|
Description
| Manufacturer: | McDonnell-Douglas | |
| Base model: | FA-18 | |
| Designation: | FA-18 | |
| Version: | E | |
| Nickname: | Hornet | |
| Designation System: | U.S. Tri-Service | |
| Designation Period: | 1962-Present | |
| Basic role: | Fighter | |
Specifications
| Not Yet Available |
History
| Date | Subject | Event |
| 1997/01/18 | The US Navy's newsest multi-mission aircraft, the F/A-18E (Super Hornet), piloted by Lt. Frank Morley, made it's first carrier landing aboard the USS John C. Stennis (CVN 74). |
Recent comments by our visitors
| Warren , PA | you know, when i was a boy and the F/A-18 came out i was really impressed with it because it filled a need in the US navy. then the US retired the A-6 and the F/A-18C had to pick up the slack, despite the fact that it couldn't go as far and carried less. then the F-14 went to retirement (great plane, but it really did have to be retired) and the super bug would fill in the roll. Ok, so the superhornet has a better missile combo (yes, the phoenix was faster and longer range, but it was useless against a target that could turn well...ie a Mig 29/Su-27) with the -120 and the new radar. and it finally had some nice legs. And finally it comes in 2 seat version! Two eyes are better then 1 (and the -18C required 1.5 pilots)!
but, as far as i can tell, it still has the following problems: can't hit Mach 2; Comparied to the MIG -35/SU-30 flanker (the one with the canards)/Eurofighter/Rafale/and other 4.5 gen aircraft, it would get its clocked cleaned; acceleration (as i understand it the -18C accelerates better); and finally, max altitude. those are huge factors in a modern dogfight. yes, the AESA radar is supposed to be pretty awesome, so when it gets installed that will really help. As well as the IR helmet tracking system. those will help...but in 2012. Plus how does it compliment the F-35? how will those squadrons work together since they have essentially similar weaknesses? so, what happens if china decides Taiwan is to come back into the fold? china will be equipped with the MIG-35 and the latest Flanker. That sort of sucks if we have to fight them off. Plus, considering that CVN's are only normally equipped with 65 planes (capacity for 90-100), one carrier won't cut it. Overall, I am not convinced the superhornet is up to the challenge, but I would love to be proven wrong. sparky 10/16/2007 @ 08:43 [ref: 18208] |
| Conan , QC | Truth is,speed and accleration are VERY factor in BVR enviroment,not only boost up lunch envelop of missile but rapid recover energy after avoidance maneuver.In other words,when both aircraft equip with same type of missile,the one with higher speed and accleration always have privilege to fire the first shot,lefting T&B fighter busy for avoid and no enable to shoot back.
Now!Except you think our opponent will always those introduced by CCCP in pre-Vietnam era or even those used for fight Brewster F2A in Gulf of Finland.Then,above privilege is NOT given to this Cheney's Super Stupid Horror when facing almost all fighter-interceptor we known which ever introduced by western allied post 1970'.High AOA performance maybe spectacular in a air show.But,however!zero-energy is a nightmare of all fighter pilot.when facing incoming missile,0-Energy gives you ability of sitting-duck in defeat it. As we stressd earlier,as you have no enable to fire the first-shot in a BVR enviroment,12 AIM-120-arried give you only fewer chance to survive from enemy gunfire in such a piece of JUNK which capable of under-performance. Finally,if you find the mighty Tomcat,or other brand-new combat aircraft are too difficult to get alone with.Then,I think nothing can be cheaper then a paper aircraft which can build by only your bare-hand.^_^ 12/01/2006 @ 08:13 [ref: 14886] |
| Joe , VA | Frankly, the negative comments about the Super Hornet just show a serious amount of arm chair ignorance. In a BVR fight it's all about radar capability, AWACS vectoring, target aquisition, and missile selection. Last time I checked the Superhornet had a radar comparable to that of the F-15 and nearly as good as the F-22. The only downside to the Supers BVR capability is its speed, but how often do fighters find the need to go full burn to intercept? Frankly, almost never. Almost all BVR fights or fights in general find themselves starting in the transonic region. The whole point of the F-14's speed was as an interceptor. The Pheonix was designed to bring down bombers, not other fighters. So again, in a BVR fight the F-18E/F is as capable as any other platform out there. In a BFM fight the F-18E/F is superb, like the F-18C/D it has the best AOA and dominates in a 1 circle fight. I don't think it has any competitor in that arena, and that's what it was designed to do. Finally, the F-14 was a maintence nightmare. Of 12 planes in a squadron frequently only 3 or 4 were working. The F-18E/F requires 15 man hours vs 50 on the F-14 per flight hour. Just some food for thought. The F-18E/F is certainly more expensive than I'd like it to be, and there's something to be said for a newer version of the F-14, but the Superhornet is an excellent platform that truly outclasses most of the competition. 11/19/2006 @ 18:19 [ref: 14784] |
| Conan , QC | Well!
You can have your "cost-efficiency",you can kill the mighty Tomcat for this "SUPER" fighter with "Fund-Saving""unsecessiary"......and other "GOOD" reason also. One day,when we find it out fighten by those opponent which really capable of "SUPER" and "UP-TO-DATE",cause severe losses to CVW or even a number of holes drill on CV flight deck.Then,it will be the best demonstrate of those BULLSHIT which named after "cost-efficiency" and "Fund-Saving policy"! And above all,the "SUPER" of this Super Stupid Horror! 09/19/2006 @ 04:23 [ref: 14210] |
| Andy , AZ | Can the F18 loiter without drop tanks? Can it take off for a two hour mission without a ready tanker? 09/16/2006 @ 20:59 [ref: 14184] |
| CJD WANTED REWARD!, CA | I worked on the F/A-18 at Northrop El Segundo. I had a Lucite, paperweight thing with a chip or scrap from the milling of the first part of the first F/A-18, well about 6 mos ago I went to visit a friend at Hawthorne Northrop Grumman plant and left it for 2 mins and came back and someone had stole it!
If you know anyone who might have one to buy, sell, trade please let me know! Thanks I collect these from other aircraft as well, and might be interested, but the F/A-18 really holds the place in my history...thanks! WANTED Lucite / Acrylic/ Perspex Paperweights WANTED Lucite / Acrylic/ Perspex Paperweights mainly aviation related....many may say they have a “First Chip” in example “ First Chip from the milling process of the YF-23” or F-16 or something like that, many are from planes, missiles etc… Some examples. McDonnell Douglas C-17 Production Shaving Lucite Paperweight, First F-22 Production Chip Lucite in the shape of the state of Georgia, containing production chip / shaving any project! See link for photos Another type are made from metals, materials & alloys used in the aircraft's manufacture they have “this is a example of the aluminum alloy used in making the B-52, they are about the size of a pack of cigarettes, see link to photos REMEMBER-I pay a finders fee; please pass this around to anyone who may be able to help… Thanks from Charles! To see the photo examples: copy and paste the web address below into your browser's web address bar: http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/bacchusd@pacbell.net/album?dir=/cbed&.src=ph&.tok=phuE 01/25/2006 @ 21:50 [ref: 12318] |
| R Nagle , MO | I think what everybody here is failing to realize is the Super Hornet is what the navy originally bought back in the legacy days. They wanted an aircraft that could deliver A/G munitions and fight it's way out of hostile engagements as well as be able to be easily upgradable to newer and better technologies. The problem was that they had no way of knowing that fighter technology would grow so rapidly. This is the reason for the new airframe that is now labeled as Super. This new age hornet can be upgraded to match any of the newer fighters and has been already ie, Aesa radar, JHMCS, MIDS, The aim 9X and so on. This is a wonderful fighter and serves it original purpose to a T 01/25/2006 @ 18:11 [ref: 12304] |
| jon , NY | Forgot one thing. The military should seriously consider making the X-31 EFM into a full fighter aircraft. The technology it demonstrated proved to work well, and the plane outperformed the F-18 in mock dogfights.
At least the F-35 won out over that monstrosity of an airplane, the boeing X-32. 12/28/2005 @ 18:56 [ref: 12037] |
| Jon , NY | Cheney and Rummy, reducing the size and 'cost' of the military was their whole scheme.
Hey, lets replace our whole front line fighter force with a bunch of planes that can shoot down other planes and bomb stuff at the same time! brilliant! They never heard the phrase "a jack of all trades is a master of none" Now the navy simply doesn't have a dedicated fighter or interceptor at all. Its best to make something do something, and be the best at it, just look at the F-15(aside from the E strike eagle) built for shooting down other aircraft, and its never been bested. The F-14, it may be heavy, but its an excellent plane. The superbug might look nice on paper, but it has more weaknesses than the tomcat might. The tomkitty is faster, and speed is life in the air. It may not be able to turn in tight circles like the hornet, but who said T&Bing was the only air to air tactic a pilot can use? It has a far stronger airframe than the hornet, a very light aircraft and can manage a heavier weapons load because of it. I really doubt upgrading the systems on the F-14 would really be all that more expensive, and the benefits would be far greater than switching from an F-14 to the F-18e. You wouldn't have to retrain all the F-14 pilots to fly the hornet either! For that matter, the JSF is another huge mistake. The raptor is an excellent plane, but its bastard brother isn't. First of all, its not even an original (or american)design, it was derived from the Yak-141bis freestyle that lockheed martin worked on with yakolev. As a harrier replacement its fine, especially if the F-35 isn't as accident prone. But to replace the F-14, F-15,F-16 and F-18 alongside the F-22 (and F-18e in the navy and marines), not a good idea. 12/28/2005 @ 18:48 [ref: 12036] |
| Joe , NY | A pilot of a standard F-18 Hornet who flew against the Super Hornet had this to say: "We outran them, we out-flew them, and we ran them out of gas. I was embarassed for those pilots". We can thank Richard Cheney for this. F-14 may be an oldie, but it is definitely a goodie. 12/08/2005 @ 19:45 [ref: 11920] |
Recent photos uploaded by our visitors
