F-16 Viper versus F-18 Hornet

TalleyHo · by **TalleyHo** » 26 Sep 2006, 03:54

Comparing a Navy plane vs an airforce plane isnt exactly the most fair compairison.
Consider the Navy planes, have alot more weight due to increased strength on air frame, stronger and heavier landing gear. Build the Hornet with Air Force specs and not Navy, im sure things will be alot different.

Corsair1963 · by **Corsair1963** » 30 Sep 2006, 20:37

TalleyHo wrote:Comparing a Navy plane vs an airforce plane isnt exactly the most fair compairison.
Consider the Navy planes, have alot more weight due to increased strength on air frame, stronger and heavier landing gear. Build the Hornet with Air Force specs and not Navy, im sure things will be alot different.

Well, in the case of the F-16 and F/A-18 both fly the same mission. So, any comparison would only be natural..............

Danimal · by **Danimal** » 29 Dec 2006, 14:04

The F-16 does have lower wing loading, bleeding off less energy in high G turns, lower aspect ratio for quicker roll rates and a better thrust to weight ratio. The F/A-18 does have a slightly more capable radar package (until the APG-68 version 10) but despite all this they have nearly identical real world performance, especially if we're talking about super hornets and CJ's. However, speaking from experience, my unit's F-16CJ's consistently owned spanish F/A-18C's. Although I would most likely chalk that up for more experienced pilots plus we had JHMCS and they didn't. So realistically I'd say that the battle would go back and fourth with no clear cut winner.

velos35 · by **velos35** » 13 Jul 2007, 20:04

I recently read an article written from a viper pilot who happened to fly Hornet also.He stated that there is a big difference in acceleration and turn performance... :thumb:

Cad · by **Cad** » 19 Jul 2007, 19:00

No doubt that the f-16 would accelerate faster than the Hornet, but the Hornet would decelerate faster also.

Parkeran · by **Parkeran** » 20 Jul 2007, 00:24

The F-18 I think has a good chance at taking down the F-16. The F-18 can take-off from just about anywhere as well as having the advantage of a better radar. Not only this but i'm a HUGE F-18 Hornet fan! :oops:

Cheers

Parkeran

Corsair1963 · by **Corsair1963** » 20 Jul 2007, 00:41

Parkeran wrote:The F-18 I think has a good chance at taking down the F-16. The F-18 can take-off from just about anywhere as well as having the advantage of a better radar. Not only this but i'm a HUGE F-18 Hornet fan!

Cheers

Parkeran

Really, so many variables and that isn't even talking about the skills of the individual pilots.

As for being a HUGE Hornet fan. Does that also apply to the Super Hornet?

By the way..................glad to have you aboard!

FLY NAVY

Parkeran2 · by **Parkeran2** » 22 Jul 2007, 08:08

Hi,
I think that the Hornet and the F-16 both stand an equal chance ( even though I am a Hornet Fan). I think it all comes down to the skill of the pilot and the condition of the plane.
Keep Soaring High
Parkeran2

Pilotasso · by **Pilotasso** » 23 Jul 2007, 09:08

Danimal wrote:The F-16 does have lower wing loading, bleeding off less energy in high G turns, lower aspect ratio for quicker roll rates and a better thrust to weight ratio. The F/A-18 does have a slightly more capable radar package (until the APG-68 version 10) but despite all this they have nearly identical real world performance, especially if we're talking about super hornets and CJ's. However, speaking from experience, my unit's F-16CJ's consistently owned spanish F/A-18C's. Although I would most likely chalk that up for more experienced pilots plus we had JHMCS and they didn't. So realistically I'd say that the battle would go back and fourth with no clear cut winner.

Several things I would like to point out here. First of all, the plane that has higher wing loading is the F-16 not the Hornet. The Hornet radar is not only slightly superior, it is considerably superior. If your talking about APG-65 VS APG-68V9 then the difference is not too much but if your going to include the APG-70 then I have to completely disagree that they are on par.

Spanish F-18's are A MLU's not C's.

My country also trains frequently with Spains F-18's, and among Pilots in my country, they too find that the F-18's fall somewhat behind but only due to worse piloting on the part of the spanish drivers. As far as perfomance goes I have never heard anything bad so far. Infact our pilots say that their kit is better than ours (F-16 MLU). The recent aquisition of helmet mouted sights and (yet unspecified) IR targeting pods has narrowed the gap, but it does give the edge in a knife fight. It will be interesting to see what will happen when they meet again.

costadelmar · by **costadelmar** » 24 Jul 2007, 02:14

http://www.patricksaviation.com/videos/Guest/249/

Entropy · by **Entropy** » 24 Jul 2007, 02:26

They were both proposed by the same guy, Boyd, were they not. That's the way I understood it. If they were, wouldn't it just be natural that they perform similarly. Although, even though th M.C. has F-18s (and I do love them), I think the Viper would probably come out on top.

redbird87 · by **redbird87** » 04 Oct 2007, 03:32

I am not a big Hornet fan. I think its range limitations are very problematic. As a multi-purpose strike aircraft the Super Bug is inferior to the latest F-15E variants in every major way (cost, range, acceleration, speed, payload, radar power). Its supposed stealth advantage goes out the window with the huge drop tanks and external stores it must carry. The exception is the obvious carrier landing ability - which is kind of a big point granted:-) The Navy and a majority of their pilots seem to be very pleased with its handling and strike capabilities. Its avionics package is second only to the F-22 and F-35.

Comparing types currently available to US pilots, the Block 2 F-18 E/F with AESA radar suites and Joint-helmet mounted cueing system would at least equal, and probably best our latest F-16s assuming equal pilot skill. I am basing this on the fact that most modern A2A engagements are going to be very brief. The more the F-16 can lengthen the combat, the better its chances due to its advantages in fuel efficiency and retained energy. But the targeting systems and missiles are getting to be so good, I am not sure we can expect many drawn-out gun fights in the future. I could certainly be wrong about that. Please let me know what you all think.

agu · by **agu** » 27 Oct 2007, 18:52

F-16 will have no chance at all when put against FAF Hornet.

Pilotasso · by **Pilotasso** » 28 Oct 2007, 16:18

...so YOU think.

Scorpion1alpha · by **Scorpion1alpha** » 07 Nov 2007, 06:28

agu wrote:F-16 will have no chance at all when put against FAF Hornet.

What's an "FAF"?