Lockheed Martin F-16 MRF 4.5-Gen Multi-role Fighter
Disclosure
I’m not the world’s biggest fan of the debacle that is the Lockheed Martin F-35. I envisage the F-35 either continuing to have issues or it becomes proven to not be all that it was made out to be in all its corporate/political spin.
Alternative Story
Lockheed Martin in an attempt to capitalise on what is/was good with the F-35 design, attempts to save face and profit prospects by offering a cheaper and simpler 4.5-generation multi-role fighter option for those lucrative customers that would otherwise have purchased and fielded the F-35.
With many of the principle draw-cards of the JSF program supposedly being that of long-rang, supercruise, and dare I say stealth, Lockheed Martin offers a radically re-designed derivative of its F-16XL – known and marketed as the F-16 MRF.
Lockheed Martin modifies the F-16XL (originally to have been designated F-16E single-seat and F-16F two-seat) to incorporate many of the beneficial advanced technologies of what it can save from multi-billion dollar JSF program.
Lockheed chooses to revamp it’s cranked-arrow wing F-16XL design on the grounds of its significant range, weapons lift capability, minimum weapons drag configuration, and it’s its supercruise capability.
Lockheed Martin wastes no time in cleverly capitalising on the fact that in its prototype form, the original F-16XL demonstrated a 25% improvement in maximum lift-to-drag ratio in supersonic flight and 11% in subsonic flight, and a design that handles much more smoothly at high speeds and low altitudes than that of its legacy F-16A/B/C/D/E/F series.
If this wasn’t enough to persuade existing operators to replace their legacy F-16’s – as the F-35 JSF was supposed to have done, the prototype F-16XL, before all its modern improvements offered an increased fuel capacity of 82%. To say nothing of being able to carry twice the ordnance of the legacy F-16A/B/C/D’s, 40% farther.
The enlarged wing of the F-16XL allowed a total of 27 hardpoints – a very flexible arrangement when considering the number of GBU-53/B Small Diameter Bomb II (SDB-II) that the F-16 MRF would be able to carry, as one of its principle weapons in semi-recessed configuration.
Lockheed implicitly knew and appreciated that its F-16 MRF program would have to go and be run as smooth as silk, if it was to debunk its disastrous F-35 program. Adherence to schedules and stated costs would make or break Lockheed Martin Corporation in not just the worlds eyes, but more importantly as a principle participator in the American ‘Military Industrial Complex.’
Senior/Executive Management of Lockheed Martin knew and fully appreciated the cost and risks of the F-16 MRF could be mitigated due to the fact that the F-16XL’s R&D had already being done and proven in the 1980’s. The Public Relations department countered the concerns of Senior/Executive Management that the original F-16XL time frame of the 1980’s and its failure to win the USAF’s Enhanced Tactical Fighter program was due more to the politics within the USAF to maintain production of the McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle series, when the smaller and cost-effectiveness of the F-16 immediately threatened not just its premier fighter – the F-15 Eagle, it also threatened the USAF’s whole ideology.
Lockheed Martin engineers elected to incorporate the following changes and modifications into the F-16XL, so as to give it a ‘4.5-Generation’ marketability and performance:
- A Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100 pitch thrust vectoring turbofan, as used in the Lockheed Martin F-22A Raptor. Lockheed Martin selecting the F119-PW-100 over that of the more powerful Pratt & Whitney F135, on the grounds that the engine itself is lighter, and the F119-PW-100 / pitch thrust vectoring system is already developed and proven on the F-22 Raptor.
-The incorporation of the Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100 turbofan required modifications to the fuselage and engine bay space.
-To improve the F-16 JSF’s stealth characteristics, Lockheed Martin incorporated its Diverterless Supersonic Inlet (DSI) design into the F-16 JFS. This advanced inlet design significantly reduces the F-16 JSF’s frontal radar cross section against the face of the turbofan.
-Northrop Grumman AN/APG-80 Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar, in an enlarged radome originally configured (as designed and trialled in 1978, for the General Dynamics F-16A (75-0750) equipped with Hughes APG-65 radar).
-Lockheed Martin incorporated the two ventral fin arrangement from its F-16 CCV and AFTI F-16 development aircraft programs, installed under the air intake. These have been incorporated to improve the F-16 JSF’s air-to-air combat manoeuvrability against the latest ‘Flanker’ series.
-With the advent of modern precision and guided weapons, the F-16 JSF is able to carry a significant weapons load in a conformal arrangement. This conformal arrangement does not just contribute to low drag, range and supercruise (when not carrying external drop tanks), it goes a long way to minimising the designs RCS.
-a dorsal fairing running the length of the fuselage aft of the canopy to house avionics, systems and equipment.
-the heavyweight landing gear derived from the Block 40 F-16C/D is fitted due to the F-16 MRF’s weight. This heavyweight gear also permit a higher landing sink rate.
-So as to minimise drag, RCS and occupation of valuable hardpoints, Lockheed Martin incorporated the AN/AAQ-40 Electro-optical Targeting System (EOTS), from its F-35, into the F-16 MRF, to provide the F-16 MRF with precision air-to-air and air-to-surface targeting capability. The AN/AAQ-40 Electro-optical Targeting System (EOTS) is linked to the aircraft's integrated central computer through a MIL-STD-1773 high-speed fibre-optic data bus.
Lockheed Martin was also acutely aware of the mitigation of the two-seat derivative of the original F-35 JSF, in an effort to save development and R&D costs. Because of this and customers concerns about conversion training and 'specialised' variants (EW, SEAD and dedicated strike/interdiction), from the beginning Lockheed Martin developed a single and two-seat variant hand in hand.
So what does everyone think?
Gentleman, I would love to see (and greatly appreciate) if anyone was willing to apply their artistic/PC talent in doing some prolife drawing of this F-16 MRF!
Just as to emphasise the design changes and inclusions of the modernised F-16 MRF, I’ve included some pics of the actual devices, so as to compare and hopefully allow for profile drawings
M.A.D