Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet

[sferrin]

Well, yes, Boeing does have a man behind the curtain and if you read the right articles by the right people you will find out who he is.

One point that is important is that with the best possible news about JSF, the Navy still has a mixed force with substantial numbers of Growlers and Super H, 20 years from now, so any investment has a reasonable payoff period.

Numbers such as "50 per cent improvement in RCS" are always squishy. But when we talk about external loads automatically having a sky-high RCS, we're forgetting to look at the fine print in some of the briefing docs we've seen over the years. Again, the right articles by the right people...

I notice you seem to have glossed over the drag issue. Those external internal weapons contraptions will have it in spades. It'd need three of those just to carry even what an F-35B carries internally. Will go along perfectly with the Super Hornets extra air-brakes, I mean "pylons". Should handle like Porky Pig.

 

[Sundog]

I notice you seem to have glossed over the drag issue. Those external internal weapons contraptions will have it in spades. It'd need three of those just to carry even what an F-35B carries internally. Will go along perfectly with the Super Hornets extra air-brakes, I mean "pylons". Should handle like Porky Pig.

The problem with this is, the F-35 is a pig by virtue of it's internal weapons carriage and STOVL requirements and there aren't any mods that will cure that. It has terrible transonic acceleration as a result.

 

[sferrin]

I notice you seem to have glossed over the drag issue. Those external internal weapons contraptions will have it in spades. It'd need three of those just to carry even what an F-35B carries internally. Will go along perfectly with the Super Hornets extra air-brakes, I mean "pylons". Should handle like Porky Pig.

The problem with this is, the F-35 is a pig by virtue of it's internal weapons carriage and STOVL requirements and there aren't any mods that will cure that. It has terrible transonic acceleration as a result.

Terrible compared to a comparably loaded aircraft? For instance, throw 2 2000lb bombs, a pair of AIM-120s, a pair of drop tanks, an ECM pod on the centerline and targeting/nav pods (all of which is inside the OML on an F-35) on an F-16 or Hornet and let's see how they accelerate. Furthermore, let's see them reach Mach 1.6 in that configuration.

 

[bobbymike]

I notice you seem to have glossed over the drag issue. Those external internal weapons contraptions will have it in spades. It'd need three of those just to carry even what an F-35B carries internally. Will go along perfectly with the Super Hornets extra air-brakes, I mean "pylons". Should handle like Porky Pig.

The problem with this is, the F-35 is a pig by virtue of it's internal weapons carriage and STOVL requirements and there aren't any mods that will cure that. It has terrible transonic acceleration as a result.

Terrible compared to a comparably loaded aircraft? For instance, throw 2 2000lb bombs, a pair of AIM-120s, a pair of drop tanks, an ECM pod on the centerline and targeting/nav pods (all of which is inside the OML on an F-35) on an F-16 or Hornet and let's see how they accelerate. Furthermore, let's see them reach Mach 1.6 in that configuration.

And the obvious (then why I am mentioning it) it is still stealthy

 

[SOC]

And the obvious (then why I am mentioning it) it is still stealthy

In centimetric bands.

At some angles.

 

[Triton]

Via the Aries Blog:

http://youtu.be/nZn03zOLyFQ

 

[sferrin]

And the obvious (then why I am mentioning it) it is still stealthy

In centimetric bands.

At some angles.

And the Super Hornet?

 

[SOC]

And the obvious (then why I am mentioning it) it is still stealthy

In centimetric bands.

At some angles.

And the Super Hornet?

Same thing, less refinement.

 

[quellish]

Same thing, less refinement.

More accurate than most think.

 

[LowObservable]

If anyone in a position to know had claimed that the stealthified Super Hornet had the same RCS profile as a clean F-35, it would be worth making a big issue over it. But they haven't so it's not.

 

[sferrin]

If anyone in a position to know had claimed that the stealthified Super Hornet had the same RCS profile as a clean F-35, it would be worth making a big issue over it. But they haven't so it's not.

No, of course not. Nobody would ever insinuate such a thing. :

 

[Triton]

If anyone in a position to know had claimed that the stealthified Super Hornet had the same RCS profile as a clean F-35, it would be worth making a big issue over it. But they haven't so it's not.

How close is the RCS profile to a clean F-35?

 

[LowObservable]

I could tell you, but then I'd have to use a hackneyed quote from a not-very-good movie.


Seriously, I don't know. The Super Rhino probably gets closer as you get closer to X-band and head-on. However, remember too that it is designed to use radar camouflage as a complement to active EW (onboard and offboard) rather than as a replacement for it.

 

[Spook]

I wanted to ask something in international point of view;

* Are these upgrades allowed by DoD to be installed on exported F-18s? and, Can a country operating F-18 only select a selected number of advanced Super Hornet upgrade packages, i.e only CFTs or only a Radar , etc.

* Might be a stupid question, but as of now Boeing introducing the new advanced Super Hornet , any chance of Finland, and Kuwait be a potential customers for it , can these be upgraded on C/Ds or does it need a serious upgrade?

thanks,

~Ak

 

[elmayerle]

Likely not. There are significant structural differences between the C/D and the E/F/G and, even then, the structure has to be designed in to take the CFT's. You could develop CFT's for the C/D but it would take some structural rebuilding to use them. Now, if you were to combine that with zero-timing the airframe for extended life and picking up improved systems where possible (F414's, AESA radar, etc.) from the E/F/G, you might have a saleable mi-life upgrade package.

 

[orihara]

* Might be a stupid question, but as of now Boeing introducing the new advanced Super Hornet , any chance of Finland, and Kuwait be a potential customers for it , can these be upgraded on C/Ds or does it need a serious upgrade?

C/Ds are an entirely different airframe that only looks similar to the E/F/G model.

 

[F-14D]

Likely not. There are significant structural differences between the C/D and the E/F/G and, even then, the structure has to be designed in to take the CFT's. You could develop CFT's for the C/D but it would take some structural rebuilding to use them. Now, if you were to combine that with zero-timing the airframe for extended life and picking up improved systems where possible (F414's, AESA radar, etc.) from the E/F/G, you might have a saleable mi-life upgrade package.

This is true. It was acknowledged when the Super Bug was first ordered that unlike, for example F-14s, you can not rebuild A-D airframes into E/Fs, so you're limited in what you can port over. Further, at this point, the cost of zero-timing the Classic Hornet would be so high that there is little or no interest in doing so. As for adding F414s, the intake/exhaust would need significant (and expensive) changes, plus range would decrease.

Avionics, on the other hand, keep shrinking in size and weight so many of the avionics enhancements (such as the AESA since it's primarily a new antenna/transmitter on the existing radar) would be refittable if there was interest, but with all the Classics getting somewhat long in the tooth, cost effectiveness tends to favor a new platform.

If there had been much interest I'll wager Boeing would try it. One might argue that they'd fear competition with the E/F, but that model has not exactly been burning up the order books, so they'd probably be willing if they thought they could make a buck.

 

[fightingirish]

In the newest issue of Aviation Week & Space Technology, 13 January 2014, there is on page 26 an article by Bill Sweetman about a Super Hornet test model with some Stealth modifications. It is being stored at AMARG since May 2013. This test model lacks both wings and its front fuselage, but it has chevron nozzles, serrated panel edges and RAM-coating. So it appears to be a RCS model to measure these modifications.
Boeing says that this model is not directly part of the [font=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]Advanced Super Hornet program, but some results might have had some influence. Bill Sweetman presumes, that this test model indicates an earlier effort.[/font]

 

[Grey Havoc]

An old proposal for a HEL pod for the F/A-18E: http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,5262.0.html

 

[blackstar]

In the newest issue of Aviation Week & Space Technology, 13 January 2014, there is on page 26 an article by Bill Sweetman about a Super Hornet test model with some Stealth modifications. It is being stored at AMARG since May 2013. This test model lacks both wings and its front fuselage, but it has chevron nozzles, serrated panel edges and RAM-coating. So it appears to be a RCS model to measure these modifications.
Boeing says that this model is not directly part of the Advanced Super Hornet program, but some results might have had some influence. Bill Sweetman presumes, that this test model indicates an earlier effort.

Posted here:

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,20938.msg209035.html#msg209035

 

[donnage99]

Note that at 1:47 we can see that the wheel doors are saw tooth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxrZ7jWT_GY

 

[BillRo]

The main wheel doors are sawtooth on all F/A-18E/Fs. The whole Northrop section was designed for reduced signature from the beginning and that is reflected in the various openings.

 

[Triton]

"Boeing sees contract soon for 47 more F/A-18, EA-18G fighters"
by Jim Young
ST. LOUIS Mon May 5, 2014 1:43pm EDT

Source:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/05/us-boeing-contract-idUSBREA440LS20140505

(Reuters) - Boeing Co (BA.N) has reached agreement with the U.S. Navy on a multibillion-dollar contract for 47 more F/A-18 fighter jets and EA-18G electronic attack planes funded in fiscal years 2013 and 2014, and is "very close" to signing a contract, a top company executive said Monday.

Mike Gibbons, Boeing's program manager for both fighter jets, said the contract would include 11 F/A-18 Super Hornets funded in fiscal 2013, 21 EA-18G "Growlers" funded in fiscal 2014, 12 Growlers for Australia and three additional EA-18G planes included in a legal settlement with the U.S. government.

He said the contract could be finalized and signed within the next two months. Gibbons gave no details on the total value of the contract.

(Reporting by Andrea Shalal; Editing by David Gregorio)

 

[GTX]

I would read the facts a little closer. The Australian Growlers for instance are the same 12 announced back in 2012...

 

[bobbymike]

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/07/15/navy-tests-stealth-like-features-for-super-hornet.html

 

[donnage99]

Another significant improvement to using conformal fuel tanks and weapon pods on the super hornet in particular is that it reduces drags created by carrying weapons canted direction. The super hornet can only carry weapons and tanks canted outward the main body, creating significant drags. With a centerline pod that faces foward directly, the drag imposed would be negated.

 

[marauder2048]

Wonder if Boeing and LM can incorporate the IRST into the EWP...

 

[bobbymike]

Super Hornets in Death Valley hmmm any other mountainous, desert terrain they may be training for (Caution some cursing by the 'very excited' person filming)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6yG-HO-8hQ#t=175

 

[quellish]

You can see some much, much cooler things in the same area

 

[Sundog]

You can see some much, much cooler things in the same area

Would these much cooler "things" be coming to a flight test center near Mojave soon? Or are those other cool things?

 

[quellish]

You can see some much, much cooler things in the same area

Would these much cooler "things" be coming to a flight test center near Mojave soon? Or are those other cool things?

One has been in the area since 2003. Looks like something from a Jamie Foxx movie and is in the open literature
In flight signature testing occurs in that area regularly as does threat simulation.

 

[AeroFranz]

Quellish is of course referring to the movie "Stealth", and the most interesting aspect of the movie. They have been testing on Jessica Biel since 2003!
;D

 

[sferrin]

The cool thing is Northop Grumman actually assisted in the design of both the fighter and the drone for that movie.

 

[Sundog]

You can see some much, much cooler things in the same area

Would these much cooler "things" be coming to a flight test center near Mojave soon? Or are those other cool things?

One has been in the area since 2003. Looks like something from a Jamie Foxx movie and is in the open literature
In flight signature testing occurs in that area regularly as does threat simulation.

So the switchblade is actually flying? Cool! I thought it was just another configuration being patented for the hell of it.

 

[quellish]

Quellish is of course referring to the movie "Stealth", and the most interesting aspect of the movie. They have been testing on Jessica Biel since 2003!
;D

Hmmm.... if she came out of a Scaled hangar, it wouldn't surprise me

 

[Triton]

Is the United States Navy going to acquire the Boeing Advanced Super Hornet while waiting for F/A-XX?

 

[GTX]

Is the United States Navy going to acquire the Boeing Advanced Super Hornet while waiting for F/A-XX?

I doubt it.

 

[SpudmanWP]

While they are unlikely to buy it as-is, they are likely to use some of it's development in future upgrades to it's existing fleet, especially the CFTs.

 

[Colonial-Marine]

Uprated engines and CFTs for the EA-18Gs at least would be nice. Would also be nice if they could straighten out those pylons after all these years.

 

[bobbymike]

Is the United States Navy going to acquire the Boeing Advanced Super Hornet while waiting for F/A-XX?

I doubt it.

Yes, but it's called the F-35C ;D