Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

My understanding is that single seaters are used for A2G while two seaters are used for A2A.

1. Is that correct?
2. Why is it that way? I thought A2G in a challenging air defense environment would need 2 crew more than A2A.

F-16.net Sponsor

From where did you get that? I was of the impression that both are used for AA and AG, though the E is more used for AA and the F more used for AG, especially CAS and FAC these days.

I Don't recall where I saw it.

The "generic" Super Bugs can be used for most of the everyday mission types regardless of the number of seats. There may be slight performance differences between models but not enough to exclude one or the other. The only Navy Hornet with a specified number of seats is the new G-model Growler. They're all sedans with the back seater emceeing the EW show.

Whether it's an E or an F model, it's still a multirole fighter. I imagine the crews of both variants train for a variety of AA and AG missions. With respect to the Growler crews, I'm sure they still do some AA and AG training as well in addition to their primary EW role.

So, which one does what on a mission involving both?

I have read that (and this makes sense) most of the ex-Tomcat pilots/squads transferred to the F model Rhino, and are mainly AA/FAC/CAP while the E's are mainly former Bug pilots and do Strike missions, for ease of training/ conversion. Also the F/A-18F pilot I spoke with at an air show said the F model was CAP/FAC.

I'm sure there's a reason F models are used operationally. It makes sense that they would be used by former Tomcat crews. I bet the aircrews are pretty much trained for everything that the aircraft can do, but have squadron unit specific missions that differ slightly between the squadrons. Would be nice if we could get a F-18E/F driver in here to comment.

So maybe it's just the tradition which is continued? While a second crew member is certainly not bad, I think that a single seater is sufficient for AA. A second crew member is more valuable during complex AG missions and the current level of technology allows for single seat operations in complex environments anyway.

Scorpion82 wrote:

So maybe it's just the tradition which is continued? While a second crew member is certainly not bad, I think that a single seater is sufficient for AA. A second crew member is more valuable during complex AG missions and the current level of technology allows for single seat operations in complex environments anyway.

Having 2 JHMCs, makes the F model a nasty opponent in WVR fights though.

Can both pilots fire AIM-9X at the same time? I was of the impression that the WSO is responsible for AG and sensor management if required performing the function of the traditional RIO aboard the F-14 and possibly battlefield management with the ACS. If what you describe is a factual capability (2 JHMCS is, but simultaneous engagement of AA targets using them?) this would be a pretty useful capability in a multi bogey scenario.

shingen wrote:

My understanding is that single seaters are used for A2G while two seaters are used for A2A.

1. Is that correct?
2. Why is it that way? I thought A2G in a challenging air defense environment would need 2 crew more than A2A.

1. Primarily Yes.

2. There's a saying "When the Air Force get bombed, they pickup up shovels and pot hole filler. When the Navy gets bombed, they start pulling people out of the drink."

Navy fleet defense, while externally similar to air superiority, is a different animal. They have to be able to engage saturation attacks at all altitudes at BVR ranges. In essence, air superiority is offense, fleet defense is defense. The second seat allows the pilot to focus on flying the aircraft while the WSO/RIO directs him/her to target. It also allows a second set of eyes (which can now deploy air to air missiles) in a dogfight. The WSO can also direct single seat fighters to targets.

For air to ground, it has similar effects. In recce the pilot flies while the WSO takes pictures. In FACA, the foxtrot directs single seaters to targets.

OK, to answer the questions.

All SH's train for the same A/A and A/G missions except for two. It doesnt matter if its an E or an F in most missions. One day you may be doing CAS and the next day strike. So, dont believe those saying otherwise. The same goes for the F-18 A-C's for the Navy. The Hornets / SH's do the same missions. Air to Air or Air to Ground, it doesnt really matter. The two A/G missions that are "F" specific are the FAC/A and SHARP missions. These are run by two seaters due to the high workload envolved. The SHARP missions could be done by E's but are given to the F community. The FAC/A program is a holdover from the Tomcat community and for the Navy takes a two seat platform, hince the F being given the job.

I was in VFA-32 and transitioned with the squadron when they went from Tomcats to Rhinos (I have 0 hours in the Tomcat). I was going through the FRS at the same time and joined the Swordsmen when they still had a couple of F-14's left and getting the Supers. Not all Tomcat squadrons transitioned to F's. Some squadrons transitioned to E's (see VFA-31).

There is only one pilot in the F. And only the pilot can fire / drop any weapon. The high lot SH's have the capability for the WSO to fire / drop. However, the stan is for the pilot only to employ weapons.

Part two JHMCS,

In A/A, both pilot and WSO can use the JHMCS to target enemy aircraft seperately. The pilot can see what the WSO has designated and vice versa. The pilot is still the one to shoot any weapon. If need be he can step between designations and shoot multiple aircraft very quickly.

The only reason the SH has two seats is becuase of the TomKitty WSO mafia...SA in theis finite and shareing it between two crew members is a bad idea. AF A10's do CAS/FAC1A just fine single pilot...

Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

SHornet Question