Whistler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (12 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 2780 times:
I was just reading that the F/A-18E/Fs are being beaten in acm by F/A-18C/Ds! Apparently the Es bleed speed at an astonishing rate when in turns. I hope the improvements in Radar and Engines will help it beat the plane it is replacing...
Redskin From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (12 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2756 times:
Well i suppose that it is now official, the super IS SLOWER than it father.
What kind of PROCUREMENT SPASTIC orders a bird that is slower, and less manouverable than it's predessor. Even worse is the fact that it is the same palne, ( sort of). I think this is called regressive advancement.( is that an OXY Moron ) or have i invented a new term
Norbb From Austria, joined Jun 2001, 24 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (12 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 2749 times:
As I saw the first photo of the super hornet i noticed the modified intakes at once. I thought rectangular intakes - as used in the F-14 and F-15 - "cut" the air better making higher speeds possible... A Hornet at mach 2... that was my dream!
Zionstrat From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 226 posts, RR: 1 Reply 11, posted (12 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2744 times:
I can't get over the timbre of this thread- For some reason the SHornet is getting trashed because it won't hit mach 2? I think you're missing the point.
Although the YF17 was originally planned for the tactical fighter role that the F16 filled, the F18 has always been multirole and has done a remarkable job replacing the A7, A6, and now F14- Why would anyone demand such a plane to outperform its predecessor in every way? The important question is, what metrics are required, and can the ac meet them?
It is obvious that the Hornet exceeded those requirements and that the SHornet is even better. Keep in mind that the Hornet was the first ac to prove that a true multi-role configuration works- It was fully loaded Navy F18s that made the first ac kills of the gulf war as they defended themselves and went on to complete their attack. In the past attack fighters would have jettisoned their load first, essentially defeating their attack role.
The supper Hornet is simply a larger version of a proven design that allows for more take home fuel at the end of the day. And give me a break on the mach 2 issue- F4s in Vietnam proved that the need for mach 2 wasn't nearly as important as a good gun and the ability to turn.
Please take this in the right sprit- I'm not out to dis anyone, just asking that you consider mission requirements and recognize that the Hornet meets them better than anything else on the immediate horizon (lets give JSF a little more time to bake
Jwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 20 Reply 12, posted (12 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2745 times:
The superhornet of today is underpowered. New engines and a slight redesign of the air intakes should fix that.
With the everincreasing emphasis on standoff weaponry, burstspeed and dogfighting turns are not considered top priority in selecting an aircraft. Range and stability are more important (note, I do not agree with this, but I am not making the decisions). In that, procurement policy is stepping back to the 1960s, when Brittain considered the days of the manned aircraft to be almost over. SAMs would provide an impenatrable shield against intrusion, from behind which ballistic weapons could be launched with impunity against whoever was stupid enough to make them angry.
Norbb From Austria, joined Jun 2001, 24 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (12 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2733 times:
You are right Zionstrat!
It is a fact that the Super Hornet has other, more important qualities ranking it over the A-6, A-7, Tomcat and Hornet C/D.
Austria is going to buy new multipurpose fighters to replace the REALLY OLD Saab 35OE Draken. I have heard that a Swiss HornetC is capable of shooting down 6 or more Drakens. Maybe it has to do with the fact that the Drakens weaponry is limited to two Sidewinders.
Anyway, the candidates are: Eurofighter Typhoon, Mirage 2000, JAS-39 Gripen, F-16 Falcon and the F/A-18E.
I would choose the Super Hornet of course. My point was that the only weakness of the E/F´s is their speed. Please notice that all the other aircraft are capable of mach 2.
Maybe mach 2 is my psychological speed limit for a modern fighter?
CX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4435 posts, RR: 5 Reply 14, posted (12 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2729 times:
First off, I am not knocking the F/A-18 Hornet as it does what it was designed to due quite well. It was designed to replace the A-7E Corsair II as a medium attack aircraft. It was not designed to be a fleet defender which is the role the F/A 18 E/F will take over from the F-14 Tomcat. It is a jack of all trades master of none. The current F/A-18 A, C, and D fleet is slow, has limited range, and is fuel needy. Besides all of those problems, the aircraft has less bring back capabilities than the F-14 which is one of the reasons why the F-14As of VF-41 and VF-14 were tasked with more bombing missions during operation Allied Force and were the ONLY aircraft to deliver certain types of LGBs. So, basically the ancient F-14As were higher priority aircraft than these "gee whiz" ain't technology great F/A 18Cs. The F/A-18 E/F has improved upon the fuel problem and slightly on the range issue. Speed, continues to be an afterthought though.
Besides all of those problems, the aircraft has less bring back capabilities than the F-14 which is one of the reasons why the F-14As of VF-41 and VF-14 were tasked with more bombing missions during operation Allied Force and were the ONLY aircraft to deliver certain types of LGBs.
What the United States Navy and DoD SHOULD have done was keep the F-14D in production (The D model is the most capable aircraft in the Navy's inventory). When you have a weak father, you normally have a weak son.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
Zionstrat From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 226 posts, RR: 1 Reply 15, posted (12 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2726 times:
I remember reading about and F4 jock who was trading up to a higher model and realized that he had one last shot at getting his mach 2 badge (the newer model had a reduced top end and the old model only broke mach2 under very special conditions)-
So he took the old model up, pushed it hard into a series of dives, exceeded the max aoa, and managed to stall both engines- Of course they relit and after apologies to the guy in back I think they actually broke mach 2, but the point of the story is that I think everybody agrees that mach 2 is an excellent "psychological speed limit" and are willing to go out of the way to get it
CX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4435 posts, RR: 5 Reply 17, posted (12 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2710 times:
Over the past 5-7 years, the F-14 fleet has been dramatically improved. Unfortunately the F-14D productions run was cut short, but by no means was that the "End" of the line. The F-14 has been pretty busy since the "Gulf War". It has continued to protect the fleet while serving as the "Heavy" bomber for carriers, dropping countless LGBs on Saddam Hussein, along with playing a major role in Operation Allied Force as a fighter, bomber, and reconaissance platform and performed FAC (F). Below I will explain.
The F-14 is now a multi-mission aircraft that not only defends the fleet (Which it has done since '72), but is the high priority attack aircraft. With the installation of the LANTIRN pod, the F-14 has truly come into its own as an attack aircraft. As I said earlier, VF-14 and VF-41 (both equipped with F-14As) put the LANTIRN pod to good use in Kosovo. In fact, the F-14 squadrons were the choosen platform for bombing missions over the two F/A-18 groups! Along with fleet defence, fighter escort and being its own escort when it bombs ground targets, the F-14 has also become what is known as a FAC (F). Which is a Fast Forward Air Controller. 6 crews pioneered this mission over Kosovo, and soon the F-14 was the preferred Forward Air Controller over A-10 Warthogs, F-16 Vipers, and even their 2 seater Marine F/A-18D friends. The reason for this is the LANTIRN pods screen in the back seat of the F-14 is larger than the F-16s, or F-15E's for that matter and is a better platform than the one the F/A-18C and D use. Also, unlike the F-16 and A-10, the F-14 has two sets of eyes. The F-14 Tomcat also remains one of the only tactial reconaisance platforms in the United States Military. The TARPS pod is constantly put to use around the world with F-14 crews putting it all on the line for those valuable photos. So, needless to say the F-14 Tomcat is enjoying a renaissance in its golden years.
Not to bad for a girl that is sometimes called old! I can't say enough about the F-14 and the capabilities that it brings to the carrier deck. While the F/A 18 is a nice aircraft, it just can't cut the mustard when compared to the F-14 as they were designed to do different things. It all comes down to what the aircraft was designed to do and what it is capable of.
If you have any more questions about the F-14 or any other aircraft feel free to ask. Lastely, in past discussions there has been some talk about speed not being all that important. SPEED IS EVERYTHING. Those that don't recognize that need to spend some more time hitting the books. With it you can fight or get the heck out of dodge.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
Zionstrat From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 226 posts, RR: 1 Reply 18, posted (12 years 5 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2700 times:
I enjoyed the bombcat update and agree that the 14 is an incredibly flexible ac- However, I can't let the speed is everything statement slide in here without quoting a little history
In close combat, look at the F4 in Vietnam- A great fast aircraft that couldn't turn with much older, much slower aircraft- I don't argue that hit and run dive tactics can pay off (i.e. Wildcat vs. Zero, followed by Hellcat vs. Zero) but if you are forced in close for tactical reasons you will loose- Check out the scores by our ‘Red’ teams flying F5s and 20s if you need proof that the fast fighter doesn’t necessarily have the advantage.
This is the point of high AOA flight and trust vectoring in current designs- Reducing turning radius and sitting nose high while barley moving provides an incredible advantage when you need to get on the opponents tail.
So let’s look at speed when you don’t want to get on the opponents tail- How about interception and CAP? Your buddy the F14 remains at the top of the heap with the F15 in the same ball park- However, speed isn’t what puts them there- Look at the 102, 104, 106 and their short time at the top of the food chain- For that matter consider the origins of the XR71 as an interceptor, or the MIG25- All were incredibly fast, but the 14 and 15s rule because of the ability to track and attack long range targets and then mix it up closer/slower/tighter with the survivors.
And in a SAM world, there is no such thing as enough speed which explains why the B1B comes home with pinecone FOD from time to time.
Speed isn’t going to help you out when you break away and take one up the tail pipe (like the Corvette on the Interstate—You might outrun the patrol car, but you won’t outrun their radio)- This is especially true with the adoption of off axis weapons- Where is the safe spot to break away from an ac that can accurately acquires anything running away over 180°?
The key, as always, is the optimum mix of speed, maneuverability, and weapons platform. This varies by role, but keep in mind that the top aces from WW2 flew slow and maneuverable ac- And even warthog drivers occasionally carry a sidewinder hoping that a fighter will be stupid enough to try to go one on one down in the weeds-
Which brings us to the last point, combine the right pilot with the correct technology mix and it doesn’t matter how fast the opponent is (within reason… don’t mix Zeros with Mig25s just to prove me wrong
Qantas737 From Australia, joined Jul 2000, 738 posts, RR: 4 Reply 19, posted (12 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2683 times:
For one, the Super Hornet has much better handling than the original Hornet. The high and low alpha handling of the aircraft is exceptional and the RAAF is looking to re-equip it's Hornets with the Super Hornet software due to this. Of course the airframe is a little different and the Hornet wont be able to pick up the exceptional alpha handling of the Super Hornet.