US Navy’s $58.8 million upgrade revitalizes the aging F-16 and F-5 aircraft

On April 30, 2025, the U.S. Department of Defense revealed that STS Systems Defense LLC, a relatively obscure entity in the defense sector, has been awarded a $58.8 million contract to enhance the avionics and systems of the U.S. Navy’s F-16 and F-5 aircraft. In an era where advanced stealth fighters like the F-35 and next-generation systems dominate military expenditures, one might question the Navy’s investment in aircraft that were designed decades ago.

The rationale is rooted in the lasting versatility of these reliable jets and the Navy’s strategic imperative to sustain a strong, adaptable force for both training and operational missions.

This contract is not merely a standard procurement; it underscores a dedication to keeping legacy platforms relevant amidst evolving global threats and intricate training demands. The F-16 Fighting Falcon, initially developed by General Dynamics in the 1970s, continues to be one of the most widely produced fighter jets globally.

With over 4,600 units manufactured since its debut in 1976, this single-engine, supersonic multirole aircraft has transformed from a lightweight day fighter into a multifaceted platform capable of air-to-air combat, ground assault, and electronic warfare. Its frameless bubble canopy provides outstanding visibility, while a side-mounted control stick and fly-by-wire technology improve maneuverability.

Equipped with a single turbofan engine, the F-16 features an internal M61 Vulcan 20mm cannon and 11 hardpoints for various munitions. As of 2025, around 2,084 F-16s are operational worldwide, making it the most prevalent fixed-wing military aircraft in service, according to data from the Wikipedia entry on the F-16 Fighting Falcon.

The jet’s versatility has ensured its continued use by 25 nations, including NATO allies and partners in the Middle East and Asia. In recent conflicts, such as Ukraine’s defense against Russian aggression, F-16s have demonstrated their effectiveness, with Ukrainian pilots reportedly intercepting Russian cruise missiles using the jet’s cannon and missiles, as highlighted in a BBC Ukraine report from April 2025.

Equipped with twin engines and capable of reaching a maximum speed of Mach 1.6, the F-5 is primarily utilized as an aggressor aircraft in training exercises conducted by the Navy’s Fighter Composite Squadron (VFC) units. These aircraft mimic enemy fighters, such as the Russian MiG-29 and the Chinese J-10, providing U.S. pilots with realistic training scenarios.

Despite its age, the F-5’s low operating costs and high maneuverability make it well-suited for this purpose. The Navy maintains a fleet of F-5s at locations like Naval Air Station Fallon in Nevada, which is known for the prestigious TOPGUN program, where they replicate enemy tactics to sharpen the skills of American pilots.

A contract has been awarded to STS Systems Defense LLC to modernize the avionics and systems of these aircraft, ensuring they are equipped for current operational demands. For the F-16, upgrades will enhance the store management system, which oversees weapon deployment, and the fire control system, which integrates radar and targeting information for accurate strikes.

The contract outlines improvements to radar systems, including the older APG-66 and APG-68, as well as the advanced APG-83 Scalable Agile Beam Radar (SABR). Developed by Northrop Grumman, the APG-83 features active electronically scanned array (AESA) technology, which allows for longer-range target detection, enhanced tracking capabilities, and greater resistance to electronic jamming. This radar advancement brings the F-16’s capabilities closer to those of modern fighters like the F-35, enabling it to engage threats in contested environments.

Additional upgrades will address mission planning systems, data transfer equipment, moving map displays, targeting pods, electronic warfare systems, communication networks, data links, radar warning receivers, cockpit displays, and GPS navigation. These enhancements ensure that the F-16 remains a relevant platform within the Navy’s specialized fleet, primarily used for adversary training and testing missions.

Enhanced radar detection and warning systems enable F-5 pilots to replicate the sensor profiles of aircraft such as the Russian Su-35 or Chinese J-20, offering a more authentic training environment. Improved communication and data links facilitate seamless collaboration with other Navy assets during training exercises, while upgraded cockpit displays and GPS technology enhance pilot situational awareness.

These advancements ensure that the F-5 remains a cost-effective resource for training U.S. pilots to confront advanced threats, especially in the Indo-Pacific region, where China’s air force is deploying sophisticated fighters.

The selection of STS Systems Defense LLC for this contract raises interesting questions regarding the Pentagon’s procurement strategy. Unlike major players like Lockheed Martin or Boeing, STS Systems Defense is a smaller company, part of the STS Aviation Group, which focuses on aircraft maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) services. Located in Jensen Beach, Florida, the firm has a proven history of supporting military aviation, including a $100 million contract in 2024 to deliver engineering services for the Air Force’s F-16 fleet at Hill Air Force Base, Utah, as reported by GovCon Wire.

Its choice over larger competitors indicates that the Navy may have prioritized specialized knowledge or cost-effectiveness. The contract’s structure—an indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity agreement—provides flexibility, allowing the Navy to request upgrades as necessary over time. This strategy reflects a wider trend in Pentagon contracting, where smaller, nimble firms are increasingly engaged for specialized projects, potentially lowering costs and encouraging innovation.

The Navy’s role in this contract, as opposed to the Air Force, is another noteworthy aspect. While the Air Force operates the majority of the U.S. F-16 fleet, the Navy retains a limited number of F-16s and F-5s for specific missions.

The F-16s, mainly older Block 15 and Block 25 variants, are utilized by the Naval Strike and Air Warfare Center in Fallon for adversary training and as chase aircraft for testing new systems. The F-5s, operated by squadrons such as VFC-13 and VFC-111, serve as dedicated aggressor platforms.

The Navy’s commitment to these aircraft highlights their critical role in preparing pilots for high-pressure missions. By mimicking the tactics and capabilities of near-peer adversaries, these jets effectively bridge the gap between theoretical training and actual combat, especially in situations involving advanced air defenses or contested airspace.

This contract also mirrors larger geopolitical trends. The widespread use of the F-16 solidifies its status as a fundamental element of U.S. alliances, with countries like Taiwan, Poland, and Morocco depending on the aircraft for their air force needs. Enhancements made to the Navy’s F-16s could influence export initiatives, allowing allies to upgrade their fleets with advanced systems such as the APG-83 radar.

For instance, Taiwan’s F-16V program, which integrates similar avionics improvements, boosts its capability to counter China’s expanding air power in the Taiwan Strait. Although the F-5 is less prevalent globally, it remains operational in nations like Thailand and Brazil, where comparable modernization efforts could enhance its effectiveness.

By investing in these platforms, the U.S. not only bolsters its own military capabilities but also reinforces a network of allies confronting regional threats. Historically, both the F-16 and F-5 have been pivotal in U.S. military operations. The F-16 first engaged in combat during Operation Desert Storm in 1991, executing thousands of sorties, delivering precision-guided munitions, and engaging Iraqi aircraft.

Its adaptability has made it a staple in conflicts ranging from the Balkans to Afghanistan, where it provided close air support to ground forces. Although the F-5 was phased out of U.S. combat roles by the 1980s, it served as a vital export fighter during the Cold War, equipping allies such as South Vietnam and Iran.

Analyzing the F-16 and F-5 in comparison to their global counterparts underscores their lasting significance. The F-16 competes closely with Russia’s MiG-29 and China’s J-10, both of which possess comparable multirole functions but fall short in terms of avionics and network integration. For example, the MiG-29 utilizes outdated radar technology and does not feature the AESA capabilities found in the APG-83, providing upgraded F-16s with a superior situational awareness advantage.

Although the J-10 is outfitted with contemporary avionics, it struggles with engine reliability and faces export limitations, which restrict its international presence. The F-5 serves as an aggressor platform, mimicking aircraft such as the MiG-21 or early Su-27 models, which are still operational in countries like North Korea and Syria.

By modernizing these aircraft, the Navy ensures that its pilots are equipped to handle a diverse array of threats, ranging from older fighters to advanced stealth technologies. The focus of the contract on electronic warfare and data connectivity indicates a proactive strategy. In modern aerial combat, the reliance on networked operations is increasing, allowing aircraft to exchange real-time information with satellites, drones, and ground control.

Systems like the Link 16 tactical data link, which the Navy is enhancing through additional contracts with companies like L3Harris, facilitate the integration of F-16s and F-5s with platforms such as the F-35 or E-2D Hawkeye. This level of connectivity is essential in situations where U.S. forces need to counter sophisticated air defense systems, such as China’s HQ-9 or Russia’s S-400, which combine long-range missile capabilities with advanced radar technology.

By bolstering the electronic warfare features of its legacy aircraft, the Navy is gearing up for conflicts where tactics like jamming, deception, and sensor fusion are as crucial as sheer firepower.

The Pentagon’s recent announcement leaves one question unanswered: does this contract indicate broader, undisclosed initiatives? Is the Navy considering the integration of F-16s or F-5s with cutting-edge technologies like unmanned wingmen or AI-driven mission planning?

Although the contract primarily addresses avionics, its flexible nature permits future adjustments, potentially including undisclosed systems. The Navy’s recent investments in autonomous platforms, such as the MQ-25 Stingray tanker drone, indicate a growing interest in hybrid manned-unmanned operations.

Upgraded F-16s could act as experimental platforms for these ideas, utilizing their reliability and cost-effectiveness to test new strategies before implementing them on stealth fighters.

The choice to modernize these aircraft also prompts inquiries about the Navy’s long-term objectives. With the F-35C and F/A-18E/F Super Hornet as the core of carrier-based aviation, why invest in older aircraft? The likely explanation is cost and versatility. Operating an F-16 or F-5 is significantly cheaper than the F-35’s $20,000-per-flight-hour expense, making them suitable for training and secondary missions.

Furthermore, the Navy’s aggressor squadrons are experiencing heightened demand due to rising tensions in areas like the South China Sea and Eastern Europe. By upgrading its F-5 fleet, the Navy can replicate a broader spectrum of threats, from stealth fighters to swarms of low-cost drones, ensuring pilots are prepared for any situation.

As the U.S. navigates a complex global environment, the decision to enhance the F-16 and F-5 illustrates a practical approach to military modernization. These aircraft, despite their Cold War origins, continue to be essential assets for training, testing, and supporting allies.

The agreement with STS Systems Defense LLC illustrates that even older platforms can evolve to address contemporary challenges, given appropriate funding. Moving forward, the effectiveness of this initiative will hinge on the successful implementation of these enhancements, especially in demanding training scenarios.

Currently, the Navy’s dedication to its older aircraft conveys a strong message: amidst swift technological advancements, dependability and adaptability remain crucial. However, as financial constraints increase and threats change, will these improvements suffice to compete with adversaries who are heavily investing in advanced systems? Only time will reveal the answer.