Originally posted by Navy2001
You have significantly funny quotes, basically false, you don't even know nothing about this plane in A2A combat and neither no nothing super about
it. First i think your scrolling around Air Power Australia or Gripen4Canada. Or trolling to criticize the jet easily.
If the Super Hornet is heavier at 32,000lbs it's fine, that's why it's a carrier fighter.
You have that backwards: the Super Hornet is heavier because it is a carrier fighter. It needs larger wings, larger control surfaces, and strengthened
structure for carrier operations. Unfortunately, being able to operate from carrier does not make you any more effective in engaging enemy
In A2A configuration it has 47,000lbs of weight creating the Rhino manuverable but adds significant drag.
Maneuverability is best demonstrated by wing loading and thrust to weight ratio. The overall weight is not so much the issue so much as how well you
can move it around. The F-15 has lower wing loading and a higher thrust-to-weight ratio which both indicate higher maneuverability.
Theres nothing you can do to release the weight armed, it's the same as the F-15. To get rid of the heavy weight, you need to fire the
I am not quite sure what is going on in this sentence. Weight problems arise when using drop tanks and heavy ordinance, not A2A missiles.
T/W Ratio which is 0.93 isn't inferior that means the Rhino has trouble in performance which is aerodynamic and acceleration
We seem to disagree on what the word 'inferior' means. 0.93 is not as good as 1.12, ergo the F-15 will have better performance where acceleration
and energy retention are required (ie A2A combat)
Same as carrying weapons, nothing inferior about that.
F-15C and F-18E both possess 11 hard points, and therefore neither gains an advantage.
It's receiving the EPE Engines to get far better A2A performance against faster high flying targets, and regain better
The EPE engines have not been fielded, nor have any contracts been signed for them AFAIK.
It doesn't have any inferior combat raduis, the 390mi is for an interdiction mission raduis. If you want more combat radius, you need CFT's
to gain more MI of range. It's nothing bad about it. CFT's are getting tested next month. Only a critic can judge its combat radius.
You get nothing for free in aerospace design. Operating an aircraft with CFTs increases its available range, but at the cost of weight. If you want
fuel, you have to haul it. This means that when the aircraft gets to the fight it will still be carrying all the fuel it needs to get home from its
farther position, and you will see a performance hit because of it.
The only thing the Super Hornet operators are concerned is it's top speed and acceleration.
The airframe can't be changed, you can add more capability if you want or select some enhancements to give the Rhino better performance.
Why would an aircraft with top speed and acceleration issues be a great fighter when compared to those fighters that don't have those problems?
It's designed to all the roles in the Navy inventory. It's a great A2A fighter in today's role. Nothing bad except top speed and
acceleration. I don't see where it's not a A2A fighter, it is as its secondary mission. It's a Multirole fighter able to do air superiorty and
It was never a great
air to air fighter. It was not great
even compared to the F-15 before it, and it has absolutely no chance against
Gen 5 fighters. A multirole fighter is just that: A decent everything, but a great
If it never recived those Block III upgrades now, it would be outclassed right now if there wouldn't been any new upgrades to the Rhino. It's
new and it's going to get very capable. I also doubt that any naval aviator would say this plane is inferior in any role or in
The F-18 has not received the Block III upgrades. The aircraft has only just begun testing, if at all
). By your own words, it is
The Naval Aviatiors have alot of faith performing great in A2A combat as i said many times, it still counts as a air superiority fighter in the
list of A2A fighters.
As far as I know the Super Hornet has no air-to-air kills in combat. Claiming that is has performed great in A2A combat as compared to aircraft such
as the F-15 (well over 100 combat kills, no combat losses) is gonna be a tough position to take.