F-16.net

F-16.net Editor Joined: Sep 23, 2003 Posts: 2862

I swear, Capt Gaddis is the man. Capt Gaddis this, Capt Gaddis that. He needs a cape and a shirt with an "SH" on the front. Laughing

This guy must drive LM absolutely nuts.

========

US Navy Super Hornet deal could cut JSF numbers

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... mbers.html

To be quite serious, we are burning up legacy Hornet hours with the ops tempo. Getting more Supers gives the Navy to put more aircraft with a new car smell on the deck. In the long term I just don't see how this will lower F-35 numbers on the deck. There will be a time when JSF gets on the deck.... and over time early Supers start running out of airframe life. Years ahead but it will happen. By 2018 early Supers will start showing their age. A workable UCAS-D off of the carrier deck is still a long long way away.

F-16.net Sponsor

ELP is right. One has to remember that the Navy still has a (very) few Hornets that saw action during the first Gulf War. Plus, I don't know how true it is but I've been told that the only reason that NSAWC doesn't have any Super Hornets yet ( and look how long they've been around) is because the fleet units need them for the current ops tempo.

Lodni_Kranazon wrote:

ELP is right. One has to remember that the Navy still has a (very) few Hornets that saw action during the first Gulf War. Plus, I don't know how true it is but I've been told that the only reason that NSAWC doesn't have any Super Hornets yet ( and look how long they've been around) is because the fleet units need them for the current ops tempo.

On average NAS Oceana has an airplane either taking off or landing every 7 minutes every day. They are flying at 11pm on the weekends to keep up.

Newbie Joined: Dec 01, 2007 Posts: 4 Status: Offline

The Hornets were supposed replace almost all A7Es and another four squadrons of the F-4N/S which were flying from the USS Coral Sea and USS Midway. Back in the 80s, these were the only Navy aircraft the Hornet was slated to replace. Fast forward to 1997 when it was decided to retire the A6, disestablish one VF from ever airwing and add another VFA to make up for the loss in capability. The Hornets were being deployed 50% more than expected so a supply of aircraft to run two units per CVW was eating up an extra 12 aircraft. A and C Squadrons were disestablished to move aircraft to other units. This started in 1991 and continues to this day:

VMFA-235 Death Angels
VMFA-451 Warlords
VMFA-333 Shamrocks
VMFA-531 Grey Ghosts
VFA-303 Golden Hawks Reserves
VFA-305 Silver Lobos Reserves
VFA-201 Hunters Reserves
VFA-203 Blue Dolphins Reserves
VFA-127 Cylons Adversary
VFA-82 Maraders
VMFA-321 Hell's Angels USMC Reserves
VMFA-142 Gators USMC Reserves
VMFA-134 Smokes USMC Reserves

Poor budgeting saw the US Navy and Marines retire aircraft much sooner than expected. The ES-3 was a victim of this poor fiscal policy. The direct result, the EP-3 doing the same mission is struck by the PLAAF J8. Very costly situation. The Super Hornet is overrated, simple. Most people dont know that it only reaches 1.6 mach if it has little in fuel and weapons. Most people dont know that the EA-6B can reach 1.8 mach in a dive. Most people dont want to admit that all the upgrades of the GE F414s were negated due to increased fuel loads and drag. the Super Hornet has next to nothing for a climb rate. It may be a good attack aircraft and tanker, but when does the US Navy using them in training as fighters when not carring weapons and a decent fuel load is not the same as being in combat with two droptanks and a buddy store.

Remember, these are the same admirals who made the same decisions to downgrade any potential submarine threats, only to be embrassed when the PLAN managed to sneak a sub in close to the Kitty Hawk. The P8 which is inferor to the cancelled P7, continues to suffer cost overruns and delay. It will not reach service until 2012.I imagine the PLAN will hold off on any further actions until we are ready. The S-3s retired from the Pacific fleet prior to the Song class SSK incident. It is ironic that all the upgrades of the S-3B which made it a strike aircraft and redefined Sea Control were negated with the ASW suite was removed. What I have heard from people from VS-31,22 and other squadrons is horrific, The H-60s are in bad shape, the P-3s are not getting the support they need.

The US Navy continues to be the less intelligent member of the flying services. I had to stiffle a laugh when I joined a F15E pilot embarrassing a Super Hornet pilot with specific and simple questions. I know the Super Hornet is outclassed by any of the Fighters in the USAF inventory. I doubt the F-35 will handle the missions of the F16s and F18s. I think it will do much of what the USMC will need it for. The A-10, no way. The Navy has bet on two horrible horses and the F-35 looks to repeat the trend. The USAF is in an excellent position with F-22s. In my opinion, more F-15Es would be a wise investment as long range strike will be more important since the US Navy CVWs arent up to the task and TLAMs are easy targets in combat against a real IADS.

Seems to me that the older Hornets are doing the A-A thing now that the Turkeys are retired, and the Rhinos are the latest bomb trucks. At least, that's the intel I get from my Rhino-driving nephew.

I don't see anything the Navy has beating the Viper or the Raptor in a one-on-one fight. At least not from a hardware standpoint. At present, I think that the avionics superiority the US has over its potential adversaries gives all our jets an advantage over the bad guys. And that's a good thing!!

F-16.net Editor Joined: Sep 23, 2003 Posts: 2862

Welcome to the forum Hudge.

SixerViper wrote:

I don't see anything the Navy has beating the Viper or the Raptor in a one-on-one fight.

Nothing anyone has can beat the Raptor one on one but the Rhino Block II+ should be more than a match for anything else the US has. Technology wise the Block 30/50 don't match up to it.

Newbie Joined: Dec 01, 2007 Posts: 4 Status: Offline

The USN is out of the fighter business once the Hornet Charlies and Alphas go away. The JSF will be another joke. The P8 is a joke, the Super Hornet is a major scandal. I doubt a Super Hornet could give any of the 4th gen birds a good fight. The Navy is killing itself. I'll ask around to the F5,F16 and F18 guys from NSACW and VFCs 12 and 13 about fighting the Super Hornet compared to fighting the F16s, F15s and F-22s.

In 1999 we got to talk to some F15E crews from the Bold Tigers after they beat up some F16s from the 174th FW (If Iremember correctly). It is saying something when the bombers eat up the fighters. The USN is out of fighters, along with ASW and effective leadership and decision making. BRAC 2005 is a good example.

Well, the Navy pilots have a love/hate relation with the hornets. and the navy is under alot of preasure for the super hornets. i honestly dont see the JSF on the carier anytime soon

Newbie Joined: Dec 01, 2007 Posts: 4 Status: Offline

Hey Philly Guy, the Newest Rhinos have the APG-79, but they still carry the same weapons as the other US aircraft. So there is no speed advantage, no technology advantage, and no real manuverablity advantage. The Super Hornets (The F4 is the Rhino to me) have nothing as far as climb rate and acceleration. I doubt it can beat F16As and F18As in combat. When early Hornets and Falcons are flying in training missions, they have a good deal of speed and energy at their disposal. The Super Hornet is a big pig, it is always overweight. Many Super Hornet pilots know this climbing into their jets, but its all they have. Sad state of affairs. The F22 is the perfect fighter, powerful, fast, long range, and great avionics. The F15s and F16s still have speed and power. Even the Alpha and Charlie Hornets have power surpluses at times. The Super Hornet is more a Hippo than a Rhino.

the_Hudge wrote:

The Super Hornet is more a Hippo than a Rhino.

Lol that one was good. But you have to remember that most fights start BVR nowadays. I think the Block II+ SH can score here not in terms of flight performance, but avionics and lower RCS than any other non stealth fighter in the US inventory. The SH has to fil a lot of holes, it's a very flexible multirole fighter, but not the best at anything.

Hudge--I agree that the F-4 was the original Rhino. I found out from my nephew's RTU squadron that the Navy has reconstituted the term "Rhino" to differentiate the E/F Hornets from the A/B/C/D versions around the carrier. The E/Fs have as much as 10,000# more landing and takeoff weight than their older brothers, and you can imagine what would happen if the cats and cables were set up for the wrong jet.

The Navy's calling 'em Rhinos, we may as well, too.

Without first-hand knowledge of what a Rhino has in its avionics suite, but with first-hand knowledge of what a block 30 Viper has, I stand by my assertion that the Viper will hold its own against anything the Navy has to put up against it. To me, the ANG blocks 25-32 vipers are the state of the art in the F-16 world. I must admit that I'm not more than passingly familiar with post-CCIP 40-50s.

Elite 1K Joined: Jul 22, 2005 Posts: 1089 Status: Offline

the_Hudge wrote:

Hey Philly Guy, the Newest Rhinos have the APG-79, but they still carry the same weapons as the other US aircraft. So there is no speed advantage, no technology advantage, and no real manuverablity advantage. The Super Hornets (The F4 is the Rhino to me) have nothing as far as climb rate and acceleration. I doubt it can beat F16As and F18As in combat. When early Hornets and Falcons are flying in training missions, they have a good deal of speed and energy at their disposal. The Super Hornet is a big pig, it is always overweight. Many Super Hornet pilots know this climbing into their jets, but its all they have. Sad state of affairs. The F22 is the perfect fighter, powerful, fast, long range, and great avionics. The F15s and F16s still have speed and power. Even the Alpha and Charlie Hornets have power surpluses at times. The Super Hornet is more a Hippo than a Rhino.

Are there any plans to upgrade the engine and would it do much good if they did? I've read several times of "plans" to get the 414 up to 26,500lbs thrust but nothing definitive.

I wouldn't be surprised to see more Super Hornets (in the short term) as the older Hornets are running out of hours at a alarming rate! That said, it is no reflection on the F-35 JSF...............doesn't really matter in the end regardless. As the F-35C Lightning will replace later Hornet Squadrons (F/A-18C's) and down the road early Super Hornet Squadrons. (F/A-18E/F's) Remember, production will ramp up slowly and will take decades to supply every partner.........

Enthusiast Joined: Sep 21, 2007 Posts: 37 Status: Offline

[quote="sferrin]Are there any plans to upgrade the engine and would it do much good if they did? I've read several times of "plans" to get the 414 up to 26,500lbs thrust but nothing definitive.[/quote]

Yes, the F414 Enhanced Durability Engine will be joining the fleet with the Block 3 Super Hornet sometime around 2009. This will increase installed thrust from 44,000 pounds to 55,000 pounds. Not a bad trick, squeezing F110 power out of an F404-sized engine. Super Hornet pilots I've spoken to at airshows insist that they have no fear of any fighter in the world WVR, except maybe the Raptor. The Block 3 Rhino will be a whole new headache in close. That's a BIG Ps increase.

F-16.net

Forum: F-35 Lightning II

US Navy Super Hornet deal could cut JSF numbers