Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

I recently read that Boeing was possibly going to be offering the F414 EPE for the Super Hornet to potential export customers (ie India). That's great. What about the USN?!? The Super Hornet is already a pretty good, "jack of all trades," replacement for many fleet aircraft, but I think many would agree that a lack of thrust has been one of the major complaints about the aircraft. It seems as though the EPE would give the Rhino a spectacular t/w ratio and make it a much more dynamic performer in the air to air role, combining already superb low speed maneuverability with the ability to also fight a high energy dogfight like an Eagle or Viper. Also, would the EPE get the Super Hornet over the Mach 2 threshold or is it just too draggy? VFA-122 got one up to 1.84 without EPE.

F-16.net Sponsor

weez wrote:

I recently read that Boeing was possibly going to be offering the F414 EPE for the Super Hornet to potential export customers (ie India). That's great. What about the USN?!? The Super Hornet is already a pretty good, "jack of all trades," replacement for many fleet aircraft, but I think many would agree that a lack of thrust has been one of the major complaints about the aircraft. It seems as though the EPE would give the Rhino a spectacular t/w ratio and make it a much more dynamic performer in the air to air role, combining already superb low speed maneuverability with the ability to also fight a high energy dogfight like an Eagle or Viper. Also, would the EPE get the Super Hornet over the Mach 2 threshold or is it just too draggy? VFA-122 got one up to 1.84 without EPE.

Lack of thrust hasn't been one of the major complaints by the USN.

I didn't mean to suggest that the USN complained about a lack of thrust, but rather that it was a general opinion. I would also think that what the USN thinks and what the pilots think about the Rhino's thrust (or lack thereof) may be completely different. In comparison, the hornet family of aircraft do not have the thrust to weight ratio of other notable 4th generation fighters. Wouldn't the EPE at least bring them up to par performance wise?

Quote:

Lack of thrust hasn't been one of the major complaints by the USN.

Interesting. If the Navy has any, what are they? Range? Weapons load? Avionics? Reliability?

WEEZ,

Curious if you read something official along that line recently, or just some chatter among the blogger types?? It's kind of unclear too, as some sources, i.e. wiki, would seem to designate the more mature engine upgrade development to date being EDE version, with EPE being down the line from that? Some chatter would seem to inter-change them.

If anything, USN would probably opt for a future EDE upgrade configured for added reliability, fuel efficiency and engine life?

Set on higher thrust mode though, it would apparently equate to something around a T/W of 1.28/1 at half-fuel which could likely enable much better rate of climb and higher-altitude, sustained maneuvering.

weez wrote:

I didn't mean to suggest that the USN complained about a lack of thrust, but rather that it was a general opinion. I would also think that what the USN thinks and what the pilots think about the Rhino's thrust (or lack thereof) may be completely different. In comparison, the hornet family of aircraft do not have the thrust to weight ratio of other notable 4th generation fighters. Wouldn't the EPE at least bring them up to par performance wise?

Well, the opinion would be very different depending on whether you're flying echoes (medium attack) for foxtrots (fleet defense).

If the Navy is pleased with the current reliability, efficiency and maintainability of the current F414 engines, then I say go with the EPE upgrade as long as it it's not a step backwards in any of those categories. If Super Hornets are modified to accepted CFTs, then that added thrust will probably be appreciated.

weez wrote:

Also, would the EPE get the Super Hornet over the Mach 2 threshold or is it just too draggy? VFA-122 got one up to 1.84 without EPE.

Static engine thrust is one thing thrust development at high mach and altitude yet another thing. The engine/inlet combo as well as overall aerodynamics and materials have an impact on speed performance. I don't think the F/A-18 would hit mach 2. Not that this is relevant anyway.

geogen,

This is the source I was referring to (an Indian one). Seems like blogger type/non official stuff, and is also a year old.
http://kuku.sawf.org/Articles/58023.aspx

Scorpion82 wrote:

weez wrote:

Also, would the EPE get the Super Hornet over the Mach 2 threshold or is it just too draggy? VFA-122 got one up to 1.84 without EPE.

Static engine thrust is one thing thrust development at high mach and altitude yet another thing. The engine/inlet combo as well as overall aerodynamics and materials have an impact on speed performance. I don't think the F/A-18 would hit mach 2. Not that this is relevant anyway.

I suspect the higher thrust would improve the acceleration, and ability to maintain airspeed during sustained maneuvers, more so than pushing it beyond M2.

I agree, wrightwing, a better sustained turn rate would certainly be more important than all out top speed.

discofishing wrote:

If the Navy is pleased with the current reliability, efficiency and maintainability of the current F414 engines, then I say go with the EPE upgrade as long as it it's not a step backwards in any of those categories. If Super Hornets are modified to accepted CFTs, then that added thrust will probably be appreciated.

It would definitely be interesting to know how far along to maturity a successful power upgrade setting is coming in this development. I for one have been in the steadily growing camp of thought, supporting it for USN Super Hornets. It could be conceivable that some of the future SH could receive this engine set in the 'fuel efficiency' mode and some installed in the 'performance enhanced' setting.

As far as the CFT configuration goes, well... when coupled with a centerline tank, for starters the off-angled wing-tanks would no long be necessary, which would translate into obviously improved aerodynamics, acceleration, cruise speed, range, etc., even with a standard F414. imho.