Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

I have a some specific questions that I was invited to ask here, so here goes.

1. What do pilots and backseaters usually call the aircraft, like the Falcon is always called Viper? I know it has lots of nicknames, like Superbug and Rhino, and I am curious as to which one is used by them.

2. What is the Super Hornet's actual Max G-Loading? The Boeing site says it is designed for 7.6 (The HUD pic of a VFA-11 SH defeating a Raptor in an exercise shows max G reached as 7.6 as well), I have read stuff online that says it is higher, and every airshow PA I have heard/watched on YouTube announces the minimum radius turn as an 8g turn.

3. How does the Super Hornet compare to other aircraft, US and foreign, in maneuverability? I have read a lot of praise for, and seen with my own eyes, its low-speed maneuverability. What speed range is that describing, approximately? 250-400 MPH?

4. When did F/A-18Fs begin being equipped with AIM-9X and JHMCS? Were those a new thing with the Block II aircraft, or did some Block I Rhinos have them earlier?

5. When can we expect to see Block III Super Hornets on Carrier decks? Were the 124 Super Hornets ordered on the 28th of September (source: http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/mil ... erview.pdf )intended to be Block III, or II? What can we expect to see on Block III aircraft, besides CFT's? Will they have the F414 EPE's?

6. Will we ever see a SH with TVC? With EPE engines and high angle of attack/low speed handling, the F/A-18F seems a good plane for it. (I know dogfighting is rare nowadays, but hey, I am a civilian (hopefully semi
Smile

) fanboy so it interests me most. Smile

7. Slightly less SH related, but when will the AIM-120D AMRAAM enter service on the F/A-18F? While I am at it, what is its max range? Most recent data I could find on it was a) from 2006 b) from sketchy sites and c) varied from ~60 nmi to well over 100! Also I have the same range data problem with the -120C-7, so any reliable data there would be appreciated as well.

8. Being a SH/VFA-11 fan, I would love to know more about the aforementioned HUD picture, so if anyone knows anything about it, I'd love to hear it.

9. Do they use the 480 gallon drop tanks on the CV's? I have read that the 480g tanks are limited to land use only, and they are limited to the 330g fuel tanks at sea. Is it more common to see a Rhino with 1,2, or all 3 tanks?

10. (If this question will start a big, unintelligent, Super Hornet is an inadequate replacement for the Tomcat argument, please tell me so I can just remove it) How does the F/A-18F compare to the Tomcat in the BVR Fleet Defense role today, with and without AIM-120D, not just in radar/missile capabilities, but also in loiter time and bring back capability? As a side note, how many AIM-120's would be carried in a high threat conflict by an F/A-18F on a fleet defense CAP, and what drop tank loadout?

Really don't want to start any silly x vs. y argument, just curious about my favorite aircraft.

Thanks! Salute

F-16.net Sponsor

noah30 wrote:

I have a some specific questions that I was invited to ask here, so here goes.

I think this thread is somewhat unnecessary as we have about 10 or so about the Super Hornet on this very front page in this channel and many of your questions, particularly wrt block III and other development efforts can be red in those threads:
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-14507.html
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-14107.html

Quote:

1. What do pilots and backseaters usually call the aircraft, like the Falcon is always called Viper? I know it has lots of nicknames, like Superbug and Rhino, and I am curious as to which one is used by them.

Rhino is the most common in USN slang.

Quote:

2. What is the Super Hornet's actual Max G-Loading? The Boeing site says it is designed for 7.6 (The HUD pic of a VFA-11 SH defeating a Raptor in an exercise shows max G reached as 7.6 as well), I have read stuff online that says it is higher, and every airshow PA I have heard/watched on YouTube announces the minimum radius turn as an 8g turn.

7.5 g is the in service g-load limit imposed by the FCS. This can be overriden however and the SH should be able to pull 9 g like any other modern combat aircraft if required.

Quote:

3. How does the Super Hornet compare to other aircraft, US and foreign, in maneuverability? I have read a lot of praise for, and seen with my own eyes, its low-speed maneuverability. What speed range is that describing, approximately? 250-400 MPH?

Difficult to say without a comparative database, but the Super Hornet compares quite well in the low speed regime (<250 kts).

Quote:

4. When did F/A-18Fs begin being equipped with AIM-9X and JHMCS? Were those a new thing with the Block II aircraft, or did some Block I Rhinos have them earlier?

IIRC it was introduced in 2002 on block I examples. Block II examples latter added a second JHMCS for the WSO in the back, IIRC this was introduced around 2006.

Quote:

5. When can we expect to see Block III Super Hornets on Carrier decks? Were the 124 Super Hornets ordered on the 28th of September (source: http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/mil ... erview.pdf )intended to be Block III, or II? What can we expect to see on Block III aircraft, besides CFT's? Will they have the F414 EPE's?

See links above.

Quote:

6. Will we ever see a SH with TVC? With EPE engines and high angle of attack/low speed handling, the F/A-18F seems a good plane for it. (I know dogfighting is rare nowadays, but hey, I am a civilian (hopefully semi
Smile

) fanboy so it interests me most. Smile

It's possible but there appears to be no interest in TVC right now and I think the odds are unlikely.

Quote:

7. Slightly less SH related, but when will the AIM-120D AMRAAM enter service on the F/A-18F? While I am at it, what is its max range? Most recent data I could find on it was a) from 2006 b) from sketchy sites and c) varied from ~60 nmi to well over 100! Also I have the same range data problem with the -120C-7, so any reliable data there would be appreciated as well.

You won't find any reliable range data at all. Rumoured Rmax is 56 nm for the C5/C6 and 73 nm for the C7. The AIM-120D should achieve IOC next year and the Super Hornet is the first to use this weapon IIRC. Meaning 2011 or 2012 if there aren't further delays.

Quote:

8. Being a SH/VFA-11 fan, I would love to know more about the aforementioned HUD picture, so if anyone knows anything about it, I'd love to hear it.

According the most widely spread information this was from a DACT between a SH and a Raptor and it was stated that the fight was called of as the aircraft threatened to go beyond the ROEs, the F-22 pilot reportedly did so, while the SH driver ignored it and continued to chase it and make the simulated (invalid by that rules) kill. As said that's what is rumoured.

Thank you for the answers, the second thread I had not come across yet, and it answered some of my questions. Smile

Another thanks for the numbers on the low speeds, and AMRAAM ranges. Those were still much better than anything I have come across before. For use with a IRL friend (not questioning them), can I have some sources for the -120 ranges?

If you get one Rmax for -120, let's say 56NM, it's only for some specific scenario. The missile's actual max range for successful interception is probably around 10-150% of that range. Launch altitude multiplies missile range. Launch speed affects range. Target movement and altitude affects range. Any given figure is quite irrelevant anyway...

noah30 wrote:

Thank you for the answers, the second thread I had not come across yet, and it answered some of my questions. Smile

Another thanks for the numbers on the low speeds, and AMRAAM ranges. Those were still much better than anything I have come across before. For use with a IRL friend (not questioning them), can I have some sources for the -120 ranges?

The true ranges are classified, though the 56nm sounds like a pretty decent guess. The only thing for sure is the the unclassified range of more than 20 miles is very conservative. That being said, ROEs make long range launches unlikely.

As for Gs, the manuals are pretty conservative to protect the life of the airframe, but if you go above the official number, the aircraft aren't going to brake apart. F-15s have pulled 12g turns in combat. They just prefer you don't be doing it except for when your life is on the line.

It might help some then if I put it in a little more perspective: I mainly want the range data for homemade boardgames that I make with my friend, then play. In that case, a general number really is useful, like say 124 nmi for Pheonix, 30 nmi for an AIM-7E, 10 nmi with 85 degrees off boresight and say .75 mile minimum launch range for AIM-9X. Same for questions for maneuverability, not an easy thing in a dogfighting board game when most data you can get is stuff like T/W, Wing Loading, Loaded Weight, and Wing Area, and then collect as many opinions online and in books as possible. Same for questions like "when were the AIM-9X and JHMCS first used on the SH?" as the games are usually (we have probably made at least a hundred games, from War of 1812 naval combat to Jet Aircraft) based on a leveling system, say at level 5 you can use an F/A-18F Block II, which has the same maneuvering stats as a Block 1 but higher radar stats (APG-79) and can carry the AIM-9X, etc. Hopefully that makes some of my questions easier to answer, as of course you are right about the range data having little value for most other purposes.

-Edit after reading bjr's pot: Which makes it all the harder to do, as more and more things are guesses and opinions. So we usually have to just average out between (just another thing where we have to read as many opinions as possible) the things we come across and use that. So I suppose I was just asking for some more educated guesses.

noah30 wrote:

Thank you for the answers, the second thread I had not come across yet, and it answered some of my questions. Smile

Another thanks for the numbers on the low speeds, and AMRAAM ranges. Those were still much better than anything I have come across before. For use with a IRL friend (not questioning them), can I have some sources for the -120 ranges?

Well the C5 range is stated here for example:
http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-120.html

Sources suggest that the C7 offers a 30% greater range than the C5, that's how I arrived at that figure. As already noted by others before the true performance is classified and the range performance depends on various factors as stated by Mechanic as well.

Scorpion82 wrote:

Well the C5 range is stated here for example:
http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-120.html

Sources suggest that the C7 offers a 30% greater range than the C5, that's how I arrived at that figure. As already noted by others before the true performance is classified and the range performance depends on various factors as stated by Mechanic as well.

Another big thanks for that one. Does anyone know any sites I could get some collected data on various aircrafts' relative maneuverability, credible opinion or fact?

bjr1028 wrote:

As for Gs, the manuals are pretty conservative to protect the life of the airframe, but if you go above the official number, the aircraft aren't going to brake apart. F-15s have pulled 12g turns in combat. They just prefer you don't be doing it except for when your life is on the line.

That's pretty impressive^^

Also, can post an F/A-18F model in the Finished Models Showroom? Or is it F-16, F-22, and F-35 only?

Can anyone point me to any sites beyond Wikipedia and Global Security for good info on Aircraft? Specifically, comparisons between aircraft with more truth than APA, or info on F/A-18F/aircraft instant and sustained turn rates and minimum turn radius and the like?

EDIT: And I would always like more answers to the questions above Smile

noah30 wrote:

bjr1028 wrote:

As for Gs, the manuals are pretty conservative to protect the life of the airframe, but if you go above the official number, the aircraft aren't going to brake apart. F-15s have pulled 12g turns in combat. They just prefer you don't be doing it except for when your life is on the line.

That's pretty impressive^^

Also, can post an F/A-18F model in the Finished Models Showroom? Or is it F-16, F-22, and F-35 only?

Saying an airplane can pull 7g or 9g or 12g safely is meaningless unless the flight conditions are stated. I don't doubt that an F-15 can pull 12g safely under some conditions. Under other conditions you could find yourself trying to fly a wingless airplane.

What conditions?? Wing load for example, varies greatly, even at a constant g, say 9g. The primary factors affecting wing load at 9g are gross weight, weight distribution, speed, altitude, and maneuver asymmetry. Modern fighters are designed to fly at some g, at some specified fuel level, for some weapon load, at some specified speed/altitude envelope. Common for fighters today are 9g at any internal fuel level, with air to air missiles up to 800 kt.

Of course wing load at 9g is usually reduced as internal fuel is burned and as altitude is increased. The speed for max wing load is usually around 600 kt. The most critical condition then is about 600 kt, low altitude, nearly full of internal fuel. As those conditions change the wing load at 9g will change. How much? As much as 35% lower in the extreme. That means you could exceed 9g by 35% and still by within the allowable wing load.

What about maneuver asymmetry (roll)? Put in a hefty roll command at very high g and you are asking for trouble. The high g makes the wing bend and the roll makes the wing twist and bend. Combining bending and twisting will cause wing failure at a much lower g than a symmetric pull.

Fascinating reply with concise info in that last one. Thanks for the input always sir.

Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

F/A-18F Questions