The week-long testing supported two goals: to validate software revisions that give upgraded Block 50 and Block 52 F-16s a slew of new capabilities; and to preview capabilities that accompany the next software update. “We’re validating software packages for Block 50/52 aircraft that have been upgraded in the Common Configuration Improvement Program, or CCIP,” explains Brandt. “Most of the validation work concerns inertially guided munitions, like the JDAM and WCMD. We’re also validating software that controls the interface between the jet and a targeting pod. As for the preview, the F-16 Combined Test Force at Edwards has two jets flying with Link-16 and helmet-mounted cueing system. We brought these jets to Nellis to give the operational test pilots from Nellis and Eglin a first look at these newest CCIP capabilities.”

CCIP Primer

CCIP, pronounced C-sip, is an extensive upgrade to USAF Block 40/42 and Block 50/52 F-16s. The modifications significantly enhance the cockpit, avionics, and combat capability of about 650 F-16s in the USAF inventory. The modification merges many features that formerly distinguished Block 40 F-16s from Block 50 F-16s. The resulting hardware and software commonality between the two F-16 versions simplifies logistics support and reduces the cost of future improvements. In addition, the modification provides a high degree of commonality with earlier model F-16s being upgraded by five European NATO countries and with advanced F-16 versions being developed for several other countries.

The Air Force is revamping its F-16 fleet in three phases. The first phase, which deals with Block 50/52 F-16s only, adds a modular mission computer, color multifunction displays, an advanced interrogator/transponder (the APX-113), and software provisions for a targeting pod and for the BRU-57 bomb rack. (The interrogator/transponder is added as a second step for some F-16s.)

The new computer replaces three large avionic units; provides increased processing power and room needed for new capabilities; reduces the overall weight, volume, and cooling requirements for the avionics system; and improves maintainability and reliability. The color displays enhance situational awareness. Pilots can discriminate threats, friendly forces, and unknowns with a glance. The interrogator/ transponder improves the pilot’s situational awareness, especially when employing beyond visual range missiles, namely the AIM-120 AMRAAM. The targeting pod adds a precision strike capability to Block 50/52 F-16s. The BRU-57 allows the F-16 to carry four (instead of two) inertially aided mun-itions, including the JDAM, JSOW (joint stand-off weapon), and WCMD.

The testing at Nellis involves hardware and software associated with this first CCIP phase. The upgrades radically alter the character of the Block 50/52 F-16. “Block 50/52 F-16s usually fly as HARM shoot-ers in the suppression of enemy air defense [SEAD] mission,” notes Brandt. “USAF Block 50/52 F-16s have never carried targeting pods until now. The software we’re testing at Nellis this week controls the interface between the targeting pod and the airplane. The same interface applies to both the LANTIRN and the new Sniper XR pod.”

The Sniper XR (XR for extended range), built by Lockheed Martin in Orlando, Florida, was selected by the Air Force as its advanced targeting pod in August 2001. The pod, with its faceted nose, incorporates a third-generation targeting FLIR that allows pilots to identify tactical targets at greatly improved standoff ranges over current targeting systems. The modular, two-level maintenance design simplifies upkeep and lowers operating costs.

Targeting pods—normally associated with Block 40/42 and, more recently, with Block 30 F-16s—transform USAF Block 50/52 F-16s SEAD capability into a destruction of enemy air defense capability. After CCIP is complete, Block 50/52 pilots will be able to locate radar-guided surface-to-air missile sites with their HARM Targeting System, suppress the site with a HARM shot, target the site with the targeting pod, and then use the targeting pod to direct a laser-guided bomb to destroy the site. The targeting pods will also improve the accuracy of GPS-guided munitions, such as JDAM and WCMD.

The second phase of CCIP gives Block 50/52 F-16s an advanced datalink capability called Link-16, a helmet-mounted cueing system, and an electronic horizontal situation indicator. Link-16 improves situational awareness by allowing the F-16 to exchange data with other air and ground assets. Link-16—a jam-resistant, secure, high-capacity communication system—has been designated by DoD as its primary tactical datalink. It will be common across many military platforms. It has also been designed to meet NATO requirements. “Real-time targeting will come through the Link-16 network,” Brandt says. “If you aren’t on the network, you are losing out.”

The helmet-mounted cueing system directs weapons and sensors to the pilot’s line of sight. The system can be used to mark aerial targets for off-boresight missiles, like the AIM-9X, or to locate and identify ground targets visually from transmitted or stored GPS/inertial coordinates. The electronic horizontal situation indicator replaces the current electromechanical HSI. The electronic display, which is more reliable, offers more operating modes. It is also compatible with night vision goggles.

The third phase of CCIP, which begins in 2005, applies the improvements of the first two phases to USAF’s Block 40/42 fleet.

“All of the CCIP enhancements are outstanding,” says Maj. Don Butler of the 422nd at Nellis. “When I first started flying the F-16, the airplane had a radar and gun. That early version could launch AIM-9 missiles and drop some dumb bombs. The improvements we’re validating this week require a lot of development to get them up to speed. Once fielded, they require a lot of training to get the pilots up to speed. But the situational awareness, accuracy, and lethality of the F-16 have been increased significantly.”

Complexity Reduced

Improvements add complexity to the F-16. Fortunately, much of the complexity can be handled by the software and by the new systems themselves. “Some of the newer inertially aided munitions are coming out with tremendous control,” explains Butler. “The newer weapons come with a whole set of options. The JDAM, for example, can be programmed just before release to strike a target at a defined axis, azimuth, angle, and speed. We have to make sure the software is handing off the proper information to the weapon for each option. In the old days, we just pickled off a bomb and waited for it to hit the ground. If the bomb came off the airplane and hit the target, we had a good point. The tests didn’t require data analyses. Today, if a smart weapon misses its target, the problem could reside with the weapon, the software, the interface between the weapon and the airplane, an input error, or a combination of those factors.”

To add more useful information to that analysis, the weapons being dropped at Nellis, like the airplanes dropping them, are highly instrumented. “We’re dropping WCMDs equipped with telemetry kits,” notes Maj. Bruce Stinar, a visiting operational test pilot from Eglin AFB. “We also have a large support pool here, including representatives from the program offices for the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile and WCMD. The WCMD program office has bent over backwards to support this testing. We all want to make sure the communication between the software and the weapon is solid.”

While the modular mission computer handles the bulk of the software complexity, the new systems themselves reduce some of the workload the new capabilities create for the pilot. “Link-16 reduces some of the pilot workload by automating several functions,” Butler notes. “Color displays help a great deal as well. With the helmet-mounted cueing system, pilots don’t have to look down into a cockpit display to find a target. They can look out of the cockpit and see the targeting symbol overlaid on the ground. The new systems make an average pilot a lot better. The best guys in a squadron instinctively know how to locate a target from information displayed in the cockpit. They can translate cockpit displays into situational awareness fast. The helmet-mounted cueing system displays the target in the pilot’s field of view. The system makes it easier to build a mental picture of surroundings. In fact, it isn’t a mental picture. The system builds an actual picture and displays a targeting solution on a visor right before our eyes.”

Impetus

While combined developmental and operational testing makes sense for many reasons, the most important reason for CCIP may be timing. The first Phase I CCIP F-16s rolled off the modification line at the Ogden Air Logistics Center at Hill AFB in January 2002. Operational squadrons began receiving the airplanes soon after. The 78th Fighter Squadron at Shaw AFB completely converted to CCIP F-16s in August 2002.

“When CCIP F-16s come out of Ogden,” Stinar explains, “they are either going to have software ready for them or they are going to be sitting on the ramp waiting for the software. If the latter is the case, squadrons at Shaw and Mountain Home won’t have any airplanes because they have sent all their F-16s to Ogden to be modified with CCIP. The software for the second CCIP phase must be complete before October. We came to Nellis to test every version of CCIP software that is under the hammer right now to get validated. BRU-57 is a big operational driver as well. We didn’t have clearance to drop weapons from a BRU-57 until recently. The Air Force wants BRU-57 operational for its latest CCIP airplanes.”

Combined And Sequential

Traditionally, developmental testing and operational testing occur sequentially. “We get the software tape at Edwards and fly it for two weeks,” says Brandt. “We make sure it is safe. We then send it to Nellis or Eglin for operational testing. They have airplanes configured like ours. They put time on the software and try to find problems with it. If they find anything, we duplicate and correct the problem on our instrumented airplanes at Edwards.”

“Basically, Edwards makes sure everything works,” Butler adds. “Then operational test pilots at Nellis evaluate the systems in a multiple aircraft environment. Pilots at Edwards are not flying against other aircraft in their testing. They are looking at the systems in a limited, controlled environment.”

The relationship between operational test at Nellis and at Eglin is more symbiotic. “The 422nd and the 85th are two squadrons out of the same wing, the 53rd Wing headquartered at Eglin,” Stinar notes. “My unit, the 85th at Eglin, is more biased towards the Block 50 testing. We are the lead test unit for the modular mission computer. The 422nd at Nellis is biased towards the Block 40 testing. Once completed, CCIP will blur those distinctions.”

Combined Benefits

While a tight schedule may be the impetus for combining developmental and operational tests, the other benefits are just as significant. “This is the first time we’ve had such a large group together for combined developmental and operational testing,” says Stinar. “Nellis and Eglin can use these drops in our operational evaluation, and Edwards can use the associated data analysis for its developmental evaluation.”

“We get a good look at the latest avionics for the CCIP aircraft,” adds Butler. “We also get an early look at the helmet-mounted cueing system. We’re also looking at Link-16 for the first time. The experience is giving us on-the-job training. When the new systems arrive at our units in the next few months, we can use them at an operational and tactical level right away as opposed to learning how to use them. We can progress much faster.”

“We are getting combined data and combined weapons upfront and early,” Stinar continues. “We are sharing the costs. We are getting information that we can all use. We’ve pooled our resources to satisfy a large test matrix. Testing sequentially or independently would take more time and money.”

For Brandt, the end of one software upgrade test leads to the beginning of another software upgrade test. “At the end of the week, we want to sign off on this CCIP software and get the capabilities to the operational units. If everything goes well here, we have checked off a major block on the capabilities of the software that go to the field in four to five months. From here, I go back to Edwards and spin up for the next software update, which introduces Link-16 and the helmet-mounted cueing system to operational units.”

Eric Hehs is the editor of Code One.