Probably the Critics most lasting impact was the F-16. The Criticsí idea of a
lightweight fighter blended nicely with Lairdís and Packardís desire to test their ideas of
aircraft acquisition through prototyping, as well as for the Air Forceís need for force
structure based on the expectation of a long period of limited defense budgets.
Once the Air Force accepted the F-16 and changed it into a fighter-bomber, it gradually became the
most important military aircraft in the world. Today more than 4300 have been produced, and it is still in production.
One can argue that the Light Weight Fighter/F-16 was not the right choice for the Air
Force. The F-15 offered considerably more potential as a fighter-bomber. A normal F-15
could carry eighteen 500-pound bombs to the F-16ís four, as well as having much more
room for internal growth for improved weapons systems. The FAST Packs, which added
6000 pounds of fuel, gave it a range of 3500 miles, more than twice the range of the F-16.
Had the Air Force opted to buy more F-15s for use as fighter-bombers, it would have had
an aircraft with much greater range and load carrying capability than the F-16 and would
have avoided the delays involved in the AMRAAM and LANTIRN programs caused by
having to make the systems small enough to fit on the F-16. An F-15 fighter-bomber
could also have used the Pave Tack all-weather targeting device immediately, rather than
waiting for LANTIRN. However, the F-15 versus F-16 arguments only apply to the USAF.
Arguably, themain impact of the F-16 was in its acquisition not only by Americaís allies but also by
the Air Forceís National Guard and Reserve forces. While the Israelis provided the
combat experience, the F-16s gave the NATO allies, the National Guard, and the
Reserves a modern, credible fighter, and one that was completely compatible with firstline
USAF equipment. The result was that throughout the 1980s western air forces were
far more capable than those of the Warsaw Pact.