F-16 Viper versus F-18 Hornet

Agreed, it will never be a fair fight but how would the F-16 match up against the ... ?
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

Pilotasso

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 532
  • Joined: 29 Oct 2006, 03:35

Unread post07 Nov 2007, 09:58

Scorpion1alpha wrote:
agu wrote:F-16 will have no chance at all when put against FAF Hornet.


:?:

What's an "FAF"?

Finish air force?
Offline

agu

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2007, 14:37

Unread post18 Nov 2007, 20:50

Yes..
Offline

Spartan-120

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 37
  • Joined: 21 Sep 2007, 05:27

Unread post25 Nov 2007, 02:23

redbird87 wrote: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.


But that's where the Super Hornet's unholy slow speed maneuverabilty comes into play. Just because it's out of energy doesn't mean it's no longer a threat, because it can still point its nose and weapons almost anywhere in the sky. +1 for the Super Hornet. And at those slower speeds the Super Hornet definitely has the F-16 at a disadvantage. If the F-16 tries to turn with the Super Hornet at those speeds, he's duck soup. If he stay at higher speeds, he runs the risk of overshooting, at which point he's probably duck soup. If he tries to come down on top of the Super Hornet, the Super Hornet can still nose up on him, giving him a nice look-up shot with his target silhouetted against the cold sky, at which point the F-16 is probably duck soup.

Any victory over the Super Hornet is going to come from pilot skill, because the Super Hornet is not a machine to be trifled with in close. It's no slouch at higher speeds and really excels at lower speeds. And when Block 3 comes online in a couple years, the F-16 is just going to have that much more trouble, because the Block 3 is going to be opening a whole new can of Ps with its new engines.
Offline

Pilotasso

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 532
  • Joined: 29 Oct 2006, 03:35

Unread post25 Nov 2007, 20:47

Spartan, any speed advantage can be converted into climbing manuevers, then use gravity as aid to turn faster into the opposition, if the hornet is slower it will have difficulty pulling up againts gravity, thus a falcon in the situation you described would infact find the F-18 low and slow in its sights while looking down. This is an elementary BFM tactic.
Offline

Spartan-120

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 37
  • Joined: 21 Sep 2007, 05:27

Unread post26 Nov 2007, 04:23

Pilotasso wrote:Spartan, any speed advantage can be converted into climbing manuevers, then use gravity as aid to turn faster into the opposition, if the hornet is slower it will have difficulty pulling up againts gravity, thus a falcon in the situation you described would infact find the F-18 low and slow in its sights while looking down. This is an elementary BFM tactic.


That's true, it's going to find the Super Hornet low and slow, but it will also find the Super Hornet looking right back at it. It does have enough power to nose up and pull up into the F-16 (with some effort). And if the SH noses into the Falcon while it's climbing above him and gets off a missile, the Falcon is going to lose a lot of that energy it had because now it's defensive and maneuvering hard to defeat that missile. At the least it's going to end up down a lot closer to the Super Hornet. And while the Falcon is busy being defensive, the Super Hornet will be using that time to accelerate and pick up its own energy margins (I'm assuming this is a Block 2 SH. Makes things a little harder for the SH. The Block 3 will be a whole new headache for the F-16). At which point the SH is right back in the game.
Offline

Pilotasso

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 532
  • Joined: 29 Oct 2006, 03:35

Unread post27 Nov 2007, 10:06

I dont know, in the first half of my message above I did say with nose high you can turn faster with gods G, so I doubt the hornet would be aiming back at the falcon with the same easiness. I think its more likely that the falcon would find the hornet still turning. I.e. exposing a great part of its plane to gunshots, but of course all this is academic, it depends much more on pilot skill and initial distance when the manuevers are initiated because both planes are too much matched to take any conclusions.
Offline

Spartan-120

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 37
  • Joined: 21 Sep 2007, 05:27

Unread post29 Nov 2007, 02:48

Pilotasso wrote:I dont know, in the first half of my message above I did say with nose high you can turn faster with gods G, so I doubt the hornet would be aiming back at the falcon with the same easiness. I think its more likely that the falcon would find the hornet still turning. I.e. exposing a great part of its plane to gunshots, but of course all this is academic, it depends much more on pilot skill and initial distance when the manuevers are initiated because both planes are too much matched to take any conclusions.


True, the Super Hornet and F-16 are well matched, but the two have enough performance differences that a mistake by either pilot will likely determine the fight fairly quickly. But the SH does have just enough power to nose up on the Falcon in just about any flight regime, and has the control authority to do so quite rapidly, even at slow speed. Definitely faster than a Falcon can pull over the top of a high yo-yo or similar maneuver. It also likes to hold its knots at those slow speeds.
Offline

Scorpion1alpha

F-16.net Moderator

F-16.net Moderator

  • Posts: 1659
  • Joined: 21 Oct 2005, 00:47

Unread post29 Nov 2007, 06:27

Pilotasso wrote:
Scorpion1alpha wrote:
agu wrote:F-16 will have no chance at all when put against FAF Hornet.


:?:

What's an "FAF"?

Finish air force?


Roger that.
Offline

avon1944

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 406
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2004, 02:03

Unread post05 Dec 2007, 02:09

Spartan-120 wrote:going to find the Super Hornet low and slow, but it will also find the Super Hornet looking right back at it

What a surprise, a carrier jet that has some of its best performance when low and slow. Just like around the 'boat'.

Adrian
Offline

the_Hudge

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 4
  • Joined: 01 Dec 2007, 19:40

Unread post09 Dec 2007, 19:42

The US Navy has a horrible record at spending and procurement policy. The A-12 and the choices over the A6 are proof of that.

ASW is lacking in the USN due to several reasons. There was a feeling that landbased P-3s and either the P7or P8 would tackle most of the downgraded sub threat from the PLAN, Iran and so on. The P8 continues to have delays, issues and will not reach the fleet until 2012. The trusty SH-60B/Fs like the Hornets and the S3s are wearing out as they have been used much more than anyone expected. The H-60 Romeos and Sierras will provide an answer to this but these new birds arent reaching the fleet fast enough. The P7 from all the VP and VS communities was a better platform than the selected P8. The P3/S3 and H60 was an effective ring protecting the various FFGs,DDs, and DDGs of the CVSG. The PLAN have show than even Song SSKs can get past the ASW provided by these ships and the outnumber and over worked H-60B/F.

There should always be some platform to CV based organic tanking. Im not sure how the Super Hornet matches up against the KA-6D. I do no that the Super Hornet is slow enough. Having it carrying fuel and a buddy store means that it will be a lousy BARCAP platform.


The Super Hornet is overweight, over priced and I think overrated. It's new and shiny so it doesnt have the gripes older platforms have. It doesnt deal with the supply problems with parts. It is slower than the C and even the EA-6, which can hit mach 1.8 in a dive. Sad to say, the F18E/F is the A6F in new skin.


There are the usual gripes from the former F14 people. Some are real concerns. As someone mentioned above, the F16 has a higher TTW than the F18A/C. The stronger engines of the Super Hornet are negated by the extra weight, larger wing area and increased drag. And the Super Hornet only tops out at Mach 1.6 if it is light enough. It cant climb, it cant enter or leave the fight the way other aircraft F14,F15.F16,F18,Rafale,Su30,33,J11 can.

The Super Hornet in my mind is the product of poor planning, some political consideration and simple lack of vision of the future.

We now have an CVW that lacks long distance ASW, long range Air Defense and strike. The TLAMs can tackle many targets at distant ranges but the Super Hornet cant carry buddy stores, AAMs, AGMs and be everwhere. The loos of speed means loss of flexibility.
Offline

Ozzy_Blizzard

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 88
  • Joined: 30 Sep 2007, 14:53

Unread post10 Dec 2007, 02:58

Guys SH may be a bit of a slouch in raw performance terms, but the block two is a far better BVR performer than allmost all of its contemporaries, including the cat. Its radar/missile combo and EW suite are practically world beaters and it is also a better strike platform. Whats goint to serve you better in BVR? Higher sprint speed or better instentainious turn rate? Or one of the best LPI radar systems operational anyware, arguably the most sophistocated EW/EWSP suite on a fighter, and some LO cahrecteristics? F/A-18E/F Bk II would shoot down a viper long before they ever merged. And even if they did, how much is maneuver going to help you when your facing an AIM 9X with its kinematic performance and off broadsight capability???
Offline

avon1944

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 406
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2004, 02:03

Unread post10 Dec 2007, 23:56

Ozzy, that is one of the most eloquent defenses of the Super Hornet I have ever read, thanx.

Adrian
Offline

Spartan-120

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 37
  • Joined: 21 Sep 2007, 05:27

Unread post11 Dec 2007, 05:07

Oh Hudge, just you wait until Block 3 joins the fleet in 2009. The F-16 will never know what hit it WVR. The main upgrade will be a full 25% increase in installed thrust (up from 44,000 to 55,000 pounds of thrust), for little or no increase in engine weight or SFC, through the use of advanced fan designs, materials, and construction techniques. This will pretty completely make up for any deficiencies in acceleration, top speed, rate of climb, and instantaneous/sustained maneuvering that the old Super Hornets might have had (what I've read says it was the equal of any -402 equipped F/A-18C up to Mach 1 in level flight).
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4756
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post15 Dec 2007, 02:52

yeah, the SH with the upgrade is going to have T/W to spare, beyond even what Eagles dream of, roughly 1.25 at full fuel (Eagle around 1.13, Raptor around 1.27). Its going to be a top shelf airplane as far as non VLO is concerned
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline

Dedaylewis

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 8
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2008, 00:58

Unread post10 May 2008, 22:46

:D As you all know twin engine aircraft are better in the fight. For the sole reason that Two engines are better than one.
PreviousNext

Return to F-16 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest