Forum: Air Power

Quote:

F-14D with AIM-54 would have been far more effective than any SH with AMRAAM.

What? Think about that for a second. Seriously.

F-16.net Sponsor

AAAM was very close to fruitation before it was cancelled. That would have provided a basis for needing more than a Hornet or the not so 'Super' Super Hornet.

discofishing wrote:

Quote:

F-14D with AIM-54 would have been far more effective than any SH with AMRAAM.

What? Think about that for a second. Seriously.

I did it ,not for a second but for an hour and came to the same conclusion ..
As captain of a super carrier I would feel much safer when I have a squadron of F-14D's with a Grumman Hawkeye in the air for ' over horizon' detection and BVR engagement .The AIM-54 has almost triple the range of the AMRAAM and is far more suitable in engaging the long-range bomber threat , it also outrange the best of Russian hardware R-77 and R-27 and the SUPER TOMCAT is much faster than the SH and the speed is one of the decisive elements in the fleet air defense role , forward defence in particular The AN/APG-71 radar on the F-14D was a world beater for BVR AA combat better than the AN/APG-73. .The SH will have to come close within AMRAAM range to engage, putting them at risk to a R-77/R-27 ..

In my opinion ,the SUPER TOMCAT hasn't been replaced, just substituted...

duplex wrote:

I did it ,not for a second but for an hour and came to the same conclusion ..
As captain of a super carrier I would feel much safer when I have a squadron of F-14D's with a Grumman Hawkeye in the air for ' over horizon' detection and BVR engagement .The AIM-54 has almost triple the range of the AMRAAM and is far more suitable in engaging the long-range bomber threat

But the bomber threat has greatly diminished. No swarms of Soviet bombers rushing Fleets positions are expected these days.

duplex wrote:

it also outrange the best of Russian hardware R-77 and R-27 and the SUPER TOMCAT is much faster than the SH and the speed is one of the decisive elements in the fleet air defense role , forward defence in particular The AN/APG-71 radar on the F-14D was a world beater for BVR AA combat better than the AN/APG-73. .The SH will have to come close within AMRAAM range to engage, putting them at risk to a R-77/R-27 ..

No worries - new AMRAAMs (C-7 and newer) greatly outrange R-27 or R-77. Besides – I think AMRAAM is far more capable anti-fighter weapon than the Phoenix.

duplex wrote:

In my opinion ,the SUPER TOMCAT hasn't been replaced, just substituted...

Tomcat was a great cold war anti bomber/fleet defender fighter(single role). SH is better suited for today’s threats – it’s a very capable multi-role aircraft.

duplex wrote:

I did it ,not for a second but for an hour and came to the same conclusion ..
As captain of a super carrier I would feel much safer when I have a squadron of F-14D's with a Grumman Hawkeye in the air for ' over horizon' detection and BVR engagement .The AIM-54 has almost triple the range of the AMRAAM and is far more suitable in engaging the long-range bomber threat , it also outrange the best of Russian hardware R-77 and R-27 and the SUPER TOMCAT is much faster than the SH and the speed is one of the decisive elements in the fleet air defense role , forward defence in particular The AN/APG-71 radar on the F-14D was a world beater for BVR AA combat better than the AN/APG-73. .The SH will have to come close within AMRAAM range to engage, putting them at risk to a R-77/R-27 ..

In my opinion ,the SUPER TOMCAT hasn't been replaced, just substituted...

Got any information about the AN/APG-71 vs AN/APG-73 other than one was on the beloved Tomcat, and ergo far superior? The APG-79 beats both anyway.

Once again the AIM-54 couldn't hit sierra if it was small, maneuverable, and didn't have the RCS of a 747. In fact, look up the famous test where they took an F-14 and launched 6 Phoenixes at 6 targets. 1 missed and 1 was declared a 'no-test'. Know why? Because the RCS enhancer to make the little drone look like a Tu-22M or equivalent fell off. Without that huge cue, the Phoenix missed it's mark. Range isn't quite as important as actually hitting the target...

You completely ignore logistics in your analysis. More SH carrying more missiles mean they have more chances to intercept anything. Speed is nice but more than offset by the practicality offered by the Super Hornet.
Your "SUPER TOMCATs" are completely pointless when they're sitting on the flight deck waiting to be fixed, which they were, much more often than any Hornet. A bird in hand is better than two in the bush- get it?

Those super-fast missiles (BrahMos, etc) APA gets all excited about have short ranges, well within a decent patrol radius from the carrier and touching AEGIS SM-6 range. Hell, APG-79 and AIM-120D is probably very effective against Anti-ship missiles as well as bombers.

Submarines and ASBMs are bigger threats to carrier groups now than bombers anyway. It is simply a waste to have a dedicated fleet interceptor when 95% of the time you don't even need that capability and the other 5% the role can be covered by aircraft you have.

Experts... like Goon and Kopp? So... 2 guys. Versus everybody in the armed services and defense industry. Um, okay.

Prinz-Eugn

Interesting link thanks I didnt mean Goon and Kopp but anyway..Tell me one good reason why I shouldn't believe the following scenario ..

The Superhornet can detect the Super Flanker which outperforms the SH in range,speed and agility from over 100 km away thanks to its superior AESA radar , but it would still be out of it's firing range. However, because the Superflanker should be able to detect the Superhornet from 80 km away, that would allow the Flanker to fire it's R-77 or even it's R-27ER/ET, all before the Superhornet can fire it's AMRAAM's which is a good missile, but the R-77 baseline model out ranges the baseline AMRAAM and some of the later variants.

No worries - new AMRAAMs (C-7 and newer) greatly outrange R-27 or R-77. Besides – I think AMRAAM is far more capable anti-fighter weapon than the Phoenix.
[quote="duplex"]

Any credible source confirming this ??

Baseline AMRAAM? The AIM-120A that's been out of production for almost 15 years? AIM-120C-7 is about even with the R-77 and the AIM-120D comfortably exceeds it in terms of range, and massively exceeds it in terms of seeker technology. 80km if it's lucky- SH has a fraction of the RCS of the Su-27 series. You're probably looking at detection ranges in the >150 nm range for SH's finding Suhkois. Even so, the APG-79 is LPI, so no matter what the SH is going to get first look by a comfortably margin and be able to dictate to a large degree where and when the engagement starts.

Thinking the game stops once missiles are launched is very simplistic. Most Russian missiles are still operating on older technology thanks to the post-Cold War defense meltdown while AMRAAMs have been constantly updated. BVR is highly dependent on ECM, something which the US has had a reasonable advantage in for a very long time. Low RCS Super Hornets with towed decoys and comprehensive EW suites they are going to be extremely hard to get a useful lock on. Once they get Growler support and AESA jamming modes, it's going to be even more difficult. Add in even harder to find F-35C's and you have a suicide zone for any Flanker variant around any US carrier.

Basically, you're going to see the high-performance Flankers' performance advantages evaporate when faced with a huge situation awareness problem. It's hard to dodge anything when you don't know who the shooters are, where they are, or when they launched their missiles. Once again, even if the Flankers manage magically to get through, at best they're going to get an even loss ratio thanks to High-off boresight missiles.

Quote:

The AIM-54 has almost triple the range of the AMRAAM

Not these days. The AIM-54 couldn't hit water if it fell out of a boat when comparing it to the latest models of AIM-120s.

Quote:

The AN/APG-71 radar on the F-14D was a world beater for BVR AA combat better than the AN/APG-73.

As for the APG-73; no Super Hornet uses such radar system anymore. They've all switched to the APG-79, which is one of the best fighter radars out there. That radar is leaps and bounds more capable than the APG-71. Yes, the first Super Hornets used the APG-73, but they've all been upgrade with an AESA set. I think the left over APG-73 sets went into the A/B Hornet fleet as part of their upgrade.

discofishing wrote:

As for the APG-73; no Super Hornet uses such radar system anymore. They've all switched to the APG-79, which is one of the best fighter radars out there. That radar is leaps and bounds more capable than the APG-71. Yes, the first Super Hornets used the APG-73, but they've all been upgrade with an AESA set. I think the left over APG-73 sets went into the A/B Hornet fleet as part of their upgrade.

That's funny how they put 200 radars on near 400 F/A-18 Super Hornets. Amazing. I'm only kidding, it hasn't been done. In fact, Boeing has only just started last year using APG-79 in every NEW F/A-18 Super Hornet and EA-18G Growler coming off the production lines.

If anything prior to lot 26 even gets it is unclear as its only cleared for lot 26 and beyond. And retrofit of the APG-79 to approved lot numbers didn't even begin until this current year. Raytheon is also redesigning some parts on the APG-79, so when they all finally do get APG-79 it will not be a uniform version across the fleet that does receive it. Boeing has the contract for the actual installation and I didn't see anything from them even hinting at the replacement being fleet wide. I have a feeling more than 30% of the current Super Hornets will reach retirement without the upgrade.

Interesting. I'd have to say madrat is correct on this one. And maybe Navy could furthermore supplement AESA retrofit sets with RACR (as a means to expedite upgrade)? imho..

I've done some reading, my sources are inaccurate I guess. I talked to some techs on the Hornet Demo team at an airshow who said the SH fleet was all AESA. Some Marine reservist acquaintances of mine out at NAS Fort Worth who work on Hornets said they got their APG-73 straight from SH units. They then sent their old APG-65 units off to support the AV-8B+ fleet. Next time I need to make sure I'm talking to an avionics guy.

Quote:

Interesting. I'd have to say madrat is correct on this one. And maybe Navy could furthermore supplement AESA retrofit sets with RACR (as a means to expedite upgrade)? imho..

I'd say stick with the APG-79 for the Super Hornet fleet for the obvious reasons.

My view on the subject of this subject: US naval aviation will increasingly divert its priorities to COIN just like the Air force.

Forum: Air Power

Aircraft Roles in the 21st Century USN?