You're not logged in.

User Name  Remember me?
Password 
  Register   Lost your password? 
 
> 1 <

Author Message

admin


Administrators
See my 57 Photos

 Online status  

 
Posts: 2118
Location: S.F. Bay Area, CA
Occupation: Webmaster
Age:

#572 2007-08-07 00:04 GMT-5 hours    
I think it's a disgrace to the F-16 to do this to it:

View large    View medium
Click here for medium size photo!

Photo © Jonathan Derden - Jetwash Images
View large    View medium
Click here for medium size photo!

Photo © Jonathan Derden - Jetwash Images

The F-16 was designed as a low-cost, high-speed, single-seat interceptor with only one missile on each wing tip and a gun. I think the true beauty of the F-16 is lost with these kind of warts and tumors all over the place. I think it's the ugliest thing ever and I hate to see one of my favorite aircraft look like this. This is the way the plane was meant to fly.

View large    View medium
Click here for medium size photo!

Photo © Jörg Pfeifer
View large    View medium
Click here for medium size photo!

Photo © Dimitris Triadafillou

-Ray

This is the oldest I've ever been.

Author Message

rjpowney


Photographers
See my 301 Photos

 Online status  

 
Posts: 152
Location:
Occupation:
Age: 38

#574 2007-08-07 07:29 GMT-5 hours    
Pah!
The F-16E, F-16F and F-16I (which I guess also therefore drags the Big Spine Block 50 Ds into the equation) are the finest looking Vipers ever built!

Regards,

Robin


You gotta know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em, know when to walk away and know when to run!

Author Message

Higgsr71


Photo Screeners
See my 863 Photos

 Online status  

 
Posts: 706
Location: Manchester
Occupation:
Age: 45

#577 2007-08-07 08:38 GMT-5 hours    
Sorry Raymondo but I agree with Rob on this, the additional spine and CFT's make the Viper look much better in my opinion, although I am not a lover of the F-16 as it seems everybody operates them and they all (for the most part) look the same. (Hmmm why do I think I may have a simular opinion of the JSF in a few years time)

The two pictured above are however much better looking not only because of the spine and CFT additon, but the fact that the colour schemes are different to the standard Viper scheme as is the case with the USAF/USN Aggressor/Adversary Vipers along with the Polish AF version, their Viper scheme looks great.

I wouldn't mind using a few megapixels on the above top two pictured Vipers

Cheers
John

Regards

John

"You rise,you fall, you're down then you rise again
What don't kill you make you more strong"

Author Message

admin


Administrators
See my 57 Photos

 Online status  

 
Posts: 2118
Location: S.F. Bay Area, CA
Occupation: Webmaster
Age:

#578 2007-08-07 11:59 GMT-5 hours    
Oh man, I guess beauty really is in the eye of the beholder. I think my Megapixels would be much better spent on the bottom left one than anything on the top. It doesn't even look right. Looks like someone made a mistake and screwed on the part of another airplane to it. They've taken a beautiful flying machine and tried to turn it into a tank.

-Ray

This is the oldest I've ever been.

Author Message

rjpowney


Photographers
See my 301 Photos

 Online status  

 
Posts: 152
Location:
Occupation:
Age: 38

#579 2007-08-07 12:54 GMT-5 hours    
That Viper in the bottom left isn't a proper Viper... where's the LANTIRN pod(s) or the HTS pod?

Regards,

Robin


You gotta know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em, know when to walk away and know when to run!

Author Message

Check6


Members


 Online status  

 
Posts: 9
Location: Connecticut
Occupation:
Age: 61

#580 2007-08-07 13:28 GMT-5 hours    
I agree with you Ray.....the top two pictures and the bottom left are hideous. The F-16 looks much better clean as in your bottom right photo.

Author Message

painter


Members


 Online status  

 
Posts: 40
Location: Almere
Occupation: Aviation artist and bus driver
Age: 53

#581 2007-08-07 13:30 GMT-5 hours    
I must day that I've always been a sucker for the clean wing-body blending of the F-16. Although I know their much more capaple than the first F-16, the spine/CFT twoholers are not getting any prettier...

Smoke on...Go!

Author Message

Check6


Members


 Online status  

 
Posts: 9
Location: Connecticut
Occupation:
Age: 61

#582 2007-08-07 14:11 GMT-5 hours    


Great photo of a clean USAF Falcon loaded for bear.....

Author Message

admin


Administrators
See my 57 Photos

 Online status  

 
Posts: 2118
Location: S.F. Bay Area, CA
Occupation: Webmaster
Age:

#588 2007-08-07 15:42 GMT-5 hours    
Quote
rjpowney :
That Viper in the bottom left isn't a proper Viper... where's the LANTIRN pod(s) or the HTS pod?


After-thoughts, after-thoughts...Now why would you need that in an air-to-air dog fight?

-Ray

This is the oldest I've ever been.

Author Message

Captain Jack Sparrow


Members


 Online status  

 
Posts: 2
Location:
Occupation:
Age:

#1187 2007-10-29 10:29 GMT-5 hours    
I love the Block 52+ Vipers with the Dorsal fin and CFT.

Check out these Polish one's below, very crisp paint scheme as well:

Author Message

N74JW


Members


 Online status  

 
Posts: 190
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Occupation: IT Administrator
Age: 42

#1189 2007-10-29 13:03 GMT-5 hours    
I like the traditional 'slick' F-16 looks. The CFT's and thick-spine are just bloat, from an appearance point of view.

The F-16 is one of the slickest fighters ever produced...

Author Message

Ghostbase


Photographers
See my 1,571 Photos

 Online status  

 
Posts: 89
Location: Guildford
Occupation: Railway Guard / Conductor
Age:

#1190 2007-10-29 19:56 GMT-5 hours    
Well, I was an aircraft-mad teenager when the original YF-16 won the fly-off against the Northrop YF-17 and the aircraft looked so cool and futuristic in that original red, white and blue colour scheme. The right plane won!

Personally I don't mind the conformal fuel tanks and the spine, it is good to see the design still evolving 30 years later. And, those with long memories will remember the 'cranked arrow' winged F-16XL which looked odd but could definitely have been a classic had it been developed further. There was also the F-16 AFTI which had a spine added as well as some canards, I was lucky enough to see it at Edwards AFB quite a few years ago

Regards not liking the F-16 because it is so numerous, well that is what people were saying about the Starfighter in Europe in the 70's and now we would give our right arms to see one flying!

Michael

"Rolling..." B-36H serial 51-5734 Film 'Strategic Air Command' 1955 - Six Turning and Four Burning!

Author Message

Sneeker


Photographers


 Online status  

 
Posts: 4
Location: I come from the Land of the Ice and Snow from the Midnight sun
Occupation: Pilot.... Well im looking for a job so it counts!
Age: 34

#1224 2007-11-01 18:24 GMT-5 hours    
Im kind of a sucker for functionality... If thats even a word. But if it has a tool and it works I like it. I love the look of the A-10 for that very reason, some people think its ugly. But it can sure kick the crap out of a dude on the ground. Thats the very reason I like the F-16 clean or dirty, If its clean and only has 2 Aim-9 hanging off its tips or 2 Aim-120's and 2- Aim-9's it can sure kick the crap out of alot flying around the unfriendly sky's old and new. There for I like it.

For Fighter and attack aircraft, also aircraft in general and any machine in cheneral like car's and ships. If its the best at doing its job im all for it, and its Beautiful to me.

Still waiting on Snort to take me for a spin in anything!

Author Message

Redskin301


Photographers
See my 1,756 Photos

 Online status  

 
Posts: 3
Location: Tilburg, near EHGR
Occupation: ASML test engineer
Age: 36

#1507 2007-11-27 15:46 GMT-5 hours    
i really like those F-16's with those bults on each side

Kind regards,

Alex van Noye

Author Message

eagle15


Members


 Online status  

 
Posts: 10
Location: thessaloniki
Occupation:
Age:

#2580 2008-05-31 15:27 GMT-5 hours    
well the f-16 is beautiful in any way you see it.i love it with or without the CFT

> 1 <