Hey guys,

At the moment I have two large F16s in my possession. One is mine and one I have just finished painting for a customer. They are both high end models from two of the best manufacturers in the game, however they are both a little different to each other in terms of scale outline.
With the JWM kicking off again it's got me thinking about scale accuracy and how judges score during static judging.

In the attached photo you'll see I have placed the left wing of one F16 on top of the other. Both the leading and trailing edges are identical where the wing meets the fuse. But as the leading edges run out to the wing tips you'll see a big difference in the angle, and the overall wingspan too.

My question is which one is correct? I have my own opinion but I'm keen to hear some of your feedback. I don't want this to turn into one brand is better than the other as they are both fantastic jets. Also could we not end up talking about Jeti radios.
Thanks team
Levi

If they are the same "scale" it would be pretty easy to do the math from a 3 view of the real thing. If its 1/5th scale the wing span should be 78.4"

You just gave the answer to your self. All start from your documentation .Not your model. Find top view photos from that F16 because this is what you will give to judges to judge your outline.

my2c

The only thing I would add is that not all 3-views are created equal. If you want to be accurate, I would compare several 3-views to be sure they are accurate themselves before scaling it to the model.
I agree that an F-16 should be easy to document...

Bob

Interesting, do the wing roots match in your photo? If so do they split from the fuselage in the same place? Would be interested to know which kits they are as am about to get one of the 1/5 f16s .... and would like the more accurate one...

Are the wing roots the same?

BTW I used 1/5 as an example, though I could probably make some accurate guesses as to which kits they are I stopped short of speculating.

There were at least 8 variants of the F-16, even a swept forward version and a full delta version. Changes like you are showing happen all the time.

Looks like the old Yellow Aircraft Sport wing vs Scale wing, HA!

Yes mate the wing roots are the same and they leave the fuse in the same place. Look at the leading edge of both wings, the angles are very different. I know there were F16 variants in delta and one with wings swept forward but these are both Block 30 ish F16Cs, and both in 1/5 scale. I'm not concerned with the size difference, just the profile.

If someone has details of the correct angle of the LE running off the fuse I think that would solve it. Peter Coers or Gary Viper maybe?

PM me if you'd like info on the manufacturers.

Hey Levi,

Was watching a doco on the F16 on the weekend and they mentioned that amongst the variants of the F16 were versions where the span was increased. Maybe that explains the difference?
No experts here though! ;-)

Awesome Craig that's the info I'm after. That would also explain the angle change on the LE. Maybe they were variants made to carry a heavier payload.
Being the owner of four F16s I'd say you're almost an expert mate

Hahaha, I don't think so mate. ;-)There are guys on here that work on the full size so at this point I should pull out that old phrase..."what the hell would I know?!"

Dunno what you mean..... And yes thats a Navy F-16 with a Top Gun logo on the tail

1/10th scale drawing. The trailing edge is perpendicular to fuse BL0 {centerline).

The larger wing on the Viper was with the A/B model blocks 5, 10, 15, and 20's. It was 21.5 inches longer than all C/D block 25, 30/32's, CG/DG block 40/42's, CJ/DJ block 50/52's. That wing was 31.0 feet for a wing span. Don't knwo about the wing sweep. Seems DCM covered that. I just verified this on F-16.net. Best Viper internet site on the planet.

I only worked those listed above. Never worked the newer E/F block 60 version.

Fascinating. I flew Block 1 A/B thru Block 50 C/D from 1980-1995. I just flew them and brought them back to John to fix. I never knew there were different wings. Like Craig said "what would I know?

chief, don't forget the ******* children, big wing big tail 15S, and the ever cracking 30N, and almost stupid C/D 50 miniA..... and last but not least, the C30-129 hot rod (only one of those left, but of course the bad ass of them all)

Yeah I'd say some F16 experts have definitely chimed in here. Thanks heaps fellas. I'm jealous of you all.

John that info is gold and David that diagram is exactly what I'm after.

Now that it's looking like these models I have are both fairly accurate in outline there should be no company bashing so I'll reveal the manufacturers. The bottom wing is SM and is mine, painted from the factory. The top one I painted for a customer and is Scale Jets. Both are 1/5 Scale and both look awesome in the flesh.

I'll post some pics of both models fully set up next to each other for comparison when I get time.

From the McDonald Douglas loft factory drawings for block 30 I think ( Drawing LS 275-52 ) dated 8/4/76.
Given 200" = 1015,2 mm (my scale of drawing is 1/5 th) the root at center fuselage is 992.2mm, half span is 902.16mm and tip is 220,72mm.
Rear Le is at 90 deg.
Tip has about 3 deg washout.
Measurements do not include tip missile rails etc.
Andre

Hey Goose, when I get one of my girls back I'll give you a call. It was always a pleasure to strap you into the baddest fighter to ever live!

In my opinion, your worry is pointless unless you match your model tail # to the correct block,and correct MLU configuration. Most award winning Vipers Ive seen have incorrect antennae placement, incorrect engine exhaust/inlet configuration....right down to incorrect ordnance loadout. Plus most models have the standard Block 30 cockpit. I think judges don't notice, or just don't care. But I do 😁 LOL.

Don't even get me started with wheel size!

I would start by asking the manufacturer what in the world did they use as a reference? But they'll probably deny the request.

David

why in the world would McDonnel Douglas have Block 30 drawings? LOL

btw I still use McDonnel Douglas flight controls design handbook.....the finest in the industry.

So true David. And then we could hit on the additional main gear follow-up door, multiple landing and taxi lights, etc. A few of us who worked or flew the real ones look and laugh at the crazy weapons load outs we see on models. But hey it all looks cool and awesome!

David my main concern was having a $20K model that's only sport Scale, I can add Fuse plates, lighting patterns, antennas, and an accurate paint job down the track. However if the airframe shape was wrong to start with, I'd have no motivation to add the detail.
Good point about contacting SM regarding the F16 reference they used.
David what do you make your scale parts out of? I know 3D printing seems popular but can get heavy. Could you share some detail pics of your F16?
Thanks
Levi