F-16.net

marauder2048 wrote:

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:No engines or radar or EW equipment etc you mean?

There's typically some EW equipment like the RWR and sometimes IDECM.

35_aoa wrote:

marauder2048 wrote:

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:No engines or radar or EW equipment etc you mean?

There's typically some EW equipment like the RWR and sometimes IDECM.

No idea who works what contract, but the jets come off the St Louis line without any RWR or IDECM components (technically speaking, ALR-67(v)3 is inherent to IDECM). Those are all post delivery maintenance actions. Engines and radar do come with the plane however.

SpudmanWP wrote:The entire SH Program has been the epitome of obfuscation from day one.

sunstersun wrote:although it probably is important that boeing's production lines stay open in order to compete for the f/a-xx

neptune wrote:

35_aoa wrote:

marauder2048 wrote:There's typically some EW equipment like the RWR and sometimes IDECM.

No idea who works what contract, but the jets come off the St Louis line without any RWR or IDECM components (technically speaking, ALR-67(v)3 is inherent to IDECM). Those are all post delivery maintenance actions. Engines and radar do come with the plane however.

...does Boeing deliver them with the AESA or is the "Canoe Club" buying the prehistoric version?

marauder2048 wrote:

sunstersun wrote:although it probably is important that boeing's production lines stay open in order to compete for the f/a-xx

I have to question this premise given that during the time that they've been producing the Super Bug,
Boeing has lost practically every competition for an air-breather that has to survive in a high threat environment.
The most recent example being LRSO.

neurotech wrote:LRSO risk-reduction contracts went to Northrop and Boeing.
https://www.dodbuzz.com/2017/08/21/nort ... ear-icbms/

When F/A-XX comes along (unless they buy a lot of MQ-25s) they'll keep the SuperBugs as carrier launched tankers.

neurotech wrote:Do they make APG-73 radar units anymore? Even most non-US operators upgraded to APG-73 radar a long time ago. Super Hornet Block II jets all have have APG-79 AESA radar, with exception of early Block II Lot 25 jets, which still had APG-73 from the factory.

The APG-79(V)X is intended for legacy Hornets, and is scaled down to fit the smaller nose. I'm not sure the Marines jets will be upgraded, but some non-US operators might upgrade.

neurotech wrote:

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:

spazsinbad wrote:SOME MORE GRIST FOR THE Super Hornet Price MILL... $677 million divided by 14 say (yes total Es & Fs) equals? ........?

~$48M each, not much at all. The joy of buying "replacements" for something you already operate is that you don't need all the support equipment.

The $48M per aircraft doesn't include F414 engines (2x $5.4m), radar is $6.2m, plus avionics and accessories that are basically required to get the jet to flyaway. Each Rhino costs $78m flyaway (FY17). The recent FY16/FY17/FY18 purchases include $15m each for engineering support, but no additional ground equipment or initial spares. The 2 FY17 jets were OCO funded due to combat related losses.

maus92 wrote:F414 engines are ~3.9M each for FY17, so add 8M for the engines. The radar and most other electronics are CFE/E (furnished by the contractor, i.e. Boeing from subcontractors) for the Super Hornet, so add ~3M for GFE/E (furnished by the Navy from other contracts.) So that's $48.2M for the airframes and most electronics; $8M for engines; and $3M for misc systems, for ~$60M URF.

$5.4m per F414 engine.

$14.1m for "ancillary equipment such as: Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System (JHMCS), Integrated Defensive Electronic Countermeasures (IDECM)/Radio Frequency Counter Measures (RFCM) ALQ-214 EFC, ALR-67, and External Fuel Tank."

neurotech wrote:The APG-79(V)X is intended for legacy Hornets, and is scaled down to fit the smaller nose. I'm not sure the Marines jets will be upgraded, but some non-US operators might upgrade.

NAVAIR Engineers Target F/A-18 Physiological Events
25 Sep 2017 FRCSW Public Affairs

"NAVAL AIR STATION NORTH ISLAND, Calif. - A group of Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) engineers intend to solve a troubling and dangerous problem that has been experienced by pilots who fly all variants of the F/A-18 Hornet airframe: decompression sickness, or Physiological Events (PE).

During a PE, a pilot may experience confusion, dizziness or even the loss of consciousness due to hypoxia, or the lack of an adequate supply of oxygen. So far, more than 500 PEs including decompression sickness and hypoxia have been documented.

Kyle Zust, F/A-18 Environmental Control Systems (ECS) Cabin Pressure Test Lab (CPTL) Project Lead, suspects that problems with the airframes cabin pressurization system may be contributing to PE events.

“The inability of the cabin to maintain proper pressure has been recorded in F/A-18 A-F and EA-18G aircraft. Improper cabin pressure on the ground and during flight can result in a PE,” Zust said. “We have documented occurrences during the life cycle of this aircraft that have stated issues with cabin pressure. Approximately six years ago, the F/A-18 and EA-18G Fleet Support Team (FST) created a PE tracking system which has allowed us to gather information following a PE to investigate the occurrences.”

To test and verify cabin pressure anomalies, Zust and NAVAIR lead engineer Sean Alexander formed an engineering team in September 2016 and designed and built a testing laboratory in Buildings 486 and 487 at Fleet Readiness Center Southwest (FRCSW)....

...“We have gained a clearer understanding of how the F/A-18 cabin pressurization components are performing at the system level,” Cummins said. “We are currently systematically testing flight profiles to better understand the system variables that drive the system pressurization overshoots and cabin surging. We believe we are heading in the right direction.”

“By creating this lab we will gain the system level test capability that will ensure our aircrew can come home safely to their families, and also be effective down range,” Zust said."

Photo: "Aerospace engineer Nathan Cox operates the pressurization test lab control station while fellow aerospace engineer Duy Nguyen, foreground, monitors the inside of the test chamber. (U.S. Navy photo)" http://www.navair.navy.mil/img/uploads/DSC_00101.JPG (2.8Mb)

Source: http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fu ... ry&id=6648

spazsinbad wrote:Heaven forfend that Canada buys known 'not functioning' SHornet - maybe they'll fly low enuf no pressure - needed? ...