Air Force 1 does not necessarily have a fighter escort
If a fighter escort is ordered, F-16s are 2 generations out of date for air superiority or intercept roles.
F22 and F35 have higher tech computers and get all the latest toys now. So this guy's assertion that it was an f16 shooting down missiles for AF 1 like that's standard protocol makes me think he wants to sound like a person with inside info, but doesnt know enough about the subject at hand to say the right thing.
Not that there was no shootdown that day but i just dont think this guy is automatically credible for inside scoops
All the armed services keep all of their frontline planes up to date on their avionics packages.
Avionics being radar, infra red, electronics warfare and the missile system itself.
This type of mission is all about avionics.
An F16, probably two in this case, protecting AF1 would have the latest avionics package. Over the last 30 or 40 years these F16 have probably had 5 to 10 upgrades on the avionics.
As of this year the F16s have had another major upgrade package.
**The latest and most advanced variant of the F-16 to date, the Block 70/72, completed its maiden flight earlier this year at Lockheed Martin’s Greenville facility in South Carolina. **
F-16 built 30 years ago probably has the same avionics capability as the most advanced F-22 and F-35.
If there was a shoot down of that missile by an F-16 IMHO it would be by EW (electronics warfare). Disabling the missile rather than shooting it down. This is what the Russians are doing to some of the Ukrainian missiles right now.
They do upgrade the systems on the older planes periodically but if you could make an f16 frame have f35 computers they wouldnt have needed to build the f35. It is actually not as manueverable as the f22 but its advanced systems give it the edge anyway. Neither the f16 nor f22 have the advancements of the f35.
I dont think, if I were Trump and I thought I needed an escort from point A to point B, that I would get f16s to do it. If anyone has any documentation proving f16s still are the primary AF1 escorts I will gladly retract my statement.
And before anyone says it could have been a ground-launched interceptor from Hawaii (not a presidential escort), Hawaii does not have F16s stationed there
Edit: one reason AF1 doesnt need a fighter escort is because it is rumored to have its own ECM package to evade or disable incoming missiles
F22 and F35 have higher tech computers and get all the latest toys now. So this guy's assertion that it was an f16 shooting down missiles for AF 1 like that's standard protocol makes me think he wants to sound like a person with inside info, but doesnt know enough about the subject at hand to say the right thing. Not that there was no shootdown that day but i just dont think this guy is automatically credible for inside scoops
All the armed services keep all of their frontline planes up to date on their avionics packages.
Avionics being radar, infra red, electronics warfare and the missile system itself. This type of mission is all about avionics.
An F16, probably two in this case, protecting AF1 would have the latest avionics package. Over the last 30 or 40 years these F16 have probably had 5 to 10 upgrades on the avionics.
As of this year the F16s have had another major upgrade package.
**The latest and most advanced variant of the F-16 to date, the Block 70/72, completed its maiden flight earlier this year at Lockheed Martin’s Greenville facility in South Carolina. **
https://www.key.aero/article/f-16-block-7072-all-you-need-know-about-most-advanced-viper-date.
F-16 built 30 years ago probably has the same avionics capability as the most advanced F-22 and F-35.
If there was a shoot down of that missile by an F-16 IMHO it would be by EW (electronics warfare). Disabling the missile rather than shooting it down. This is what the Russians are doing to some of the Ukrainian missiles right now.
They do upgrade the systems on the older planes periodically but if you could make an f16 frame have f35 computers they wouldnt have needed to build the f35. It is actually not as manueverable as the f22 but its advanced systems give it the edge anyway. Neither the f16 nor f22 have the advancements of the f35.
I dont think, if I were Trump and I thought I needed an escort from point A to point B, that I would get f16s to do it. If anyone has any documentation proving f16s still are the primary AF1 escorts I will gladly retract my statement.
And before anyone says it could have been a ground-launched interceptor from Hawaii (not a presidential escort), Hawaii does not have F16s stationed there
Edit: one reason AF1 doesnt need a fighter escort is because it is rumored to have its own ECM package to evade or disable incoming missiles