Commander Naval Air Forces wants more F/A-18s

Program progress, politics, orders, and speculation
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4184
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az

Unread post20 May 2018, 15:43

Thanks basher!
"Spurts"

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

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 22823
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post21 May 2018, 01:21

BooSucks to be BOING! Why would not BOING! go ALL OUT to help the Hornet Customers find a fix? Make sense somebody.
NASA Finds Boeing Showed ‘No Initiative’ To Fix F/A-18 Hypoxia [LARA MILKS THIS STORY I RECKON]
21 May 2018 Lara Seligman

"In a little-noticed addendum to NASA’s report on the unexplained physiological episodes plaguing U.S. Navy F/A-18 pilots, the agency concluded that Boeing, the manufacturer, showed “no initiative” to fix the problem.

But Boeing is pushing back, arguing that it has long been a “proactive partner” in the Navy’s efforts to mitigate the harrowing cockpit events. The company says it took on a significantly larger role in the Navy-led investigation in 2017, during the tail end of the NASA review.

Despite more than 450 physiological episodes (PE) on Boeing’s F/A-18 strike fighter fleet, the aerospace giant has over the years depended “almost entirely” on the Navy to identify and correct the problem, according to the NASA report dated September 2017.

“What this review of Boeing’s PE involvement suggests is that Boeing, the manufacturer of the F/A-18 (a fighter with a long history of PE episodes), has shown a very limited effort on its own initiative to describe a problem with their product to their customer, and no initiative to actually correct the problem,” the report reads....

...“The NASA report conveyed that this problem emerged in 2009 and involved more than 450 incidents through late 2017, and that the contractor could have initiated and provided more engineering support services—services for which they charged the federal government,” Tsongas [Rep. Niki Tsongas (D-Mass.)] says.... ["money money money - must be funny - in a rich mans world" ABBA]

...Boeing briefed Navy leadership on the review, and as a result, in March 2017, the company was elevated to the role of co-lead for the Navy’s Physiological Episodes Action Team (PEAT), led by Rear Adm. Sara Joyner, Gillian says.

“The specific charter of Boeing as the co-lead of that PE team was to create and implement and drive a comprehensive root-cause corrective action (RCCA) process, pulling from around Boeing, pulling from our experience on F-22, pulling from our experience on 787, the best of Boeing, [and] bringing the medical community in,” Gillian [Dan Gillian, Boeing’s F/A-18 and EA-18G program manager] says. The goal was “to really [pursue this], starting with the human, ending with the human.”..." [lots of other BOING! stuff and acronyms to read about]

Source: http://aviationweek.com/defense/nasa-fi ... 18-hypoxia
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7676
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post21 May 2018, 01:46

That's a damning NASA report.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3192
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post21 May 2018, 14:07

Why should Boeing show any initiative? Congress keeps funding the Hornet/Super Hornet/Super Duper Hornet ad infinitum. There's no end to it. What began in 1982 as an F-4/A-7 replacement has replaced the entire fleet air arm!

And now, with the F-35C allegedly on the horizon they KEEP funding it! As the title of this thread so eloquently states the Navy, Congress, and any near peer that knows anything about tomorrow's contested battlespace want more Hornets for the US Navy too..
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5880
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post21 May 2018, 14:50

spazsinbad wrote:BooSucks to be BOING! Why would not BOING! go ALL OUT to help the Hornet Customers find a fix? Make sense somebody.
NASA Finds Boeing Showed ‘No Initiative’ To Fix F/A-18 Hypoxia [LARA MILKS THIS STORY I RECKON]
21 May 2018 Lara Seligman

"In a little-noticed addendum to NASA’s report on the unexplained physiological episodes plaguing U.S. Navy F/A-18 pilots, the agency concluded that Boeing, the manufacturer, showed “no initiative” to fix the problem.

But Boeing is pushing back, arguing that it has long been a “proactive partner” in the Navy’s efforts to mitigate the harrowing cockpit events. The company says it took on a significantly larger role in the Navy-led investigation in 2017, during the tail end of the NASA review.

Despite more than 450 physiological episodes (PE) on Boeing’s F/A-18 strike fighter fleet, the aerospace giant has over the years depended “almost entirely” on the Navy to identify and correct the problem, according to the NASA report dated September 2017.

“What this review of Boeing’s PE involvement suggests is that Boeing, the manufacturer of the F/A-18 (a fighter with a long history of PE episodes), has shown a very limited effort on its own initiative to describe a problem with their product to their customer, and no initiative to actually correct the problem,” the report reads....

...“The NASA report conveyed that this problem emerged in 2009 and involved more than 450 incidents through late 2017, and that the contractor could have initiated and provided more engineering support services—services for which they charged the federal government,” Tsongas [Rep. Niki Tsongas (D-Mass.)] says.... ["money money money - must be funny - in a rich mans world" ABBA]

...Boeing briefed Navy leadership on the review, and as a result, in March 2017, the company was elevated to the role of co-lead for the Navy’s Physiological Episodes Action Team (PEAT), led by Rear Adm. Sara Joyner, Gillian says.

“The specific charter of Boeing as the co-lead of that PE team was to create and implement and drive a comprehensive root-cause corrective action (RCCA) process, pulling from around Boeing, pulling from our experience on F-22, pulling from our experience on 787, the best of Boeing, [and] bringing the medical community in,” Gillian [Dan Gillian, Boeing’s F/A-18 and EA-18G program manager] says. The goal was “to really [pursue this], starting with the human, ending with the human.”..." [lots of other BOING! stuff and acronyms to read about]

Source: http://aviationweek.com/defense/nasa-fi ... 18-hypoxia


Maybe someday the Super Hornet will finally be ready.
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 22823
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post23 May 2018, 01:59

Missed this slightly old article earlier but here 'tis now.... Yep the Shornet will be available for some 'ventilatin' soonish. BUT WAIT - There's moar…. Mebbe BOING! does not have to FIX anything - no wonder they are draggin' dose chains....
Here’s how House lawmakers plan to fix the US military’s hypoxia problem
17/8 May 2018 Valerie Insinna

"WASHINGTON — The U.S. Navy and Air Force still don’t know what is causing an influx of physiological episodes impacting pilots of tactical aircraft like the F-35 and F/A-18 Hornet, but House lawmakers are dealing with it in a characteristically congressional fashion: by ordering studies and throwing money at the problem....

...The symptoms — shortness of breath and disorientation — are similar throughout the cases but could actually be signs of different conditions including hypoxia, also known as oxygen deficiency; or hypocapnia and hypercapnia, which is when carbon dioxide levels in the blood reach abnormally low and high levels, respectively....

...Despite several years of investigative work by both services, there seems to be no smoking gun causing the PEs, so the services have responded by making targeted modifications to impacted aircraft....

...“If there’s any system that has that key interface between the human and the machine, it’s the air-breathing system. So anytime we get into one of these, we have the challenge of understanding the human performance versus what the machine is producing.”

Here’s a rundown of what HASC wants to do to get to the bottom of the PE issue:

---- • Add $10 million to accelerate the development of technologies that could identify or mitigate PEs.

---- • On all contracts for new fighter, attack or training jets, require Air Force and Navy secretaries to certify that new aircraft will come equipped with the latest equipment available to allay PEs.

---- • Modify F/A-18s with a host of new or updated devices, such as a new cockpit altimeter, upgraded onboard oxygen-generation system, redesigned life support systems, improved physiological monitoring and alert systems, and installation of an automatic ground collision and avoidance system. The Navy secretary must submit a report to Congress by February 2019 on its progress toward making these upgrades.

---- • Require the Navy to submit a report on modifications to the T-45 and its ground equipment made since 2017 to help ameliorate PEs. The service, in its assessment, should also indicate the cost of the upgrades and whether they were successful in addressing the problem.

---- • Call for a similar report from the Air Force on its efforts to address physiological episodes in F-35s, T-6s or any other tactical aircraft impacted by the issue.

The legislation does give the Navy and Air Force a backdoor that would allow those services to forego the requirements to equip new jets and F/A-18s with PE-mitigating technologies. According to the current language, the service secretary may waive those requirements if it’s determined to be in the service’s best interest, but the secretary must justify the decision to Congress.

Pawlikowski said the Air Force has put its resources in the right places to get after the PE problem. But the service is waiting on test equipment from industry so it can speed up its investigative efforts. “Some of the things that are slowing us down with respect to the test is just the availability of some of the measurement equipment and the test equipment. It just is a matter of getting industry geared up to build them for us,” she said."

Photo: "Lt. Clayton Shaw, an instructor pilot from the Navy's Training Squadron Ten, participates in testing of equipment meant to provide early warning signs to pilots before feeling symptoms of hypoxia. (MC2 Michael J. Lieberknecht/U.S. Navy)" https://www.armytimes.com/resizer/tr0JD ... uality(100)/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-mco.s3.amazonaws.com/public/OPA5OITFFFHYLM4POZVOQJL56M.jpg


Source: https://www.defensenews.com/air/2018/05 ... a-problem/
Attachments
OPA5OITFFFHYLM4POZVOQJL56M.jpg
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 22823
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post24 May 2018, 04:19

Boeing Touts Block III Super Hornet’s Better Range, Improved Digital Connectivity to Fleet
23 May 2018 Ben Werner

"...In 2013 Boeing developed a plan that would make the Super Hornet 50-percent stealthier than its already-low-radar signature design, Boeing’s F-18 program manager Dan Gillian told reporters on Wednesday. But the Navy reportedly balked at the plan, explaining they don’t need Super Hornets to be extremely low observable – the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lighting II Joint Strike Fighter accomplishes that – but rather they need an F-18 to stay on station longer, deliver more weapons and be better integrated into the Naval Integrated Fire Control-Counter Air (NIFC-CA) system, Gillian said.

“The Navy’s carrier air wing doesn’t need us to be at F-35 level of stealth to perform the missions the carrier air wing has to do,” Gillian said. “They need us to improve our radar cross section and they need us to carry large amounts of ordinance far forward.”

The end result, according to Boeing, is that the Block III Super Hornets are only slightly stealthier than Block II fighters but will have greater range and the ability to carry more weapons on a more robust airframe designed to last up to 9,000 flight hours – about a decade longer than the current airframes. The jets will also have far superior data processing and communications capabilities than previous versions....

...Within six years from now, half the total Super Hornet inventory will be the Block III planes, Gillian said. Within a decade, the entire Super Hornet fleet assigned to carrier air wings – about 480 aircraft – will be Block III jets. This includes 116 new-build Super Hornets and modernizing about 364 Block II airframes. The Navy will retain about 100 Block I Super Hornets for training purposes.

Boeing focused its Block III development on outfitting Super Hornets with an Advanced Network Infrastructure, using systems already part of the Boeing EA-18G Growler electronic warfare aircraft, Gillian said. Block III Super Hornets will have the Distributed Targeting Processor Network (DTP-N), which is 17-times more powerful than the previous systems. Block III Super Hornets are also getting the Tactical Targeting Networking Technology (TTNT) data link and satellite communications for advanced network connectivity.

The improved networking onboard Block III Super Hornets, though, still doesn’t address a vexing problem for the Navy’s future air wing – finding a way for F-35 jets to communicate with other platforms without losing their stealth. Boeing officials conceded they’re still working on a solution but would not elaborate.

Perhaps the most visible change to the jets is the location of fuel tanks on Block III Super Hornets. Instead of carrying external drop-tanks as previous versions did, the Block III Super Hornets will have conformal fuel tanks installed behind the cockpit on the jet’s shoulders. These hold slightly less fuel, but because they are lighter and make the jet more aerodynamic the end result is an increased range of about 129 nautical miles, Gillian said.

More importantly to the pilots, the new fuel tanks will allow the Super Hornets to remain on station longer and carry more weapons, Capt. Dave Kindley, the Navy’s F/A-18 and EA-18G program manager, said.

“As an operator, there is some interest in range, but there’s fascination with time. If I can get 100 miles farther, that’s awesome. But if I can stay in the air and support someone on the ground for 20 minutes or 30 minutes more, that’s much, much more interesting to us,” Kindley said."

Source: https://news.usni.org/2018/05/23/33808
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5400
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post24 May 2018, 05:15

Boeing is just spinning the Super Hornet to the best of it's abilities. Yet, it's really nothing more than a "Dog and Pony Show". As the fact is the Block III isn't really version of the Advance Super Hornet that many expected the USN would acquire. It's just a modest upgrade that with allow the Super Hornet to keep up and work with the F-35C. While, hanging around for another decade of so....


The real truth is the Super Hornets will start to be replaced in ever increasing numbers over the next 10-12 years. As a matter of fact the first F-35C Unit to reach IOC. (combat coded) Will be VFA-147 the "Argonauts". Which, just traded in their F/A-18E Super Hornets for F-35C's.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 22823
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post24 May 2018, 08:45

Boeing, U.S. Navy To Add F/A-18 Collision Avoidance System [BEST READ ALL AT SOURCE]
23 May 2018 Lara Seligman and Guy Norris

"Boeing and the U.S. Navy are working to add an automatic ground collision avoidance system to the F/A-18 strike fighter in the hope of saving pilot lives. The move is in response to an anticipated congressional mandate in the forthcoming defense policy bill for fiscal 2019, Capt. David Kindley, F/A-18 and EA-18G program manager, told reporters during an event at Boeing’s facility in Arlington, Virginia, May 23.

Instead of building a new system from scratch or porting over the Automatic Ground Collision Avoidance System (Auto-GCAS), which has been credited with saving seven U.S. Air Force F-16 pilots since its fielding in 2014, the joint Boeing-Navy team plans to upgrade the existing Terrain Awareness Warning System (TAWS) on the F/A-18 Super Hornet, Kindley said.

TAWS already provides the warning piece, loudly instructing the pilot to “pull up, pull up,” if he or she gets too close to the ground, Kindley said. But it does not automatically prevent a crash if the pilot is incapacitated due to G-LOC, hypoxia, or other factors. “The good news on the Super Hornet is that we already have the initial infrastructure in place. All we have to do is turn it into inputs in the flight control system, which I don’t know that that’s necessarily trivial,” Kindley said. “Right now the tie to the flight control system does not exist. The wiring does exist but the software command to the flight control system does not.”

The program office could implement the capability as soon as 2021, but the timeline depends on how the Navy decides to implement the system, Kindley said. The Navy also appears to be mulling various recovery maneuvers ranging from the baseline rolling wings level and high-G pull recovery adopted by the Air Force for the F-16, to more sophisticated options such as preprogrammed altitude recovery or positional preset altitude and hold maneuvers as a response to G-LOC or disorientation.

Boeing will likely develop the software, while the government will be responsible for testing it, he added.
The U.S. Marine Corps is working on a similar capability for its legacy Hornets, but has settled on a basic automatic roll-and-pull recovery system.

“Do you want a seven-G pull which could lock you again? Do you want to pull up and level off to a certain altitude? Do you want to pull up to a certain altitude and fly to some particular place in orbit?” Kindley said. “The Marine Corps really just wants to get away from the ground in that first [instance] and then hopefully that gives the pilot enough time to start flying again; the Navy is I think working through how complex they want to make it from there.”...

...Auto GCAS was developed by an Air Force Research Laboratory-led team including the Office of the Secretary of Defense, NASA, Air Combat Command, Air Force Test Center, and Lockheed Martin. Flight testing of the system on Lockheed’s F-35 is scheduled to begin in September at Edwards AFB, California, following the decision to accelerate implementation on the new fighter."

Source: http://aviationweek.com/defense/boeing- ... nce-system
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1983
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post24 May 2018, 09:36

Corsair1963 wrote:Boeing is just spinning the Super Hornet to the best of it's abilities. Yet, it's really nothing more than a "Dog and Pony Show". As the fact is the Block III isn't really version of the Advance Super Hornet that many expected the USN would acquire. It's just a modest upgrade that with allow the Super Hornet to keep up and work with the F-35C. While, hanging around for another decade of so....


The real truth is the Super Hornets will start to be replaced in ever increasing numbers over the next 10-12 years. As a matter of fact the first F-35C Unit to reach IOC. (combat coded) Will be VFA-147 the "Argonauts". Which, just traded in their F/A-18E Super Hornets for F-35C's.



Yes, I agree and share the same opinion.
A 4th/4.5th gen fighter aircraft stands about as much chance against a F-35 as a guns-only Sabre has against a Viper.
Offline

loke

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 753
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2008, 19:07

Unread post25 May 2018, 15:25

spazsinbad wrote:
...Auto GCAS was developed by an Air Force Research Laboratory-led team including the Office of the Secretary of Defense, NASA, Air Combat Command, Air Force Test Center, and Lockheed Martin.

Source: http://aviationweek.com/defense/boeing- ... nce-system

Is this a new iteration of the F-16 Auto GCAS? If yes, then Saab and FMV was also involved in the development ;)
Sweden's Forsvarets Materielverk (FMV) and Saab participated in Auto-GCAS development and flight tests, and cofunded the program with the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory under a collaborative agreement. Four Swedish air force pilots have flown Auto-GCAS demonstration profiles at Edwards AFB, and their assessment of the system's viability was very positive.


http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article8.html
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 22823
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post25 May 2018, 16:10

"Is this a new iteration of the F-16 Auto GCAS?..." NO. Read the article - it clearly states:
"...Instead of building a new system from scratch or porting over the Automatic Ground Collision Avoidance System (Auto-GCAS), ... the joint Boeing-Navy team plans to upgrade the existing Terrain Awareness Warning System (TAWS) on the F/A-18 Super Hornet, Kindley said....

...Boeing will likely develop the software, while the government will be responsible for testing it, he added...."
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 22823
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post25 May 2018, 17:23

Because this F-16 website was down for a few hours I have some catching up to do (and so does AvWeak - this URL not available for the moment - what's new): http://aviationweek.com/defense/super-h ... sor-fusion
"Super Hornet Demonstrates ‘Eye-Watering’ Sensor Fusion Lara Seligman | Aerospace Daily & Defense Report
"During Fleet Exercise 2017, two U.S. Navy Super Hornets were able to fuse data from multiple sensors on both aircraft in near real-time to form a “common tactical picture,” Boeing says." OK the website is BACK!
Super Hornet Demonstrates ‘Eye-Watering’ Sensor Fusion [EVERYTHING OLD IS NEW AGAIN. F-35 Buehler?]
24 May 2018 Lara Seligman

"Two Boeing F/A-18 Super Hornets recently demonstrated sensor fusion, a sophisticated information-sharing capability most commonly associated with Lockheed Martin’s F-35. During Fleet Exercise 2017, the two naval strike fighters were able to fuse data from multiple sensors on both aircraft in near real-time to form a “common tactical picture,” Bob Kornegay, business development manager for the F/A-18E/F and EA-18G Programs at Boeing, told reporters May 23 during a briefing at the company’s Arlington, Virginia, facility.

This capability greatly improves each pilot’s situational awareness and targeting ability, he said. “The feedback we got from the users was that it was eye-watering, they were seeing things and getting weapons-quality tracks at ranges they’d never been able to hit before,” Kornegay said. [SUCK IT UP BOING! F-35 is already there]

The aircraft combined information from three different sensors: an infrared search and track (IRST), which allows the Super Hornet to detect and track threats from a distance without giving away its own position; the Tactical Targeting Network Technology (TTNT) radio, which provides a bigger pipe for passing information; and an advanced computer called the Distributed Targeting Processor Network (DTPN)…. [BEST READ IT ALL AT SOURCE]

...Lockheed touts sensor fusion as a game changer for the F-35, but the company has struggled to perfect the capability. [MY OH MY - the LIES & FUD from this Lassie - unbelievable] The next step for both fighters will be fusing information between the Super Hornet and the F-35, which are planned to complement each other in the future carrier air wing. [AS IF and good plan if it works out - but hey the F-35 will be the problem - NO? <sarc off>]

Source: http://aviationweek.com/defense/super-h ... sor-fusion
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Online

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8293
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post25 May 2018, 18:04

Welcome to what the F-35 was doing ~10 years ago :cheers:
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline
User avatar

doge

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 195
  • Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 16:07

Unread post25 May 2018, 19:17

Articles with Features and future Timeline written.
https://breakingdefense.com/2018/05/nav ... -for-f-35/
Navy, Boeing Tout Block III Super Hornet As Partner For F-35
Once touted by President Trump himself as an alternative to the F-35, the souped-up Super Hornet is now firmly established as its partner.
By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR. on May 23, 2018 at 6:05 PM

Features & Timeline
To make this symbiosis work, the Super Hornet needs new electronics, which are one of the most prominent features of the Block III model. Upgrading to Block III adds
    ● the Lockheed Martin MUOS (Mobile User Objective System) satellite communications link to share data with friendly forces too far away for line-of-sight radio.
    ● the Rockwell Collins TTNT (Tactical Targeting Network Technology) network also found on the EA-18G Growler (itself a Super Hornet variant) and E-2G Hawkeye, allowing rapid transfer of large amounts of data even in the face of hostile jamming. TTNT is in turn part of the NIFC-CA (Naval Integrated Fire Control – Counter-Air) system.
    ● the Distributed Targeting Processor-Networked (DTP-N), which handles all that data onboard the aircraft, boasting 17 times •the processor speed of current (Block II) Super Hornets and an open architecture for easier upgrades in the future.
    ● the Infrared Search and Track (IRST) sensor, which is bought under a separate program; not every Block III Super Hornet will have the sensor (or need it, since it’s mainly relevant to air-to-air combat, not anti-ship or ground attack missions). A single aircraft with ISRT can only determine what direction the enemy is in, but two aircraft sharing data over TTNT can triangulate the precise location, giving targeting-quality data.
    ● the Advanced Cockpit System (ACS) to pull together all the data from these different sensors and networks into a clear and intuitive picture.
    ● conformal fuel tanks which fit snugly against the aircraft’s hull, streamlined so they don’t create aerodynamic drag or glaring radar reflections like traditional drop tanks. As a result, the Block III will be able to strike targets about 120 nautical miles further away than the Block II or stay on station longer over friendly forces it’s protecting.
    ● a 10 percent reduction in radar cross section, although this will be more than cancelled out by carrying missiles under the wing.
    ● a 50 percent increase in service life, from 6,000 to 9,000 flight hours. To last this much longer, new-construction Block IIIs will have redesigned and stronger components, while existing Block IIs being upgraded to IIIs will have their structure reinforced in key places.
What’s the timeline to deliver all this?
    ● 2019: Boeing will deliver two test jets to the Navy.
    ● Late 2020: Serial production of new Block IIIs will begin in late 2020 at Boeing’s Saint Louis plant.
    ● 2021: Conformal fuel tanks for the planes will finish testing and enter service.
    ● 2022: Boeing will begin converting existing Block IIs to Block IIIs, both in Saint Louis and at a new facility in San Antonio. The first operational squadron of Block IIIs will deploy.
PreviousNext

Return to Program and politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests