it's hard to beat a tire on ground with a jet off the line, but in the long run a jet will always win... it just depends how long the race is on who wins.
sorry, I don't care what car you're driving. nothing beats pulling out of the take off straight into the vertical and not stopping until you reach about 30,000 ft. I'd like to see a Viper do that.
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b120/onlyatmidnight12/hurt.jpg
im a @!#$ pussy ass liar! i lied to my girlfriend over and over, sat around with her friends naked and stayed home downloading porn...she loved me and i hurt her...i deserve to be alone and unhappy...no wonder every girl i try to love leaves me...i suck.
old but,
remember kids, a f-16(FALCON not viper) only has one engine
whole thing wouldn't play, but did the f-16 start w/ the after burner on?
id like to see it race a f-22
an f-22 would probably take it. it's got the lowest weight/thrust ratio of any modern aircraft from what i've read. but that's not bad for a lil old fighter jet.
Andy
it's not how fast you go, it's how you get there that counts.
ZZP XP cam, 1.6 rockers, 105# springs, speedbuilt FWI, 3.3" modular pulley, TOG headers,
3" exhaust, flomatched injectors
'97 GTP 14.06@100.6mph pre cam w/ 3.5" pulley, I/E
A jet has to get the air moving and spun up, it's not going to be as quick off the line as a tire driven vehicle. like I said, it will catch it, but it's not going to get the jump. Just like a runner VS a bike, the runner will always get the jump at the line, but the bike (should) catch up and pass the runner.
Don't confuse off the line with winning a 1/4 mile or 1/2 mile race... it just means it gets a little bit of a jump and a head start.
Ooook...many people use Viper in place of "Fighting Falcon". The official Air Force designation the F-16 "Fighting Falcon", buuuuuut during the design and testing phases it was referred to as the "Viper". The name just kinda stuck around. Funny thing is even at airshows they will misdesignate the aircraft with the "Viper" nickname.
Now as for the F-22 comparison. Yes it is true about the power to weight ratio. It uses the new Pratt & Whitney F119 engines which are capable of about 40,000lbs of thrust. This is also vectored thrust in which the nozzles can be augmented up to 20 degrees up and down. This is what helps give the aircraft it's exceptional maneuverability and impressive takeoff numbers. The F-16 uses the old P&W F100 fans which only produce 30,000lbs of thrust. Granted it is a smaller aircraft, but you just can't argue with 2 more powerful engines. Now at this time to my knowledge, the fighter with the best takeoff performance in the Air Force at the time is the F-15, which can be in the air with less than 1,400 feet of runway. BTW it uses the same F100 engine as the F-16, but instead has 2 of course.
Now the F-16 has a max T/O weight of about 42,000lbs and a horsepower rating of about 80,000HP when calculated it come out to be about 1.9
Now the Dodge Viper has 500HP and weighs about 3400lbs. and when calculated comes out to be .147, actually less than a 1/1 P-WR
So there ya go...straight from me. The aviation guru that I am. Seriously when it comes to anything having to do with airplanes, im a damn encyclopedia. THough I do admit I looked up the aircraft weights for the calcualtions...so sue me
Hopefully you kids read all of this and get something to go home and tell your parents about..HA
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b120/onlyatmidnight12/hurt.jpg
im a @!#$ pussy ass liar! i lied to my girlfriend over and over, sat around with her friends naked and stayed home downloading porn...she loved me and i hurt her...i deserve to be alone and unhappy...no wonder every girl i try to love leaves me...i suck.
oh man! i've got to go tell my mom and dad now!
Andy
it's not how fast you go, it's how you get there that counts.
ZZP XP cam, 1.6 rockers, 105# springs, speedbuilt FWI, 3.3" modular pulley, TOG headers,
3" exhaust, flomatched injectors
'97 GTP 14.06@100.6mph pre cam w/ 3.5" pulley, I/E
Fighting over the difference between an F-16 Falcon and an F-16 Viper is like fighting over the difference between a Plymouth Voyager and a Dodge Caravan.
the F-22 takes off alot faster than the f-15, I've seen them take off
MONGOOSE(TheL61) wrote:the F-22 takes off alot faster than the f-15, I've seen them take off
True...but as of now the F-22 is not in full service yet. Therefore the F-15 still wins.
Buuuuuut The Navy F-14 owns everything...period..it gets no cooler. Never will.
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b120/onlyatmidnight12/hurt.jpg
im a @!#$ pussy ass liar! i lied to my girlfriend over and over, sat around with her friends naked and stayed home downloading porn...she loved me and i hurt her...i deserve to be alone and unhappy...no wonder every girl i try to love leaves me...i suck.
?
they are at nellis in full force
Gonzo (The Long Nosed One) wrote:Ooook...many people use Viper in place of "Fighting Falcon". The official Air Force designation the F-16 "Fighting Falcon", buuuuuut during the design and testing phases it was referred to as the "Viper". The name just kinda stuck around. Funny thing is even at airshows they will misdesignate the aircraft with the "Viper" nickname.
Now as for the F-22 comparison. Yes it is true about the power to weight ratio. It uses the new Pratt & Whitney F119 engines which are capable of about 40,000lbs of thrust. This is also vectored thrust in which the nozzles can be augmented up to 20 degrees up and down. This is what helps give the aircraft it's exceptional maneuverability and impressive takeoff numbers. The F-16 uses the old P&W F100 fans which only produce 30,000lbs of thrust. Granted it is a smaller aircraft, but you just can't argue with 2 more powerful engines. Now at this time to my knowledge, the fighter with the best takeoff performance in the Air Force at the time is the F-15, which can be in the air with less than 1,400 feet of runway. BTW it uses the same F100 engine as the F-16, but instead has 2 of course.
Now the F-16 has a max T/O weight of about 42,000lbs and a horsepower rating of about 80,000HP when calculated it come out to be about 1.9
Now the Dodge Viper has 500HP and weighs about 3400lbs. and when calculated comes out to be .147, actually less than a 1/1 P-WR
So there ya go...straight from me. The aviation guru that I am. Seriously when it comes to anything having to do with airplanes, im a damn encyclopedia. THough I do admit I looked up the aircraft weights for the calcualtions...so sue me
Hopefully you kids read all of this and get something to go home and tell your parents about..HA
Word... 'bout time I saw somebody else with the same knowledge base of the
real high performance machines. Props man. BTW many of the Falcon pilots have taken to calling the bird "Viper" as well, part of the reason the name stuck.
The p/w ratio though is off, I think you are looking for lbs/bhp - in that case it should be 0.525 lbs/bhp and 6.8lbs/bhp. Not trying to show you up, please don't take it as such.
And A.15 is just jealous 'cause he's a prophead.
-------------------------
Tom
1999 Cavalier Z/24 ATX
1995 Taurus SHO MTX
1999 Chrysler 300M w/PHP
im just stuck here w/ heavies
damn stratotankers and jstars
KC-135's - w3rd - our local AFB is soon to be closing, and the 914th out of Niagara Falls will be heading down to Alabama, I think... taking their 'Tanks with them. sad to see.
-------------------------
Tom
1999 Cavalier Z/24 ATX
1995 Taurus SHO MTX
1999 Chrysler 300M w/PHP
yeah, the tanker wing here will be moving to KC in 08 I think. Maybe then we will get something cool.
lol, this is weird, we have KC-135R's here too...
the BRAC isn't going to touch us though (unless they change the recomendation)
MONGOOSE(TheL61) wrote:?
they are at nellis in full force
This is true. Nellis is home of the AWFC and the home base of the Raptor which would make sense. Tyndall here in FL is the original training center for the Raptor, though the Nellis range would make a much better area for the actual aircraft. Though im not sure if Tyndall has any units.(*Ben Stein Voice* "Anyone? Anyone?") F-22 testing has been taking place out there for a while now. My info could be a little slow seeing that im a civi, need to find a source to keep my apetite fed.
Quote:
The p/w ratio though is off, I think you are looking for lbs/bhp - in that case it should be 0.525 lbs/bhp and 6.8lbs/bhp. Not trying to show you up, please don't take it as such.
Yeah that sounds a little better. I originally did all the math myself and the number came fairly close to that, but it didn't sound right to me at the time. It was pretty early, so I plugged in some numbers into an online calculator and got what I got. It seemed too, but it was a calculator, so I trusted it. Glad to see I was somewhat right in my first attempt...See..technology isn't always right
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b120/onlyatmidnight12/hurt.jpg
im a @!#$ pussy ass liar! i lied to my girlfriend over and over, sat around with her friends naked and stayed home downloading porn...she loved me and i hurt her...i deserve to be alone and unhappy...no wonder every girl i try to love leaves me...i suck.
you can play basketball on it too, but not as well as a C5
Awwww, that guy in the viper couldnt go home and tell his friends he beat an F-16 on the 1/4. I saw that awhile ago but glad to have it on my computer again.
How many steps to heaven, Doc?
...Ah, metaphysics.
A.15 wrote:TrueBlue wrote:
And A.15 is just jealous 'cause he's a prophead.
Don't hate the C-130 just cause it's slow. You can take piss, smuggle 130 gallons of alcohol, and play ping pong in it.
No hate here. 130's used to fly diamond over my house at 2000 ft, miss having those big bastards shake the glass in the kitchen when they flew over.
Now, an
AC-130...
-------------------------
Tom
1999 Cavalier Z/24 ATX
1995 Taurus SHO MTX
1999 Chrysler 300M w/PHP
F-16CJ's are designated "Vipers". They do that because it's a different model than the "regular" F-16A through F-16D.
I think the IRL car vs. the F-18 was a better race anyway.
Go Ugly, EARLY!
The ONLY real Close Air Support!
well, they also said it was fully loaded w/ fuel, how many times do they take off w/ full loads of fuel?
Mongoose: Are you talking about an F-16? They will eat an entire 600 gallon external tank on takeoff (Full Burner). A "Viper" with 3 externals has a TOT (Time on Target) of maybe 20 minutes because of how the engine uses fuel. So without calling up some contact's in the world of F-16's I can say that 96% of the time the use full loads of fuel.
Go Ugly, EARLY!
The ONLY real Close Air Support!
