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.
I personally would like to see a stealthier revision of the F-18 airframe in the Navy's arsenal. That way you would have:
1. A twin engine attack aircraft that won't splash if one engine flames out
2.A less expensive aircraft available in overwhelming numbers
3. A bomb truck to carry out attacks after the more stealthy F-35's have "kicked the door down".
Originally posted by steppenwolf86
Originally posted by Luke.S
I've got a replacement for the F-18. It would fly rings around it. Everyone loves it and it is very good looking.
Strange where people get the idea that the F-14 is superior to the F-18.
Originally posted by MisterBurns
That first aircraft doesnt seem large enough to fit 2 massive jet engines behind the huge intakes - but maybe its just perception because you cant see underneath.
In anycase, I have no idea why we would choose single engine here in Oz (we selected the F-35). Doesnt seem a good fit for our geographical / polical interests at all.
Originally posted by steppenwolf86
reply to post by RichardPrice
The only way the f-14 was superior was in its ability to carry the aim-54, and that superiority was only theoretical. The hornet is more manueverable and has a higher thrust to weight ratio, so there goes your acceleration argument.
Originally posted by steppenwolf86
I said theoretical because the success ratio of the aim-54 has been called into question in the past.