F18 Hornet/Super Hornet

Discussion on World War 2 in general.

Re: F18 Hornet/Super Hornet

Postby Blaster » Fri Nov 28, 2008 3:05 am

Hubsu wrote:
Ricky wrote:
Blaster wrote:Well, a modern air superiority fighter is bound to be better than the Hornet.

... in a straight air-to-air combat with equal conditions.


Actually, the Hornet is by far the best dog fighter of the legacy fighters. That assesment is not based on the next picture, altough it is a nice pic anyways. By this time pretty much every fighter has some gun camera footage out of the Raptor.

Raptor gun kill by a Super Hornet :) (don't mind the bubble violation...)

Image


What are the legacy fighters, and how can the Hornet be the best?
  • 0

Blaster
General
General
 
Posts: 1599
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 7:35 pm
Reputation: 0

Re: F18 Hornet/Super Hornet

Postby Hubsu » Fri Nov 28, 2008 2:46 pm

Blaster wrote:What are the legacy fighters, and how can the Hornet be the best?


You shouldn't be asking "how can" but instead ask "what makes".

What makes (especially) the Super Hornet "the best"?
20 years newer
-avionics
-aerodynamics
-materials
-technology
than with any of the older legacy fighters. The people that designed SH know a lot more about aerial fighting than the people who designed aeroplanes back in the seventies. That's what makes it "the best". As far as SH and legacy Hornets goes, they are not "the best" in everything. They are amongst the best at where it really counts :)

Legacy fighters are all the other fighters except eurocanards and US stealth fighters.

High alpha and nose authority is where the SH (and legacy Hornets) excels as far as dogfighting is concerned :mrgreen:
Image
  • 0

Hubsu
First Lieutenant
First Lieutenant
 
Posts: 415
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 3:55 pm
Reputation: 0

Re: F18 Hornet/Super Hornet

Postby Blaster » Sat Nov 29, 2008 1:51 am

Hubsu wrote:
Blaster wrote:What are the legacy fighters, and how can the Hornet be the best?


You shouldn't be asking "how can" but instead ask "what makes".

What makes (especially) the Super Hornet "the best"?
20 years newer
-avionics
-aerodynamics
-materials
-technology
than with any of the older legacy fighters. The people that designed SH know a lot more about aerial fighting than the people who designed aeroplanes back in the seventies. That's what makes it "the best". As far as SH and legacy Hornets goes, they are not "the best" in everything. They are amongst the best at where it really counts :)

Legacy fighters are all the other fighters except eurocanards and US stealth fighters.

High alpha and nose authority is where the SH (and legacy Hornets) excels as far as dogfighting is concerned :mrgreen:
Image


The only reason the Hornet/Super Hornet is the best is that it's so much newer. Against a modern air superiority jet designed at around the same time, it doesn't stand much of a chance in aerial combat. Heck, the Mig-29, which is significantly older, still bested the Hornet in mock battles.
  • 0

Blaster
General
General
 
Posts: 1599
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 7:35 pm
Reputation: 0

Re: F18 Hornet/Super Hornet

Postby Hubsu » Sat Nov 29, 2008 2:40 am

Blaster wrote:The only reason the Hornet/Super Hornet is the best is that it's so much newer. Against a modern air superiority jet designed at around the same time, it doesn't stand much of a chance in aerial combat. Heck, the Mig-29, which is significantly older, still bested the Hornet in mock battles.


Against such an overwhelming expertise, I simply can't have anything to say against :D
  • 0

Hubsu
First Lieutenant
First Lieutenant
 
Posts: 415
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 3:55 pm
Reputation: 0

Re: F18 Hornet/Super Hornet

Postby Blaster » Sat Nov 29, 2008 3:33 am

Hubsu wrote:
Blaster wrote:The only reason the Hornet/Super Hornet is the best is that it's so much newer. Against a modern air superiority jet designed at around the same time, it doesn't stand much of a chance in aerial combat. Heck, the Mig-29, which is significantly older, still bested the Hornet in mock battles.


Against such an overwhelming expertise, I simply can't have anything to say against :D


Is this sarcasm, or are you really agreeing with me?
  • 0

Blaster
General
General
 
Posts: 1599
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 7:35 pm
Reputation: 0

Re: F18 Hornet/Super Hornet

Postby canambridge » Sat Nov 29, 2008 4:59 pm

Blaster wrote: Heck, the Mig-29, which is significantly older, still bested the Hornet in mock battles.


And the F-18 bested the MiG-29 in mock battles. By the way, I went through the whole thread and didn't notice the "proof" of the MiG-29 besting the F-18 anywhere. I don't doubt it though, you can find these "my plane's better than yours" vids all over the net to "confirm" just about any plane over the other.

http://www.aviapedia.com/video/mig-29-vs-f-18

Okay, it looks like a Tv show, but you get the point. These types of statements are meaningless unless everything is equal.

Blaster, there are 11 pages of debate on this, most of which seems to show that the F-18 is a capable air-to-air fighting aircraft that lacks the "maximum" speed and "range" of the SU-33 and little else to differentiate the aircraft.

I don't think you want to accept that the F-18 may actually be a good multi-role aircraft with a chance to hold its own against the air superiority Su-33. :shock:
  • 0

User avatar
canambridge
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1229
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 2:59 am
Location: Montreal, Canada
Reputation: 0

Re: F18 Hornet/Super Hornet

Postby sinissa » Sat Nov 29, 2008 6:39 pm

I went through the whole thread and didn't notice the "proof" of the MiG-29 besting the F-18 anywhere. I don't doubt it though, you can find these "my plane's better than yours" vids all over the net to "confirm" just about any plane over the other.




October 1998's Exercise Churinga, between Australia Royal air force (F-18) and Royal Malaysian Air Force (MIG-29) ,where MIG's outmatched F-18 in air to air combat


U go back just few pages and there is proof. U cant really compare Migs vs Hornets in unfair situation (10 Migs vs 500 Hornet+ avaks) where F-18 bested migs...I wonder what will be in opposite situation. But when we compare MIG-29 it is nearly 40y old plane,much older then F-18.
  • 0

User avatar
sinissa
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 331
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 6:28 pm
Reputation: 0

Re: F18 Hornet/Super Hornet

Postby Blaster » Sat Nov 29, 2008 9:41 pm

canambridge wrote:
Blaster wrote: Heck, the Mig-29, which is significantly older, still bested the Hornet in mock battles.


And the F-18 bested the MiG-29 in mock battles. By the way, I went through the whole thread and didn't notice the "proof" of the MiG-29 besting the F-18 anywhere. I don't doubt it though, you can find these "my plane's better than yours" vids all over the net to "confirm" just about any plane over the other.

http://www.aviapedia.com/video/mig-29-vs-f-18

Okay, it looks like a Tv show, but you get the point. These types of statements are meaningless unless everything is equal.

Blaster, there are 11 pages of debate on this, most of which seems to show that the F-18 is a capable air-to-air fighting aircraft that lacks the "maximum" speed and "range" of the SU-33 and little else to differentiate the aircraft.

I don't think you want to accept that the F-18 may actually be a good multi-role aircraft with a chance to hold its own against the air superiority Su-33. :shock:


I'd love to accept that the Hornet is an awesome plane (it looks really cool), but right now I'm simply doubtful of it's air combat capabilities.
  • 0

Blaster
General
General
 
Posts: 1599
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 7:35 pm
Reputation: 0

Re: F18 Hornet/Super Hornet

Postby canambridge » Sun Nov 30, 2008 1:42 am

To avoid going all hyperbole again, I never said the Hornet was an awesome airplane (as an air superiority aircraft at least). But an awful lot of information has been provided that indicates the F-18 could hold it's own in an air to air battle. It seems there is nothing out there that would make you think otherwise.
Instead of looking at things like max speed and range you need to look at sensor systems, IR and radar signatures, pilot workload, and missiles, among other less obvious stats (like reliability). If you would look at all these things you'd probably get over the SU-33 wonder plane complex, and it's collorary, the F-18 bad plane.
Both have their strengths and weaknesses, but you need to be somewhat open minded about it. Beyond a suspect top speed and range, there really doesn't seem to be that much that favors the SU-33. Perhaps you could enlighten me.
  • 0

User avatar
canambridge
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1229
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 2:59 am
Location: Montreal, Canada
Reputation: 0

Re: F18 Hornet/Super Hornet

Postby Blaster » Sun Nov 30, 2008 3:23 am

canambridge wrote:To avoid going all hyperbole again, I never said the Hornet was an awesome airplane (as an air superiority aircraft at least). But an awful lot of information has been provided that indicates the F-18 could hold it's own in an air to air battle. It seems there is nothing out there that would make you think otherwise.
Instead of looking at things like max speed and range you need to look at sensor systems, IR and radar signatures, pilot workload, and missiles, among other less obvious stats (like reliability). If you would look at all these things you'd probably get over the SU-33 wonder plane complex, and it's collorary, the F-18 bad plane.
Both have their strengths and weaknesses, but you need to be somewhat open minded about it. Beyond a suspect top speed and range, there really doesn't seem to be that much that favors the SU-33. Perhaps you could enlighten me.


The only other thing that favours the Su-33 is the fact that it was designed to excel at air combat, while the F-18 was designed to be fair at everything but not particularly good at anything.
  • 0

Blaster
General
General
 
Posts: 1599
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 7:35 pm
Reputation: 0

Re: F18 Hornet/Super Hornet

Postby canambridge » Sun Nov 30, 2008 3:48 pm

Blaster wrote:The only other thing that favours the Su-33 is the fact that it was designed to excel at air combat, while the F-18 was designed to be fair at everything but not particularly good at anything.


This is a rather harsh statement.
Actually the SU-33 was designed to be excellent at one thing. The F/A-18 was designed to be good at a number of things.
  • 0

User avatar
canambridge
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1229
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 2:59 am
Location: Montreal, Canada
Reputation: 0

Re: F18 Hornet/Super Hornet

Postby sinissa » Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:46 pm

canambridge wrote:
Blaster wrote:The only other thing that favours the Su-33 is the fact that it was designed to excel at air combat, while the F-18 was designed to be fair at everything but not particularly good at anything.


This is a rather harsh statement.
Actually the SU-33 was designed to be excellent at one thing. The F/A-18 was designed to be good at a number of things.


Quite good expression. But to be fairly if the USAF did not want to make pure fighter they woud not go for F-22 raptor. Planes like F-18 ,if they use only by the own,r quite easy target to pure fighter planes. That is why US still got F-16 in fleet.
  • 0

User avatar
sinissa
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 331
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 6:28 pm
Reputation: 0

Re: F18 Hornet/Super Hornet

Postby Hubsu » Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:08 pm

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_q ... tBody;col1

A nice article about a NFO on exchange tour to fly F-16s. He gives some nice and insightful comparison about Hornet and F-16. A nice read :)
  • 0

Hubsu
First Lieutenant
First Lieutenant
 
Posts: 415
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 3:55 pm
Reputation: 0

Re: F18 Hornet/Super Hornet

Postby canambridge » Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:09 pm

You're right sinissa, there is a place for a true air superiority fighter in every air force. But I think it is a bit extreme to claim the F/A-18 is "not particularly good at anything". To me this is the fundamental problem with Blaster's position, he is comparing a multi-role aircraft with a true air superiority fighter. While he is quite right to point out that the SU-33 "outpoints" the F/A-18 in some areas, it is unfair to claim that it is totally outclassed. Th einformation available just doesn't support that conclusion.

I hope we never get a chance to find out for sure.
  • 0

User avatar
canambridge
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1229
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 2:59 am
Location: Montreal, Canada
Reputation: 0

Re: F18 Hornet/Super Hornet

Postby sinissa » Sun Nov 30, 2008 8:36 pm

Yes F-18 is decent plane for his ability's , nothing wrong with that. He is moderate good on more fields but none the best. And yes,it is unfair to compare to any modern fighter plane. Unfortunatly for us on this topic,and fortunate for F/A-18 pilots we did not had chance to see F/A-18 where is on disvantage position,outnumbered, withouth cover etc,what we had chance to see for older generation of Russian fighters like Mig -29, Mig-25,Mig-23 ,etc. In position like we seen F/A-18 ,i think that A-4 coud perform similar good.
  • 0

User avatar
sinissa
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 331
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 6:28 pm
Reputation: 0

PreviousNext

Return to World War 2 in General



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron
Reputation System ©'