USN F/18 E & F Super-Hornett

Background:

In 1991, the Navy announced plans to develop an E/F variant of the F/A-18, which it began purchasing in 1997. During the early 1990s, the Navy had three aircraft -- the F/A-18E/F, the A/F-X and the A-12 -- on the drawing board as potential replacements to the A-6. The A-12 and the A/F-X were canceled due to escalating costs and the declining need for a carrier based deep-strike aircraft. The only aircraft left on the drawing board was the F/A-18E/F "Super Hornet", which is an upgraded version of the existing F/A-18C/D

Originally, the Navy and Marine Corps intended to purchase 1,000 of the new attack aircraft. However, the 1997 Quadrennial Defense Review recommended that the Navy should only procure 548 F/A-18 E/Fs, yet allowed the Navy the option of buying up to 785 F/A-18 E/F aircraft if the transition to the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) is delayed. 548 F/A-18E/Fs are estimated to cost $46.1 billion with production increasing to 48 aircraft per year starting in fiscal year 2002. The Marine Corps has decided against purchasing the E/F.

www.clw.org...

Check this out, I found it on anotehr discussion board...



An experimental F/A-18 flexible-wing aircraft lifts off on its debut flight Nov. 15 from NASA Dryden at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif. The new wing technology is important to the Air Force because it represents a new approach to designing wings that are more efficient structurally, aerodynamically and from a control effectiveness standpoint.

11/19/02 - WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Ohio (AFPN) -- An experimental flexible-wing jet made its first flight Nov. 15 from NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif.

During an hour-long test, the modified Navy F/A-18A took off, climbed to about 30,000 feet and flew over a test range northeast of Edwards AFB. NASA officials report that the aircraft had a good first checkout flight, and all test points were met.

and flew over a test range northeast of Edwards AFB.

Hmmm.....I wonder what test range that could be...!!!

Read The Entire Article



[Edited on 21-11-2002 by Zion Mainframe]

They were not speaking of introducing this technology to the new F-22.

The USAF is already looking for another new aircraft ?

Well, they are always testing new technologies.
Maybe the new Boeing bird of pray is already much better that the F-22...who knows...

But the F-22 still is a very advanced aircraft. It can cruise at around Mach 1.5 WITHOUT using the afterburner!!!!
Making it a lot more stealthy.


[Edited on 23-11-2002 by Zion Mainframe]

Me, I like the F-23.

I wonder why they didn't chose it.

Originally posted by ultra_phoenix
Me, I like the F-23.

I wonder why they didn't chose it.

I think that it would have cost more in the long term. t Per unit production cost I think was projected to be higher.

its been said that the YF-23 is flying "in some form or another" i think is the quote, to this day

The E/F models were mor steathier i guess... How many planes does the USAAF atually have...?

Originally posted by mad scientist

Originally posted by ultra_phoenix
Me, I like the F-23.

I wonder why they didn't chose it.

I think that it would have cost more in the long term. t Per unit production cost I think was projected to be higher.

True, but it has/had the potential to be clearly superior to the F-22. If we are judging planes strictly on cost, is it not cheaper to build an upgraded F-15?
The F-15 costs $43 million, compare to the F-22 which costs $200.8 million (both prices were quoted from FAS.ORG (www.fas.org...) this shows that the F-22 wil cost more long term than the F-15.

My point is, the Air Force and the Pentagon were foolish to pass over the F-23. Now let's hope their ignorance does not cost the US dearly! If I was in charge, we would be flying the Nothrop F-23's and we would have a working ATF by now. The F-22 contract was signed in April of 1991, it is now June 2005 (14 years for those who are counting). The B-2 Spirit, in contrast was combat ready in 1993 after the contract was signed in 1981 (only 12 years). At this point I'm willing to say, the F-22 is only a medocure aircraft at best. If the Air Force was looking for a clearly decisive edge in the world of fighters, they will be lucky if they can break even on the F-22 program.

Bottom Line: Considering that the USAF Could have had the F-23, the F-22 was a poor investment! Price alone does NOT make something Good!

[edit on 7-6-2005 by ghost]

... And the cost isn't currently what Lockheed said it would be. It could be just sour grapes, but i recall the people i know at McDonnel Douglas being very confident in their bid from a financial standpoint, and very dubious about the '22 proposal. And unlike the A-12, the USAF wasn't changing their minds every 17 seconds about mission requirements, configurations, etc... so the F-23 may have been cheaper after all.

The F-22 cost is down to the 100mil. $ per piece now (flyaway). That's the price for making all the next planes (excluding R&D) and everything about it. It may look quite a much, but if you looks at the F-18E/f with almost 46 bil$ for 550 plane., its really a good deal, because the Superhornet is much worse aircraft.

I think tht the F-22 is a superior choice for the USAF. But tell me, which branches of the military will get the F-22? Is it only for the air force, or can it be split between, like how the F-A-18 is for the US Navy and Unites States Marine Corps?

i hope they base the F/B 2x on the YF-23 , the aircraft is just begging to replace the `vark - and of course northrop have just a little experience on building bombers

Originally posted by longbow
The F-22 cost is down to the 100mil. $ per piece now (flyaway).

WARNING: HARD HAT REQUIRED! WATCH OUT FOR RAPIDLY FALLING PRICES!!!!

Seriously, When did it change? I got the $200.8 per plane yesterday. According to the website I quoted, the figures were current as of yesterday afternoon. It seems strange that your source is quoting the price as being only 1/2 of what FAS is saying. I would like to resolve this discrepency so we can find the truth!

Originally posted by ghost

Originally posted by longbow
The F-22 cost is down to the 100mil. $ per piece now (flyaway).

WARNING: HARD HAT REQUIRED! WATCH OUT FOR RAPIDLY FALLING PRICES!!!!

Seriously, When did it change? I got the $200.8 per plane yesterday. According to the website I quoted, the figures were current as of yesterday afternoon. It seems strange that your source is quoting the price as being only 1/2 of what FAS is saying. I would like to resolve this discrepency so we can find the truth!

At this rate they`ll be FREE before the week is out

Originally posted by ghost
Seriously, When did it change? I got the $200.8 per plane yesterday. According to the website I quoted, the figures were current as of yesterday afternoon. It seems strange that your source is quoting the price as being only 1/2 of what FAS is saying. I would like to resolve this discrepency so we can find the truth!

Could this not be because the FAS includes also R&D costs(already paid)?

Originally posted by ghost

Originally posted by longbow
The F-22 cost is down to the 100mil. $ per piece now (flyaway).

WARNING: HARD HAT REQUIRED! WATCH OUT FOR RAPIDLY FALLING PRICES!!!!

Seriously, When did it change? I got the $200.8 per plane yesterday. According to the website I quoted, the figures were current as of yesterday afternoon. It seems strange that your source is quoting the price as being only 1/2 of what FAS is saying. I would like to resolve this discrepency so we can find the truth!

FAS is trash. They never get updated. Go to www.globalsecurity.org... . The cost goes down as you build more planes. Thats why things that are mass produced are cheaper than things produced in small numbers.

Don't know about FAS but I was watching show that aired a week ago on the History Channel about the Raptor and they also said its production cost was around 100mil.