It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

F-18, The best fighter today...

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 07:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Here's an important question to settle this. Hey Fightermaster, did you mean it's the best ACTIVE fighter, or the best fighter including ones just coming into service?

I hope best Active fighter, alot of new aircraft are coming out that will easily wipe the floor with the Hornet, after all, the hornet is almost 30 years old, not including the e/f variants.

Shattered OUT...




posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 07:54 PM
link   
I'm ASSUMING active, but just want to make that point clear for everyone else, dircetly from the thread authors mouth.



posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 11:06 PM
link   
Folks, BARF

The Hornet is the best fighter that the Navy has today. Now the Superbug makes things even better.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see the Tomcat keep its place in the fleet, but the costs are just too high.

In most scenarios the Hornets have been able to use their better thrust-to-weight ratio to beat the Tomcats. However a great deal of that depends on the pilot(s).



posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 11:16 PM
link   
Sure they have a better thrust to weight ratio, but that doesn't do you any good if you can stay in the air for 45 minutes before you have to refuel. The Hornet is a good plane except the fact that it has no legs to it. Even the E/F isn't a lot better when it comes to loiter time. It's better, but it's not a LOT better.



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 07:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
In responce to the intial post: No the best fighter flying today is the Typhoon soon the be eclipsed by the Raptor


Fred,
The F/A-18 was the first plane to be truly design to fill both the Fighter and the Attack mission. That was the reason for the F/A designation. The Typhoon is a really good plane, but don't count the Hornet out. That little plane still packs a hell of a nasty sting in both the air to air and the air to ground mission. Here are some of the things a Hornet Can carry:

Air-to-Air Air-to-Ground
AIM-120 AMRAAM JDAM series Smart Bombs
AIM-9 Sidewinder MK-84
MK-82
AGM-88 HARM
AGM-84 Harpoon/ Standoff Land Attack Missile (SLAM)
Rockets
Napalm
B-61 Tactical Nuclear bombs

The Hornet might not be the newest plane, but don't count it out yet. It can still sting you pretty bad.



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 07:42 AM
link   
I think that you all need an info correction. Here is complete development of Hornet. Link here.

First idea - a Northrop P.530




Early YF-17 predcessor - P.600



YF-17



Comparison of P.600 and F/A-18A



The first Hornet [F/A-18A]



Study of Hornet with 2D nozzles - improvements on C/D versions



Hornet 2000 configuration 4 -proposed for European countries - F/A-18E/F predcessor.



F/A-18E/F Superhornet



EA-18G Growler




posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 08:21 AM
link   
Funniest thing about the F/A-18 is that the f-18E is as different from the F-18C as the F-18C is different from the YF-17. Though not on the level of Tupolev's Tu-22 Blinder / Tu-22m Backfire bomber tomfoolery, the E model of the F-18 is nothing at all like the C model, except sillouette.

Given this, it is a good replacement, costwise, to replace no fewer than 3 of the carrier fleets' aircraft. Let the Air Force worry about Air Supremacy and the the Navy drop the bombs.

While not the best fighter in the air, it is more a jack-of-all-trades than any other plane in the air, and a cheaper cost than any of the new projects.

flyaway costs:

F/A-18E - $57 million to $66 million(EA-18 growler cost)

F/A-22 - $329 Million

F-35 - $97 million

Typhoon - 83 million pounds
(Not 100% sure of the numbers, but based on a quick google search)

[edit on 7/11/2005 by soulforge]



posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 02:17 AM
link   
Active... There will come better ones out soon...



posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 03:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by COOL HAND
Folks, BARF

The Hornet is the best fighter that the Navy has today. Now the Superbug makes things even better.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see the Tomcat keep its place in the fleet, but the costs are just too high.

In most scenarios the Hornets have been able to use their better thrust-to-weight ratio to beat the Tomcats. However a great deal of that depends on the pilot(s).



They were all ex TOMCAT pilots to. So they know the stregnths and weakness's of the TOMCAT. Maybe different story if F-14D or these
proposed variants.

www.topedge.com...



[edit on 12-7-2005 by Jezza]



posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 06:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by soulforge
flyaway costs:


Typhoon - 83 million pounds
(Not 100% sure of the numbers, but based on a quick google search)
[edit on 7/11/2005 by soulforge]


I looked up the current exchange rate. In case anyone else is wondering about the numbers:

83 million pounds (UK) = $146,798,726.32 (US)

That's a pretty reasonable price for a modern fighter!



[edit on 12-7-2005 by ghost]



posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 08:04 AM
link   
well since everyone endlessly argues over which jet is better than the others;

we should hold mock fighter battles for all the worlds nations

we can get all the models from all the nations and test them out agianst each other at the COOLEST air show of All time
lol

i personally would love to see who wins

but none of us really know; your assertions are only speculations

there is a very slight possibility a p51mustang could beat a mig27 LOL
very very very slight; but id like to see how quick the mig creams it lol

isnt the only a-6s the navy uses these days converted into electronic warfare like the viking or something?
the one GWB flew in on the carrier the day he said the major combat was done
it was electronic warfare im pretty sure

but argueing which fighter is best is kinda pointless lol
todays warfare is determined on Computers; Missles and Radars
the jets themselves arent really the main part of the equation *my opinion*

if i was going to pick "the one i think is best"
id pick the
X-31 EFM
*this thing should be our main jet me thinks*
if only we put some missles on this baby
we could rock everyones world






this pic is got a hornet and falcon in it too *fancy paintjobs lol*


i u let me name this baby *x31* i would name it the Cobra or the Viper



oh and we cant forget that spiffy x29 fsw
it rocks it too



posted on Jul, 12 2005 @ 08:26 AM
link   
Lol, nice aircraft, but the only problem is that they are all experimental, including the F-18 and F-16 variants, they are not production. So you would be pitting limited aircraft against each other.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Jul, 13 2005 @ 09:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by FredT

Originally posted by Hockeyguy567
[Lol, even though it has never seen combat.

The best fighter today is the F-15C Eagle.


Hmmm yes, but people have no poblem considering the F-22 Raptor as the best but its combat record is also the same as the Typhoon. Based on technology and performance, the Typhoon is the current king of the hill in Squadron service.


Fred, in order to be king, you have to actually see combat, the Typhoons hasn't yet, and won't for a long time, the F-15 has been the king for over 25 years, and still is.

Besides, based on what i've read I would place the Rafale ahead of the Typhoon.

[edit on 13-7-2005 by Hockeyguy567]



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 03:54 AM
link   
Nice pics...
Love em'...



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 05:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hockeyguy567

Originally posted by FredT

Originally posted by Hockeyguy567
[Lol, even though it has never seen combat.

The best fighter today is the F-15C Eagle.


Hmmm yes, but people have no poblem considering the F-22 Raptor as the best but its combat record is also the same as the Typhoon. Based on technology and performance, the Typhoon is the current king of the hill in Squadron service.


Fred, in order to be king, you have to actually see combat, the Typhoons hasn't yet, and won't for a long time, the F-15 has been the king for over 25 years, and still is.

Besides, based on what i've read I would place the Rafale ahead of the Typhoon.

[edit on 13-7-2005 by Hockeyguy567]


I would have to say that on your continued comments on this thread any another EF 2000 thread, your extreme bais is showing through, I will be more than willing you post your sniped comments in this thread, merely to point out that any thing you address or comment on, in regards to the Eurofighter would merely be the words of some bitter person.

Again I will address your comments, the French pulled out for a few reasons, the project was being coming too expensive due to the fact that the British and German Requirements where rather high, the French wanted a Cheap fairly good multi role fighter, then with chirac they simply didn't want to lose aircraft design and construction skills. They got it, they got a Relatively cheap multi role fighter, most of the aircrafts systems are either Eurofighter standard systems or reduced capability revisions or taken from their current fleet.

The Rafale is a great aircraft, but it my opinion, still below the Eurofighter in capability, not to mention weapon carrying cabilities and intergration not to mention better BVR systems than the current fleet of rafales and F/A-18s not to mention the F-15c at present, and before you twits start screaming "AESA!!" to my knowledge it isn't in fleet yet.

As for combat record, if you where to plant a F-15c against a Su27 without AWACS support, good luck, another pilot joins the martin baker family, also the Combat Record is with a foreign nation, not with the americans. The F-15 had her day, its over, she is a pure fighter, not a multi role aircraft, how can you not say that a fighter which has the same and in most cases better abilities and then ALSO have the ability to start dropping bombs and missiles on SAM sites and tanks. You need a view point, rather than your nationistic pride, it blinds you to the facts.

At present I am on the opinion that the fighter at the top, is at present the Eurofighter, that is untill the F/a-22 enters into full scale production. Then the title will change.

- Phil



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 06:12 AM
link   
Not trying to disagree with you, or start a fight but AESA is already in service. The wing in Alaska has them that I know of for sure, and I believe Langley has them as well.



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 06:35 AM
link   
OK peoples, this thread is about the F-18 not EF...



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 06:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Not trying to disagree with you, or start a fight but AESA is already in service. The wing in Alaska has them that I know of for sure, and I believe Langley has them as well.


Thank You, To be honest, I haven't found any thing yet as to the operational statis of this system, but it merely means an expanded BVR range, even this is questionable after to speaking to some colleagues that comment that the Eurofighter Radar system is at the same level of capabilities.

About the F/A-18
Yes your quite correct, its about the F/a18, I would have to say that out of the variants, the E/F Super Hornets are the best of the Line, but in combat vs the latest soviet aircraft or eurocanards, I would believe that it would lack the ability to keep up in both the BVR enviroment and then the close in Knife fight, without AWACS support I believe that the US Pilots would suffer. I also believe that the current fleet of american aircraft and their pilots are too dependant on AWACS, as with every conflict they have entered, they have always had awacs support, even in Vietnam.

- Phil

[edit on 22-7-2005 by gooseuk]



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 10:26 AM
link   
ok, thanks for that view...
Nice point...







 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join