[quote][b][url=/v3/forum/%C3%A9tats-unis-31/topic/f-16-fighting-falcon-352/?post=13494#post-13494]ex-rogcas[/url] a dit le 15/05/2007 à 11:51 :[/b]

[quote="Tuckson"][quote="RogCas"][quote="HB-JVR en parlant du F-16XL"]En tout cas j'ai horreur de cet appareil. Il est horrible mais tu parlais d'emport suplémentaire, combien en plus sur le XL[/quote]
Alors :
 :arrow: +82% de carburant en interne
 :arrow: Doubement de la capacité d'emport répartie sur 27 (!) points d'emport
 :arrow: +40% de rayon d'action
 :arrow: Capacité à atteindre Mach 1.1 en poussée sèche (supercroisière)

Moche, mais efficace le bonhomme...[/quote]
Et question maniabilité compte tenu des modifications de charge alaire, de l'absence de stabilisateurs horizontaux, etc ... Ca donnait quoi ?[/quote]
Voilà pour les infos (selon le site F-16.net) :

[quote]Through wing planform improvements and camber optimizations, the final configuration offered a [u]25% improvement in maximum lift-to-drag ratio over the F-16 supersonically[/u], and 11% improvement subsonic. [u]The handling of the F-16XL was reportedly quite different from that of the standard F-16[/u], offering a [u]much smoother ride at high speeds and low altitudes[/u]. The configuration had matured into a very competent fighter with a large wing that allowed low-drag integration of large numbers of external weapons.[/quote]
Et sachant qu'il a été en compétition contre le F-15E :

[quote="John G. Williams, lead engineer on the XL"]The XL is a marvelous airplane, but was a victim of the USAF wanting to continue to produce the F-15, which is understandable. Sometimes you win these political games, sometimes not. In most ways, the XL was superior to the F-15 as a ground attack airplane, but the F-15 was good enough.[/quote]
Voili, voilou...[/quote]