>>"Weight in that respect is not going to be the major a lim factor for the F16 in DACM. More so the limitations of the external stores."<<

Weight is usually THE limiting factor in any kind of manuevering.  External fuel tanks are designed to handle the same stresses as the aircraft.  Air-to-air weapons can also go to the max g loading of the aircraft.  With the high weights of an air-to-ground mission, the aircraft's g-loading is limited.  But all air-to-ground weapons can more than handle the aircraft's max g-loading when it is flying an air-to-ground mission.

Keep in mind that wings are designed for up bending loads.  But hanging ordnance on the wing bends it down.  Pulling G with ordnance bends it down even more.  that is one BIG reason why the max landing weight is always MUCH lower that the max take of weight.  At takeoff, the aircraft weight is supported be the wing and the wing is producing lift and bending upward.  Upon landing, the landing gear supports the aircraft and all the inertia of the wing and the ordnance haning on it  causes down bending moment.  Hence, the landing wt restriction.

>>"Your fuel usage during the mission will greatly depend on the amount of engagements you will encounter."<<

1.  This thread was about the F-16XL being a superior ground attack platform, not a fighter plaltform.  That is a Hi-Lo-Lo-Hi mission that would be carefully mission planned to keep the fuel state during the Lo segments relatively low, and certainly would NOT be planned with a full bag of gas during the Lo segments.

2.  Even flying CAP (combat air patrol), which can often involve lots of loitering, you don't plan on arriving on station with a full bag of gas.  You might take off with a full bag on the anticipation that you'll burn down before arriving on station.  But if you're flying a CAP mission, that means a pretty light weapon load, so even with a full bag of gas at takeoff, you're nowhere near max wt.

3.  It is exceedingly rare to have multiple ACM (Air Combat Maneuvering, or "dogfighting") engagements and no one plans for that.  For that matter, in today's world (as you correctly pointed out) it is even rare to get into an ACM engagement at all, especially given the proliferation of BVR missiles.  ACM engagements are very high energy affairs and very violent, even when there are no shots fired.

>>"What is your background?"<<

Let's just say I have some operational and some design engineering experience with fighters.  My employer is the Boeing company.  My former employer is the US Navy.  Check out the "tactics" section and my reply to another poster asking about carrier landings and the Fresnel Lens system.  It'll give you an idea about my "background".