like a F16, eurofighter and D. Rafael had a tri-some and only one kid came out. Who knows whos who on this sex triangle.

@balazsbelavari7556

3 жыл бұрын

@@juanguerrero9128 idk for me it's just a double delta F16, so I'd accuse Draken for it

@nolanolivier6791

3 жыл бұрын

More like a Mirage 2000 dropped off a basket of joy on the F16's porch... I guess you're a dad now, huh?

When i worked on the F-16XL for NASA, there many proposed projects for the aircraft. One was thrust vectoring (like VISTA) and removing the vertical tail. Lots of potential for this great F-16 derivative.

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks for commenting and good to see you here again!

@robertgarcia6569

3 жыл бұрын

@@PilotPhotog You're Welcome. It's interesting that the US Air Force didn't want the F-16XL, but they didn't want other countries to have it either. I remember other countries being very interested in having the aircraft built for them.

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

@@robertgarcia6569 can you imagine if the F-36 gets built? The XL would have come full circle

@robertgarcia6569

3 жыл бұрын

@@PilotPhotog Very True. When i look at all the pictures of the F-36 I see many of the proposed modifications that were being considered for the XL. I would be great to see all the testing the F-16 community did come to fruition :-)

@timbaskett6299

Жыл бұрын

For me, the F-22 and F-35 is similar to the Navy's Seawolf and Virginia class submarines. The Seawolf and F-22 production numbers are low but they have the best tech. The Virginia and F-35 are less complex, but more numerous. Eventually the Air Force will just have the F-35 and the F-16 replacement.

I built a 1:72 F-16XL back in the 1980's, and have always dreamed they would put it into production. It was such a fantastic design.

@imghost6296

Жыл бұрын

Do you have your design uploaded on the internet anywhere? I'd like to take a look at it and show it to those who actually build Americas Airframes.

@Condor1970

Жыл бұрын

@@imghost6296 ..No. it was 1:72 scale model. It was back in the 80s, and it's long gone now.

@JamesMiller-lq5rd

2 ай бұрын

LOL... I built one also... Think it was Testor model? Sat on my dresser next to a Grumman X-29A, both were amazing designs!

It would be so cool to see a derivative of the F-16XL flying around.

@phantomdracula

3 жыл бұрын

The American Gripen! 👍

@leefithian3704

3 жыл бұрын

The engineering around that duel stabilization through the wing would be an interesting challenge

@myusername3689

3 жыл бұрын

@@phantomdracula more like draken

@valenrn8657

3 жыл бұрын

@@phantomdracula The difference is the American version is based on a larger diameter engine. With USAF's common engine requirement, 45,000 lbf estimate from NGAD and future F-35 engine upgrade or 29,000 lbf engine from F-15EX and F-16C Block 50.

@Tigershark_3082

3 жыл бұрын

Thing is, we really don't need it, do we?

An updated F-16 XL would be a great option as it gives you true multi role capabilities by allowing then to carry a ton of ordnance for bombing runs or mix and match with air to air missiles for escorts.

@joelbilly1355

Жыл бұрын

Unless you are bombing the Taliban it's obsolete. They want a cheap stealth fighter.

I’ve always love the F-16 fighting Falcon. I was at Edwards AFB in the 80s with the F-16XL and the F-20 Tiger shark testing. XL was ahead of its time, maybe it time for her

@mysteriousfleas

3 жыл бұрын

The F-36 is going to happen, So is the F-23, incidentally. You're going to see two very iconic designs operating contemporaneously in a way that nobody ever thought was going to happen.

@Prof.Megamind.thinks.about.it.

2 жыл бұрын

@@mysteriousfleas Let's hope so , mahn ! Both were fantastic designs , and should not be wasted ! 😎

@adventurekid9242

Жыл бұрын

@@mysteriousfleas I'd like to see that happen and I am for wise military spending but would love to hear the reasoning behind your comment

@Durzo1259

Жыл бұрын

It's weird how everybody seems to prefer the unofficial name of the F-16 Viper. I always thought Falcon sounds way better and honestly, "Viper" sounds kind of cheesy, like what a 10 year old would name a plane.

@jaybuff3008

Жыл бұрын

@@Durzo1259 Yep, the F-16 was always the Falcon, or Fighting Falcon while I was in. Then in the 90's I started noticing that term 'viper' creeping in.

Bringing back the F-16XL, would be a "Fantastic" idea, as the TECH of the aircraft is already known, so "Development", would be next to NOTHING . . . it was a "Mistake", not to have built it in the first place, but this NEW design, using the XL as its "Base Design", would save COUNTLESS DOLLARS . . . this project, should be started ASAP !.

@trolleriffic

3 жыл бұрын

That's what they said about the SLS rocket - it will be cheap because it reuses technology. The Kingssnake would be a completely new plane with radically different fuselage, wings, engine, avionics, and everything else compared to the F-16. Some of the F-16s being sold now already cost more than the F-35 and we're supposed to believe that this would somehow be much cheaper? Come on, let's be realistic. Also, F-16s are wearing out now and need replacing now. This plane does not exist and probably wouldn't be available in quantity for a decade at least so what do we do until then?

@Yuki_Ika7

2 жыл бұрын

Just as I think that using the YF-23 as a base to make and/or influence future 6th gen fighters would be a good idea!

@montanabulldog9687

2 жыл бұрын

@@Yuki_Ika7 I "Completely Agree", with you ! . . .

@thefolder69

2 жыл бұрын

"what's with" "all the" "quotation marks?"

@montanabulldog9687

2 жыл бұрын

@@thefolder69 I do it to "Piss Off", you English Majors ! . . .

Can't wait till this becomes a 1/32 scale model

@jrftworth

3 жыл бұрын

Not going to be built

@diegoarce490

3 жыл бұрын

This is the best reply EVER!!! LMAO ... I am still laughing

@michaelprocter1298

3 жыл бұрын

That'd be a great kit, just imagine the different colour schemes.

@frankmueller6522

3 жыл бұрын

Go forward, America! Long live the Nato! Long live freedom! Down with all dictatorships and terrorists all around the world! Best wishes from Germany!

Lockheed Martin, 20 years ago: "The F-35 will be the last manned fighter plane. USAF, 20 years later: "yeah, nah."

@mysteriousfleas

3 жыл бұрын

Yf-23s are going to make a resurgent comeback in the JSDF to the point where the state department realized they were behind on the times from the outset. The black widow and the kingsnake are going to revolutionize air defense.

@bryanrussell6679

3 жыл бұрын

There's a whole hell of a lot more UAVs being built right now than Kingsnakes...

@lairdriver

3 жыл бұрын

Nah, they have a role. The will bomb truck configure most and have them guided in by a networked Raptor like it was intended to be. The other F35s in stealth mode would take out radars. That's the plan but I don't see them buying 3000

@lairdriver

3 жыл бұрын

@@mysteriousfleas the Japanese own their design. Their new fighter is based on it.

@alessiodecarolis

3 жыл бұрын

The same idiocy said about the F104.... in 1958!

Salesman: "Now let's see sir, would you like a 4th & a half Gen plane, or fifth-Gen minus". Buyer: "Minus what?"

@johnyanga8532

2 жыл бұрын

Exactly, I don't get that statement.

@bokiNYC

2 жыл бұрын

I understood the gen 4.5 to be closer to the older gen 4 tech and gen 5 minus to be closer to the gen 5 tech.

U.S. planes are without a doubt the most beautiful fighters ever.

@zopEnglandzip

2 жыл бұрын

Thank the Lord Boeing didn't get anywhere with the x-32, first sign things were going badly over there 🤮

@starfighter1043

2 жыл бұрын

Honestly I like the su variants the little notch on the nose and where the fuselage meets its sexy af it just makes it look like it has a high angle of attack when flying the Americans to me seem like more conventional like something you'd expect Americans to build if that makes sense...im American by the way I love our aircraft don't get me wrong but like the draken the su the mirage the typhoon they're EXOTIC looking if you will....like the su is a benz and the f16 is a ford haha

@michaeltrent2726

5 күн бұрын

As an American, I certainly appreciate our fighters design. However, I do find the Soviet/Russian designs to be even more so. Of course they have no chance against our superior tech and pilots/ tactics

@Quetzalcoatl_Feathered_Serpent

3 күн бұрын

@@zopEnglandzip to be fair. The end result.of the Boeing X-32 supposedly would have looked liked a little Stealthy F-86 saber. That's not a bad thing at all

Go with the F-22 engine but make it fully 3D thrust vectoring! add cool air sleeve mix chamber to spoil heat seeking. Yes this is exactly what the AirForce needs!

@rogerramjet6134

3 ай бұрын

Nah, why go backwards? Use the adaptive engine they keep trying to sell for the F-35s. 15% more range, and probably an enormous boost in supercruise speed and range.

It's interesting what lessons in wing shape were learned from the Concorde, and the Saab J-35 Drakken.

@dannynye1731

3 жыл бұрын

More like The Mirage3, the F102, the F106 and the Lippische P13

@PugilistCactus

3 жыл бұрын

Actually it started with Delta Dart and Dagger.

@mysteriousfleas

3 жыл бұрын

Everyone is seeing reflections of the Draken, it looks like the Swedes had it right all along.

@willdsm08

3 жыл бұрын

Don't forget great-granddad, the Vulcan.

@ulvschmidt7174

2 жыл бұрын

@@willdsm08 its three years i dont know if great granddad is waranted

Interesting concept. I definitely like the twin rudders idea as I believe it increases maneuverability and stability. Building on a proven platform is the right idea.

I worked on the XL from concept through development it has several more fantastic features that were not mentioned and at the roll out I was just positive this plane would be adopted like I was at the roll out of the F 16. I was very disappointed when it lost the completion. I would love to see an updated General Dynamics plane like the XL in our sky again.

@rogerramjet6134

3 ай бұрын

What's worse is that the competition never meant the XL could not / should not be built. For a near doubling of combat capability for about a 2.5% total cost of ownership/operation, I have always rated it as the biggest miss in USAF purchasing ever.

The reasons listed in favor of the Kingsnake are valid. The USAF has already stated intent to fill the role of the Viper with a new aircraft. The F-16 XL has been sitting around being a great idea that should be rediscovered for far too long. It's almost a no brainer- the design already exists and has been tested. That fits right in with the AF 's new 'Agile development for new fighters' process.😁

@spartanx9293

3 жыл бұрын

Incorrect this all stems from a stupid forbs article this guy explanes it better"Well, it’s more of a desperate attempt to write about the F-35 program in light of recent media attention (David Axe’s infamous Forbes article). If you’re relying on comments from politicians that too from 5 years ago then that says it all. The article’s argument revolves around program cost. But what do you think will happen if you cut down F-35 procurement dramatically? The unit cost and operational cost will skyrocket as economy of scale shrinks. Then the very people proposing the whole notion will be outraged and call for further cuts… And you’ll have F-22 2.0; only this time there won’t be a multirole Fighter program like F-35 in development to save the day from such short-sightedness. You think the Next Generation Air Dominance platform (6th gen.) is going to be any less expensive? Hint: It’s going to be closer to F-22 than F-35 in terms of cost. The JSF program had a target of reducing the unit cost down to $80 million for the F-35A before full rate production begins (Lot 14). From $107 million ($125 million after inflation) in 2011, the F-35A unit cost reached $79.2 million in Lot 13, a year before planned and In Lot 14 the F-35A cost $77.9 million.[1] These are not estimates but the actual Pentagon contract signed in 2019.[2] Let me break that for you, the F-35A today has lower unit cost than any modern 4th gen. aircraft (with the exception of F-18E/F and F-16V). Yeah that includes Gripen-E which is projected to cost $85 million according to Saab.[3] And the F-35’s full rate production is yet to begin.  The F-35 doesn’t just have better sensors - there’s no equivalent of DAS on any other platform, the F-35’s Helmet fully replacing HUD, the sensitivity of ASQ-239 or the massive computing power handling 1 TB of sensory data produced in every flight.[4] The only reason the F-35 cost less than almost any contemporary aircraft is because of the economy of scale. The fact USAF will be buying 1,763 F-35A. You take away that economy of scale and you don’t need to know economics to predict the outcome. And it was incredibly funny to see the very same people concerned about F-35’s cost today being silent or supporting the idea of Pentagon forcing the USAF to buy 80 F-15EX at $98.3 million unit cost last year.[5]Oh and unlike the F-35 having an integrated Targeting pod, jammer and sufficient internal fuel - the F-15EX requires Sniper/LITENING pod, external jamming pod & fuel tanks to be combat capable - none of which are included in the unit cost. So add a couple of millions more to have a combat capable aircraft. After all, it’s perfectly fine to spend $20 million more for a “low-end” platform… There’s a lot of talk about F-35 having high operational cost but no outlet understands what that actually means. You’ve them talk about F-35 being “so expensive to maintain” at $34,000 CPFH. On surface that sounds a lot but you know what else cost exactly that today?  The F-15E fleet today has same operational cost as F-35A.[6] The F-15C fleet is even higher. Have a look at F-15 fleet cost from 2015.[7] The F-35A’s CPFH decreased to $34,000 down the years while everybody else’s increased due to ageing fleet.  Funny we don’t see articles calling for scraping the USAF F-15E fleet as they’re so expensive to maintain… The real issue for USAF isn’t that F-35 is super-expensive, it’s not. The real problem is that it’s meant to be the backbone of the USAF just like the F-16 have been for last 30 years. They’ve to buy 1,763 F-35A to meet that role but in post Cold War era tight budget, the only way to sustain such a large fleet is for F-35 to have comparable operational cost as the F-16. The JSF program had a requirement for F-35A to have comparable CPFH as Block 52 F-16C/D, which is about $25,000. The F-35A is supposed to achieve that CPFH by 2025 and this was always a controversial for obvious reason. The F-35A will eventually reach close to $25,000 CPFH just like it reached

@capnron65

3 жыл бұрын

Too bad we're broke as a nation. Can't afford an expensive development program like the F-36. Too much money spent on F-35s.

@spartanx9293

3 жыл бұрын

@@capnron65 the program's expensive the aircraft is not and we're not broke yet the government could learn to cut spending though there are a bunch of military programs that are entirely meant as bailouts the f-15 eagle 2 for example

@michaelkeller5008

3 жыл бұрын

@@spartanx9293 well i gues the initial starting point was that 3 presidents in a row thought about the F-35 being a cashgrab, overpriced and way to delayed to make any good IF it should go into serial production (the F-35 is still pre-series! And buggy as hell, too!). Now with the report Biden asked, Forbes has all the reasons to dig into the topic. To bring "to light" what has happened before. Refering to "F22 instead F23, when the Black Widdow was the better choice", "F-35 instead F-32, eventough the F-32 was better", findings around F-16XL never implemented, aso...

@spartanx9293

3 жыл бұрын

@@michaelkeller5008 the yf23 was the better choice the aircraft that couldn't launch missles from its weapons Bay and couldn't surpass mach 1.6 for fear of cracking the cockpit was the better choice the yf-22 gave a much better preformance a both surpassed the criteria given to them

You can make arguments for both F36 and the F15EX. Both could be acquired for the mission capabilities mentioned in the video. Splitting the purchase also gives the Air Force options in mission planning and capability. I’m sure that there are still those who only think that stealth fighters are the only choice the Air Force should have, but there are other mission requirements that do not require stealth aircraft or use one or two stealth fighters and integrate other aircraft in the mix. It is the individual mission requirements that determine what aircraft are used and in what numbers. It is up to the Air Force to determine what they need. Of that I am certain. Stay safe mates!😊👍🏻😷

@cap.meruwkateklimana8321

3 жыл бұрын

Specifically, the next war is Iran.

@kevinrusch3627

3 жыл бұрын

It's my understanding that part of the intended use of the F-15EX is to be a weapons hauler for the F-22. The 22s will fly ahead and point out targets and the F-15s will chuck them.

@kevinrusch3627

3 жыл бұрын

@@cap.meruwkateklimana8321 what do they have? A couple Mig-29s?

@markphilpot8734

3 жыл бұрын

@@kevinrusch3627, that is my understanding also. The stealths will point out to the 15s and the 15s will put foot to ass. The 15s can carry a bunch of hurt to whomever wants to play in the sandbox. They won’t be taking any ass whoopins either. They don’t know how! Stay safe mates!😊👍🏻😷

@mhamma6560

3 жыл бұрын

Do you know what you do when you have a mission that doesn't require a low-observable aircraft? You fit the L/O aircraft full of bombs and missiles. Both the F22 and F35 can more than double their payloads with external stores. The fact the US is buying F15ex and even considering something other than 5th gen just proves we've spent entirely too long in the desert bombing primitive people. Spec'n aircraft on yesterday's war is really stupid idea to put it lightly.

Solid video as always bro! Really like how your videos are rooted in fact rather than speculation. Being retired Air Force myself, that’s a huge plus in videos and channels I watch and recommend to others! Well done!

@PilotPhotog

Жыл бұрын

Thank you Chris, I really appreciate that - I think you will enjoy Monday's video - its about the NGAD fighter. Cheers!

I remember the cranked arrow as a test bed back in the 80’s. I thought she was a good idea then. So yes given that the Falcon is nearing the the end of its service life, an upgrade of this type is perfect for extending its airframe life. The Navy has already upgraded the F/A 18 for greater range payload and mission capability. It would also cost us less money than creating a completely new bird to fill the void if the F-16 were taken out of service. Also a retooling will be much easier as well as training the ground crews to maintain an aircraft they already know. Btw I’m not a pilot but I grew up near a SAC base and I love military aircraft because they represent the cutting edge of aviation technology and enjoy reading about them. This video is a great assessment of how to keep a great aircraft flying into the near future while the next generation fighter is still in the computer.

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

Agreed and thanks for commenting! In case you haven't seen it, here is a video all about the XL: kzread.info/dash/bejne/aKBnq9qaj7rTg8o.html

Whenever there is a longer air combat then a few confrontations what you need are the numbers. The duality part is a great choice, but there really should’ve been more of a focus on the economic endurance part. In the end it’s always going to be the numbers, you can’t risk only having 200 F-22s when you could build thousands of F-16XLs or F-36es.

@samfosdick9874

2 жыл бұрын

The Soviets knew this...win by having numbers over numbers. Look at their tank squadron structures during the Cold war. Our tanks could take out about 10 or 11 Soviet tanks but they had 20 on standby just to fill the void so we would never win a tank battle. Use that philosophy in our aircraft strategies we would be invincible

@koekiejam18

2 жыл бұрын

@@samfosdick9874 its not an unbeatable strategy, it has merit if the conflict is over in a short time. But if it drags on, youll end up rapidly burning through experienced personel. (Which as we al know isnt something that gets replaced easily)

@samfosdick9874

2 жыл бұрын

@@koekiejam18 so true brother. We've lost a lot of good men and women to stupid wars our government gets us into. I'm a retired disabled US military veteran and am sick of the neverending story of our "leadership" sending us were we don't belong. Look at who makes $$$ off these long wars and you'll see why Trump is right...our military men and women have died for the profit of a select few.

@marsmotion

2 жыл бұрын

@@samfosdick9874 yes thats true sam but its worse than that. the wars have all been designed to bring into being a one world technocracy where due to the level of technology human free will comes into serious question. see "Geoengineered transhumanism" by elana freeland for deeper technical descriptions of whats planned and being implemented now. god bless us all we will need it.

@samfosdick9874

2 жыл бұрын

@@marsmotion truth what’s crazy is those of us at speak like this are currently thought of as lunatic fringe conspiracy theorist but but our eyes are wide open. When all the rest of the sheep realize that they are being led to a slaughter it will be too late for them. I’ve armed myself quite well and have a plan a back up plan and several more back up plans. The last plan is save the last round for me because I refuse to live one day on my knees to what’s coming and I will take as many of those bastards with me as I can.

I think the idea of building new 4th+ gen aircraft is a good one, as 5th gen are expensive to build and maintain. So building less potent but still capable fighters is probably the best call for replacing the aging old fleet. And who knows, maybe by the time we are building 6th gen aircraft we may be building newer 5th gen to compliment those as well.

@arklight1670

3 жыл бұрын

Ya but did you not hear what he said about using new materials on a old design, that in its self will send the costs up. some times old tech is good enough depending on mission to be done.

@Tanstaaflitis

3 жыл бұрын

An new F-35A costs about the same as a new build F-16V or F/A-18E or F Block 3. And it's got mission systems that beat the pants off the pods you hang from those frames. The main cost problem right now with F-35 is keeping parts in stock to keep mission rates high. And deciding how many of the initial batches should be fully upgraded or repurposed to non-frontline roles.

@spartanx9293

3 жыл бұрын

I don't It will sapp resources from the f35 and drive up it's costs

@cncmne7404

3 жыл бұрын

@the O.D.S.T spartan Yea but operating costs of the F-35 are high. It cost up to 30k or more to operate a F-35 , and the F-16 cost only 8k. I dont think the new fighter will be much more expensive than the F-16 maintenance wise. Well depending on the engine.

@Tanstaaflitis

3 жыл бұрын

@@cncmne7404 Operating costs are not always compared apples to apples, so take such numbers critically. During wartime, an F-35 mission is expected to take far fewer planes to accomplish the same objective. The per-mission costs for such objectives is going to be lower. For certain, during training or deployed to low intensity conflicts, the F-35 costs are currently higher than mature platforms. This is a high priority item for both Lockheed and the US military, so those costs will come down. As an operational platform, the F-35 is still young and having teething issues. Placing hopes that a new, undeveloped, program will not have similar issues is an unfounded assumption on the part of many people. For all the ink spilled about the F-35, it's faced a normal level of program risk and overruns for any platform the US has developed over the life of military aviation. These things are normal and expected, with normal and expected resources to handle them. The platform is good and doing what it was requested to do, and then some.

I was always disappointed that the F-16XL never made it into production and would therefore be happy if this updated version was finally put into service. Let’s hope they can make a compelling case for it.

I was at Carswell when the Cranked Arrow F-16 rolled out. That plane was phenomenal. Bringing its progeny into the arsenal will strengthen Air Force capabilities.

My new favorite aviation site. And not a computer generated voice. Thanks!

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you much appreciated! Using my voice doubles production time but is totally worth it, already working on the next video!

If I drink Guinness extra stout beer I too can super Cruise

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

Literally laughed out loud

@andybaksh2818

3 жыл бұрын

Tf lol

@Jambalaya_Jo

3 жыл бұрын

Lol

@davidtharp1591

3 жыл бұрын

Pure speculation

@Ob1sdarkside

3 жыл бұрын

😂😂

Good analysis-- especially effective in comparative review of multiple service mission requirements. Smoothly and clearly delivered, which typically requires a great deal of production work, both writing and editing. Your channel joins my A-List. * Amazing how the "lifting body" concept has come to dominate design. The only thing the F36 does not have is canards.

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

Glad you enjoyed it and thanks for the comment! I try to get a little better with each episode so stay tuned, lots more on the way.

@kdrapertrucker

Жыл бұрын

the designer of the F-16 once famously told a young aircraft designer that the optimum position for a canard was on someone else's aircraft.

My great uncle used to work for General Dynamics and would bring me photos of the delta wing F-16 back in the 80s. He helped design the missile guidance system. I would love to see an updated version of the F-16 replace the current.

@kdrapertrucker

Жыл бұрын

All F-16s are Delta winged.

I really want this one to win if there would be a fighter contest... it just looks so new and smooth

The F-119 was designed from the onset to have flat nozzles. It wasn't modified to have flat nozzles, its prototype, the YF-119 as well as the PW5000 that came before it all had flat nozzles. Modifying it with round nozzles will require more work and cost. It would be cheaper just to put the original flat nozzle of the F119. If you really want round nozzles then just design it to fit the F135, which is, in a way, a modified F119 with round nozzles

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

Excellent point and thanks for commenting!

@Ry_TSG

3 жыл бұрын

Yeah, it would make more sense to me to just use the f-35’s engine, which is very powerful and already in production

@BV-fr8bf

3 жыл бұрын

@@Ry_TSG The Correct answer! Reduce logistic bottlenecks.....

@unknownuser069

3 жыл бұрын

While you make excellent points the larger concern is that the F135 Engine has run into production issues. Otherwise we would be acquiring F-35 more rapidly. A new revision of the F119 would be my top choice. Yes the F119 would take a long time to restart, but solving F135 production is also a problem. Also - the F-135 engines have a lot of stupid compromises related to keeping commonality for the F-35B version. As mentioned the cranked delta wing can lead to loss of energy in high AOA maneuvering. The 1dimensional thrust vectoring of the F119 would easily offset that - making the proposed aircraft more maneuverable than the F-16 in all domains. including a sustained turning fight. This plane is not going to spend its life as a dogfighter, especially with the missile loads it can carry. What most of these sorts of videos miss is that fighters have to execute evasive maneuvers against missiles. Being able to generate large changes in flight vector in a short time will help defeat faster hypersonic medium range FOX-3 missiles like R-77M. Pilots call this "notching" and executing it effectively is an artform, and it requires rapid turning capability. Further the F119's engine isn't flat for thrust vectoring - it is easier to achieve multidimensional thrust vectoring with nearly circular nozzles - as seen on Su-35 and Su-57. The real reason is IR stealth. This is essential against newer high performing FOX-2 missiles, as the flat nozzle disperses the exhaust laterally very widely, thus cooling the exhaust rapidly with atmospheric air. Further, the F119 can be shrouded. F110 and F414 (Super Hornet/Gripen Engine) are exposed from all rear aspects. By comparison if you look at the F-22, its pretty hard to see the engines except from nearly on its six or in planform. So, not only would I like to see F119 on this proposed plane, I would like to see it on F-15EX as well. (Though I have very serious reservations about the F-15EX program in its totality - too many compromises for a new build.)

@michaeld1170

3 жыл бұрын

@@unknownuser069 That would indeed be better but the F-36 is not there to be better its there to be cheaper. And while I would love nothing more than to restart the F-119 line that can lead the way to improved F-119 variants, I just think the added work and cost will immediately get the proposal shut down. I am aware that the F-119 is not flat for TVC, the YF-119 installed on the YF-23 was also flat despite the absence of TVC. The F-119, its YF-119 prototype and the PW5000 that was the tech demonstrator for it all came with flat nozzles. All I'm saying is that if you need round nozzles, modifying the F119 is not the cheaper option. You can use the F-135 or advanced derivatives of the F100 and F110 if round nozzles is indeed what you need.

Would love to see this come to be, same as the YF-23 revived as a strike bomber, taking over the role the F-111s and F-117s left when they were retired. Really digging these mockups are using the LF tail code for Luke AFB near Goodyear, AZ. Used to love seeing F15 and F16 overflights when I lived in Phoenix and Dad was posted there when they still primarily operated F4s.

Very nice episode. I have seen your channel a few times, but this is one of the best presentations I have ever seen on youtube so I am a new subscriber now. To many times other channels grab me with a real interesting "Titles" only to watch old footage of past aircraft or regurgitated graphics of unrelated aircraft that proves the "titles" are nothing but click bait. I will be a faithful subscriber as long as you show true images or relative examples and do not poop out click bait episodes that would make you like the others. Keep up the great content and I look forward to checking out more from you. Good luck and I hope you stay happy and healthy in the future.

You mean the F-35 was suppose to be the replacement, but in the end were far too expensive per unit to feasibly replace all F-16s in service

@Ry_TSG

3 жыл бұрын

Yes, that is exactly correct

@pravirchandragadkari88

3 жыл бұрын

Wrong f35 was upgraded replacement of f117 with kutte better fighting and load carrying capabilities but is a sitting duct against indian mig29upg and lca tejas mk1a

@ytn00b3

3 жыл бұрын

can become cheaper as more F-35s out there and more to be roll out soon. U.S need to start selling their downgraded version of F-35A to other countries that operates F-16 but right now they're happy to just upgrade existing F-16 to F-16 Block 72 which will add another 25+ more years.

@spartanx9293

3 жыл бұрын

79 million per airframe is roughly the cost of an f16 airframe in the 1970s so not too expensive

@pravirchandragadkari88

3 жыл бұрын

@@spartanx9293 usa airforce must seriously consider indian mwf tejas for light to medium role . It is most cost effective versatile 4.75plus gen fighter jet in the world. Second why usa needs 300 plus squadrons of light fighter jets in drone era ?

"This is Wizard One, the Demon Lord has entered the net." "This is Wizard Five, Roger." "Let's begin."

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

Memories of the Round Table

@MrPetarted86

3 жыл бұрын

Can we just get Zero remastered?

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

@@MrPetarted86 yes!!! I’d be the first to buy it 😎

@MrPetarted86

3 жыл бұрын

Great video BTW. I’m sure this feels like something perfect for Taiwan. Also, back to ace combat I’m glad we get all the wunderwaffen planes but man I would love to have that game in like 1971. The strangereal universe but with late 60’s and early 70’s aircraft.

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

@@MrPetarted86 that would be a great setting for an AC game

Great detailed info and explanations of WHY the various features matter. Earns a subscribe. I would think the fuselage could be better blended into the wings in a subsequent design.

I’ve got a long family history with the Viper. My uncle was with GD throughout the ‘70s and helped design the fire control system for the original F-16A. (when it was still the Fighting Falcon 😄) His wife’s cousin later flew F-16s for the Israeli air force. And I got nearly an hour in the F-16’s 360° simulator at Luke Air Force Base in the mid ‘90s because a friend was there transitioning to the ANG’s F-16C. So anything that keeps the F-16 family in the air sounds great to me.

A Mach 2 super cruise is bananas.

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

Can you imagine?

@trolleriffic

3 жыл бұрын

@@PilotPhotog I can imagine, but it's not remotely credible. Concorde could do Mach 2 supercruise because it was built for it and had a very sophisticated variable geometry inlet which delivered superb pressure recovery and made it possible for the engines to supercruise at that speed. Kingsnake has a DSI which is good for simplicity and stealth, but has very poor pressure recovery and no variable geometry so top speed takes a big hit as a result. Mach 1.6-1.8 with afterburner would be credible but better supercruise than a Raptor despite a massively inferior intake is pure fantasy.

The F-16XL is being restored for museum status 40 feet from my hanger space. It is so cool taking new guys to see the size difference. I want this Kingsnake in service now. Can we also add new A-10's? Go Hawgs!

@jacobarmstrong9173

3 жыл бұрын

I'd love to see some new, high tech Hawgs. I'd work on those beasts again if they did.

@PugilistCactus

3 жыл бұрын

I'd like to see more A-10's but with a downsized gun and increased payload. The 30mm ain't as useful as it was in the 80's. A 20mm would work considering its mostly used on soft targets.

@robertw6894

3 жыл бұрын

@@PugilistCactus tank warfare would still definitely happen if we werent at war with a developing country, and killing tanks is the original reason for the 30mm. the 30mm is also used to take out people in buildings, something a 20mm definitely couldnt do. besides, replacing the 30mm with a 20mm would be extremely costly and require very extensive modification. the whole aircraft is built around that gun, and taking it out would shift the center of mass significantly and require expensive changes to the entire airframe. besides, why try to "fix" something that is working just fine?

@Thor45701

3 жыл бұрын

They definitely need to keep the A10. A new model would be a great idea

@mysteriousfleas

3 жыл бұрын

Japanese F-23s are forthcoming, they will be multi-role maritime defense and intelligence aircraft, they will set a precedent. The Kingsnake may well be the mainsteay but the F-23 will will become the specialist fighter-coastal defense asset that it should have been the whole time.

Honestly I'd love to see a F-20 style aircraft return

I would use the F-135 engine. That way you'll never need to upgrade the engine. And if you do want/need an upgrade it can "simply" be transferred over from the F-35 fighter family. Also I would only go semi-stealthy. Just the shaping and very little R.A.M. Around the intake. Current stealth design is very expensive and labor intensive hence the high operating costs of the F-22 and F-35's.

@dwwolf4636

Жыл бұрын

Internal room for some smaller ordnance....conformal fuel tanks, integrated IRST.

When I was a teen, I was hoping the F-16XL would win that competition.

Great video! I really enjoyed it. The concept art of the F-36 was awesome.💯

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

Some designs will have to take time to grow on me. I'm still in love with the F-16XL.

if it's cost effective, survivable and can be produced quickly, then it's a win-win.

The F-36 definitely needs an internal gun as well as the ability to take some CFTs. And I don't see why they can't use the thrust vectoring versions of the F-119 either. Wouldn't that be an even larger win for both airframes?

@spartanx9293

3 жыл бұрын

Why not use the f135 engine

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

@@spartanx9293 good point and I should have mentioned that as an option in the video.

@nivlacyevips

3 жыл бұрын

Thrust vectoring is high cost and not nearly as important in this role. Keeping engine costs down is high priority.

@spartanx9293

3 жыл бұрын

@@PilotPhotog If the thing does actually use it this will partially alleviates my fears of the f35 being killed as parts commonality would help keep it in service

@donovannotmyname7306

3 жыл бұрын

@@spartanx9293 That's what I've said on other videos

While the F-16 is (as Mechanics Illustrated said in 1976) an engine with a man strapped to it -- this bird can fly. I would like to see the F-5 variant -- F-20 Tigershark looked at. The F-5 is still a widely used fast, agile, small unit that the US is now looking for F-5's to purchase for its Agressor Squadrons. The F-20 would be a wonderful theater combat aircraft.

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

I think you will like the next video in the series 😎

@dblankenship88

3 жыл бұрын

Was thinking the same. I would love to see the USAF take another look at the F-20.

@pravirchandragadkari88

3 жыл бұрын

@@PilotPhotog buy indian lca lekar mk1a , mwf tejas and being engine orca. Indian jets are designed to dominate hostile air defences and 4.5plus gen fighter jets. Americans have no experience of fighting a against a potent airforce that is why they failed in Vietnam.

@pravirchandragadkari88

3 жыл бұрын

@@dblankenship88 today gripen is better available choice and lca tejas would be rhe best choice. Tiger shark was good concept when it was designed but today no pilot would like to fly any jet in war with such a high wing loading .

@dblankenship88

3 жыл бұрын

@@pravirchandragadkari88 agreed but being a USAF veteran I can assure they will not purchase the Gripen. They (USAF) always wants to keep their airframes to a select few companies that do not originate overseas. The Gripen, even the Rafael would be amazing to see having a squadron in the Air Force but it’ll never happen. It doesn’t fit the narrative for the overall future of the Air Force.

You know they have already developed a Gunstar and an F-302- death glider. They are just waiting for the right time to show it to the world.

I believe this is a great idea to not only able to saving time to develop a new concept aircraft but also to take advantage of what we have learn Pro and Con about the 4th generation aircraft.Most important of all, we can continue using mostly the same familiar parts no need to retrain the engineers who maintains the aircraft. It is a win win win solution. Love your analysis.

Both F-16XL prototypes recently disappeared from display at Edwards AFB. Does anyone know any details?

@999Evandro

3 жыл бұрын

That's a great info, sir!

@frankcrawford416

3 жыл бұрын

How old is the king snake design. I thought the new upgraded f-16s were for export mainly. And they were not as modified as the king snake.

@mysteriousfleas

3 жыл бұрын

The only ally that the US would ever trust to utilize such a design was the JSDF, and only Japan would be ballsy enough to take the place at the bleeding edge of technological innovation to try these things out. Think about it. The U.S has a fucking plane for every role, but the JSDF cannot afford such things, thus they must homogenize as many roles into as few aircraft as possible. The future is the JSDF F-23 Black widow with a full maritime defense compliment alongside the F-36 kingsnake compliment of fighters. Cheap and stealthy and capable of long scale maritime flight just like their big(er) brother the F-23. The F-23 will be outfitted for a variety of roles including anti-ship and coastal maritime patrol, and the kingsnake will be their stealthy and more economical backup should things go bad.

Looks like the XL reborn.... an she inherents that divertless test inlet they ran on an F16 tail number120 Texas bird i think.

@mikepowell9439

3 жыл бұрын

I heard some rumors that F-16XL might had outperformed the original F-16. Then again, I could be wrong.

It’s a win win to use the F-16 proven platform , along with modern day avionics, flight dynamics and the F-22’s engine, lower production cost with stunning performance capability

Back in the late 70s and 80s I was building F 16‘s for general dynamics. That’s when the crank arrow XL was produced. It is good to see that a reasonable cost-effective aircraft is now being considered to replace the F 16.

I would looooove to see an irl wizard sqaudron

@Komyeta

3 жыл бұрын

If they do, i would like to see F-23A

Today I learned the F-16 Xl could supercruise - wow!

@Im_TheSaint

3 жыл бұрын

most planes since the F4 phantom could super cruise. You just need a clean airframe with 0 stores mounted.The stock f16 will supercruise too if you have an empty wing setup. The trick is to be able to carry missiles and supercruise at the same time, which only stealth planes can do because only stealth planes carry weapons internally.

@spartanx9293

3 жыл бұрын

Probably not under combat load

@henrikerdland578

3 жыл бұрын

@@Im_TheSaint Sorry but I have say no. I doubt that a clean F-16 would be able to supercruise. The only Stealth aircraft that can supercruise is F-22. Typhoon and Rafale can also supercruise in combat configuration with external stores. F-18 SH and Gripen E are able to supercruise but doubt this is in combat configuration. I know that F-35 can stay supercruise for about 150 miles before it drops below. But the definition of supercruise is that a aircraft has to reach supercruise speed and stay there without the use of afterburner. Else would all aircraft be able to supercruise.

@silaskuemmerle2505

3 жыл бұрын

@@spartanx9293 one of the things the F-16XL was intended to do was be able to supercruise under a combat load

@spartanx9293

3 жыл бұрын

@@silaskuemmerle2505 sorry it doesn't have to thrust away to do so parasitic drag will keep that from happening

The Kingsnake development is well beyond what is speculated by the the military aficionado. It is a blend of F-35,-F22 on the cheap with new or established features a war fighter which may obtain from from a myriad of established technologies such as having stealth and bomb trucking features the airforce needs currently, it must fit a new paradigm of war fighting sustainment from the air, having stealth and speed as part of its defensive attributes. It's a new piece to the overall puzzle for air superiority from one jet fittinting the US aviation puzzle.

@oldhag2881

Жыл бұрын

People are starting to acknowledge out loud that even if the F35 problems can be overcome, both the F22 and F35 are just too damned expensive. How many can we afford to lose? Same goes for the B2. Totally badass, but horribly expensive to maintain and operate.

Want to help support this channel? Become a channel member: kzread.info/dron/z_aGg3uEnfE4hU6Pu6Wj3g.htmljoin Subscribe on Patreon: patreon.com/PilotPhotog

Definitely cool, but why wouldn't they consider thrust vectoring? Cost maybe? But if you are saving money on the project in general, adding thrust vectoring on 1 engine would make this a pretty scary opponent.

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

Great questions, and I'm wondering if the added weight penalty/maintenance could be a factor. Thanks for commenting!

@DonMeaker

3 жыл бұрын

Normal control surfaces at high speed give you more maneuver authority than you can use, without thrust vectoring, so thrust vectoring is only useful when you are going really slow. Thrust vectoring is heavy, hard to make stealthy, and the weight is in the wrong location- the back. Hot structures are hard. Transparent structures are hard. Low radar cross section structures are hard. Light structures are hard. Choose two, and they get harder. Choose three and it becomes very hard.

@CrossWindsPat

2 жыл бұрын

It doesn't need it. It will already be nimble seeing as its a single engine. This would only work if they really manage to keep it as cheap and simple as possible. Otherwise I think the money would be better spent just pushing out more 5th gen stuff.

@stevenplesnarski7918

2 жыл бұрын

@@CrossWindsPat Is the F-36 in addition to the NGAD fighter? or is it the same thing. We haven't heard much about the Kingsnake since the press release, but there has been stuff about NGAD

well done! Most informative of the King Snake videos so far!

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you glad you enjoyed it!

I was at General Dynamics when the XL did it's test flight. I thought for sure it would make production.

Another great video. Thank you.

I feel a lot better about this being a replacement for the F-16 than I do the F-35, but it suffers from the same sort of problem that the tomcat pilot you quoted mentioned: “Its a great plane, but it wont be cool” Its very hard to be teen-series type of cool, but I suppose this one comes closer

@kingdomofprussia9749

Жыл бұрын

What you mean "not cool"? Looks so much better than an F-35

@oot007

Жыл бұрын

@@kingdomofprussia9749 I think he means "cool" as in over engineered stealthy, fancy 5th gen hype etc.

@pike100

6 ай бұрын

Who cares if it's cool? People get all stressed out over that question, and it drives me crazy. We're not talking about TV stars or fashion models.

Gosh darn it you are GREAT at this!

Having an "F-16XL" would be so cool.. It looks like a miniature B-58 Hustler -- one of my favorite delta wing designs. So gorgeous!

@rogerramjet6134

3 ай бұрын

What's not to love about 4x J-79s?

I would like to see thrust vectoring (soviet style) on this model to offset the delta wing maneuvering speed losses. You can't count on a presumed mission role to save you in a surprise dogfight.

@johnharker7194

2 жыл бұрын

Makes me wonder if you could also make a carrier capable XL as TV is supposed to help with shorter take offs.

@myusername3689

2 жыл бұрын

Or maybe use a YF-23 wing and V tail design to give the F-36 kingsnake incredibly low wing loading. A clean YF-23 had a wing loading of 280kg/m^2 which is lower than a fucking clean Gripen. The YF-23 was actually noticeably more maneuverable than the F-22 especially in high speed sustained turn rates because the YF-23 had lower drag, better thrust to weight ratio, and lower wing loading.

@majorborngusfluunduch8694

2 жыл бұрын

@Chris Pasquale It did not.

@rhobidderskag1121

2 жыл бұрын

Not sure i understand how thrust vectoring is supposed to help a delta wing energy fight. The key to winning a dogfight is always to play to your aircrafts strengths. Delta wings like this excel in nose to nose fights where the radius of the turn (how small it is) is more important than how fast you come around your circle.

@GreenCurryiykyk

2 жыл бұрын

Surprise dogfight is what the latest AIM-9 is for (or F-22s). From the vid, this strikes me as more of a high speed missile and bomb delivery platform (ie a bomber). Also the gun would only make sense for CAS, better to eliminate and save the weight and drag.

The legacy of the XL lives on

@jrftworth

3 жыл бұрын

It'll never be built

That was a good video. You should make one about the B-1R concept. That is a really cool one.

Love the simple smooth design, makes a nicer profile and probably would help with radar cross section as well. I've never been one for fancy or overt designs, a simple smooth one appeals to me better

The only reason anybody Stateside would feel the Falcon lacks any capability is because the beancounters refuse to buy any of the cutting edge variants that Lockheed has been selling to other countries.

The way you described it would be cheap but if the non-stealth cranked-arrow wing F/A was designed with F-35 parts commonality in mind, it would be more future-proof and benefit the F-35 instead of the F-22

@kolinmartz

3 жыл бұрын

Just to piggyback off of that. The F22 needs to be optimized to have parts commonality with the 35.

@silaskuemmerle2505

3 жыл бұрын

@@kolinmartz no, the F-35 should have been designed to have parts commonality with the F-22

@kolinmartz

3 жыл бұрын

@@silaskuemmerle2505 true. But at this point there’s more f35s in production and with newer technologies. So I can only speak for the future not the past. The past has passed.

@rapidsqualor5367

3 жыл бұрын

The F-22 can't be changed much. I've heard it's a packaging problem and has to be designed from the outside - in. The F-35b is brilliant, one F-35c mixed in with 10 F/A-18 should improve effectiveness but the F-35a ..... bring on the Kingsnake.

@silaskuemmerle2505

3 жыл бұрын

@@kolinmartz the F-22 has been out of production for as long as the F-35 has been in production, there’s nothing that can really be done to give the F-22 parts commonality with the F-35.

Started watching 30 seconds after upload

@sircommander27

3 жыл бұрын

Same lmao

I cant get over how happy this plane looks. :D

Come on, Air Force, get this beauty mass produced.

Another great video, Tog!

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you!!!

I think this 4+ fighter could be a good idea. But why not just build more F-15 EX it is a great platform with better sensor fusion than the F-35.? When I look at the F-16XL / F-36 double delta wing, I cannot stop thinking of the old Saab Draken. It looks like it was ahead of it's time. Great video by the way, very professional done.

@Primus54

3 жыл бұрын

Saab aircraft design has always seemed advanced. Beautiful aircraft.

@Rek1emMScar

3 жыл бұрын

Double engine plane are more expansive to fly. That is why is not a good reason for "work horse".

@dwwolf4636

Жыл бұрын

Cost mainly.

Also adding a firecontrol systems with the ability to fire the AIM-54 "Phoenix" [excessively] long-range air to air missile would be a good idea

Wow! I'm impressed ! This is really cool looking jet.. I'm up for serial production.

I like the idea. Though I think an optional 3D thrust vectoring nozzle would aid in turn performance.

@SanjaySingh-oh7hv

3 жыл бұрын

But it would add weight ... if the YF-23 consideration of thrust vectoring applies, it would have made a few hundred pounds of difference. Hard to say who was right. Northrop must have assumed there would almost never be a turning fight ever with super stealthy planes so there was no need for thrust vectoring which would affect range and maintenance. Lockheed probably assumed there would still be visual turning fights and so they traded off range and top speed for turning ability at very low speeds, which is apparently rarely seen in air combat.

@jaimegrant784

3 жыл бұрын

@@SanjaySingh-oh7hv I think there are far more benefits than just slow speed turning. It means that in a dogfight you can turn inside your opponent giving a distinct advantage. You can also turn tighter to aid in avoiding missiles and you can make it much harder die an opponent to get a middle lock or gun lock on you.

@SanjaySingh-oh7hv

3 жыл бұрын

@@jaimegrant784 Hi Jaime. It sounds like you're assuming a 1 vs 1 type of situation, so let's go with that. I'm not a pilot or in the military, just an enthusiast who flew simulations like Falcon 3.0 and Mig-29: Deadly Adversary of Falcon in the past, and what I have read in books and on KZread. From what I have read and heard, the thrust vectoring maintains the ability to control the plane in the "post-stall" flight regime, meaning that there is not enough air flowing over the wings, elevons and tail surfaces to generate the forces needed to control the plane. Under the vast majority of normal flying conditions these surfaces generate much stronger forces than thrust vectoring will. But if you're in an airplane that most of the time is invisible to radar from most angles and you've ended up in a turning fight with a non-stealthy plane and you're running out of kinetic energy to the point where all you have is thrust vectoring, you've probably made a grave tactical error. If there is even one other enemy plane in the area, you're likely not going to make it. In a 1 vs 1 against a generation 4 plane thrust vectoring will allow you to get a missile or gun shot. But a visual turning fight if you are in a 5th gen fighter is not a good use of its abilities nor a good place to be in general. TTYL.

@manuairborne

3 жыл бұрын

@@SanjaySingh-oh7hv original ATF program requested thrust reversers, not thrust vectoring. The requirement was dropped during development to save money. The YF-23 design was so advanced that to avoid too many changes the thrust reversers were deleted but the fuselage kept its shape. Had it been produced, the F-23A would have had a more streamlined rear fuselage, and be even faster than the prototype. And the YF-23 simply didn't need thrust vectoring to meet the ATF program requested maneuvrability. As you said, the weight difference between a F-110 GE-129 class engine and a thrust vectored variant is around 600 pounds.

Great video as usual. I really like that idea of a F16 XL derivative for a new 4th-5th gen fighter. For a single engine fighter, wouldn’t the F35s 43k lbs thrust engine be a better fit?

In the original version of the video game Doom, a player could use cheat code "IDKFA" and a message would appear, "very happy ammo added." An F16 pilot moving to the Kingsnake would feel like they used IDKFA in their pre flight checklist!

@PilotPhotog

2 жыл бұрын

I spent many, many hours playing Doom in college - IDKFA was great, and who can forget the BFG 7000 lol

Hope it'll be the one with the thrust factored engine. That plane is a beast.

I'll take a thousand!

I would like to thank you for showing 8th TFW WP F=16 Falcons. I was based there for two years, doing two tours.

This would be a great platform for a three dimensional thrust vectoring engine system. Especially in the event of the rapid bleed off in the turns.

Where have you and your channel been all this while huh? Love it here!!!

@PilotPhotog

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you very much appreciated! Working on a video about the Su-75 Checkmate next.

Why the dual vertical stabilizers? Why that specific deviation from the F-16XL?

Reminds me of Anvil Arrow from Star Citizen.

Nobody ever mentions that, when carrying any significant external stores, no jet fighter in existence can fly supersonic, with or without afterburner.

Thanks for the time and effort put into these vids. As always.

@PilotPhotog

11 ай бұрын

Glad you like them!

Excellent video as usual . You do great work bro 👊👍

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you much appreciated!

Love it, looks amazing

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

The double delta Draken was primarily designed as an interseptor, but had to be able to operate according disperced operation from 800 meter on highways.

**See's the plane and has Project Wingman flashbacks** Give it two engines and change that name to Chimera

This F36 could still carry weapons in a stealthy manner by carrying the weapons inside of stealthy pods. This concept was proposed for the F/A-18E with some of the more advanced variants.

@Joshua_N-A

3 жыл бұрын

But parasitic drag though.

@willdsm08

3 жыл бұрын

That would reduce quantity and variability. The whole idea would be for the F-35's to get up close and personal, while the F-36 would hang back and launch standoff missiles and bombs at the targets designated by the F-35's. Why would you want another aircraft to compete with the 35. The aircraft are supposed to complement each other.

@myusername3689

2 жыл бұрын

@@Joshua_N-A Conformal weapons bays.

I want to see the thunderbird team in kingsnakes. This aircraft clearly deserves to be produced.

@ReptileRescue

3 жыл бұрын

Why? The design specs that make it a better long range attack aircraft go directly against what would make it a better flight demonstrator than the current F-16

@jrftworth

3 жыл бұрын

It's not going to be built

The design in the video is very similar to a design I saw flying in 1981 except the rear of the plane didn't have the engine and stabilizers protruding out the back and the wing towards the front was incorporated into the nose of the fuselage more like an SR-71. The plane I saw looked like it may have had 2 compact engines under each wing, but I'm not really sure because the plane made no noise.

Oh look, it's basically what some Boeing early 90's designs for the JAST/JSF programs were (well, the vert tails were closer to the body, the wing was that of the early X-32 including winglets and high-mounted, and some used a F-22 style exhaust) before things went weird for the X-32 demonstrator and beyond.

I love this concept.

Yes i wanted f16xl this would make even more sense! And low cost

The F 16 XL was a super plane , now add canards to the front and engine like the F22 thrust vectoring and you would really have something special with up to date weapons and electronics it would be top tier