| Author |
Message |
|
yunus
|
Posted: May 15, 2008 - 03:24 PM
|
|
|
Newbie

Joined: May 05, 2008 - 08:16 AM
Posts: 4
Status: Offline
|
| I think the F-18 was designed from outset to be easier to fly requires less training. F-16 as great as it is requires higher skill level. Nations who have recognised this have opted for f-18. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Sponsor
|
Posted: May 27, 2012 - 12:11 AM
|
|
|
F-16.net Sponsor
|
|
|
|
 |
|
INO
|
Posted: Jun 16, 2008 - 03:50 AM
|
|
|
Enthusiast

Joined: Apr 07, 2006 - 07:40 AM
Posts: 74
Location: Virginia Beach
Status: Offline
|
| So, the F-16 takes a higher skill level to fly? And you got this information where? Or maybe you have seat time in both? Just curious which nations have recognised this as "the" reason to chose an 18 over a 16. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
outlaw162
|
Posted: Jun 17, 2008 - 04:17 AM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran

Joined: Feb 28, 2008 - 02:33 AM
Posts: 907
Status: Offline
|
Variations in pilot skill level are more apparent in aircraft that are more difficult to fly.
There is a certain amount of humor in hearing a comparison between these 2 fighters as to which one is more difficult to fly.
IMHO, compared to the Century Series (100-110) fighters, the F-16 is an extremely easy and forgiving aircraft to fly.
The gap between the performance of the best pilot in the squadron and the worst is narrowed considerably. Both best & worst are nearly on the same level because these aircraft are so capable. Time marches on.
The gap between the best & the worst in the earlier fighters very often resulted in a new surviving worst. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
LordKadghar
|
Posted: Jun 26, 2008 - 03:25 AM
|
|
|
Newbie

Joined: Dec 18, 2005 - 01:30 AM
Posts: 13
Status: Offline
|
|
the_Hudge wrote:
The TLAMs can tackle many targets at distant ranges but the Super Hornet cant carry buddy stores, AAMs, AGMs and be everwhere.
You are correct. Fortunately, after some time of deploying with the Rhino, the Navy has learned the advantages of having more than a single Super Hornet on the flight deck. Therefore one can have some Rhinos with buddy stores configured as tankers, some configured with AIM-120s as fighters, and some with a strike loadout as strikers. It's not like every single plane is going to be intended to do every single mission on every single flight. The advantage here is that you can mix and match as is necessary to accomplish the mission... which rolls into the whole discussion about common parts between strikers, fighters, and tankers (and EA assets in the near future).
BTW-- I don't know where this discussion of "Blocks" started, but nobody in NAVAIR refer to them. The Super Hornet starts with Lot 21, and the latest is Lot 29. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
outlaw162
|
Posted: Jun 26, 2008 - 03:40 AM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran

Joined: Feb 28, 2008 - 02:33 AM
Posts: 907
Status: Offline
|
I thought the Rhino was the F-4. Do they call the F-18 the Rhino now? Is there room in fighter aviation for two Rhinos?
regards |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
LordKadghar
|
Posted: Jun 26, 2008 - 03:58 AM
|
|
|
Newbie

Joined: Dec 18, 2005 - 01:30 AM
Posts: 13
Status: Offline
|
Good question-- the F-4 was the Rhino also. Problem now is that with both the Super Hornet and Hornet around the boat, there is potential for confusion, which is a big deal given that the arrestor cables need to be set differently for a C model vice an E/F. As a result, when calling the ball, it becomes either "Rhino, ball" or "Hornet, ball".
I think you're right, that it may be a nod to tradition with the old Phantoms, but I can't say for sure. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
INO
|
Posted: Jun 26, 2008 - 08:04 PM
|
|
|
Enthusiast

Joined: Apr 07, 2006 - 07:40 AM
Posts: 74
Location: Virginia Beach
Status: Offline
|
| I am pretty sure that lot 30's are already flying in fleet squadrons. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|