Super Hornet Flies With CFT's

[Cat12345]

According to the editor of Aviation Week, Bill Sweetman, Boeing is not officially released (yet) but a F/A-18F equipped with conformal fuel tanks and other modifications made its first flight from the airport International St Louis on Monday. The company also plans to add a cocoon of weapons central and perform a series of aerodynamic tests and RCS this month in support of the proposal "Advanced Super Hornet."

The blog AeroExperience posted some pictures of the model with the CFT. However, they are not functional. Serve only to aerodynamic tests, as said by company representatives earlier . The CFT have some differences from the mock-up shown above, with a deeper profile forward. In response to suggestions from the U.S. Navy, they were made ​​a little larger, increasing the amount of fuel (in both CFT) 3,000 to 3,500 pounds.

The CFTs and weapon PODS are part of a package of improvements that Boeing and General Electric are proposing for the Navy.

HAHAHAHAHA i couldn't stop laughing at this.

 

[USN_force]

What's so funny here?

 

[Cat12345]

What's so funny here?

LOL. The Navy is only going to get the CFT and the stealthy weapon pod. They are not going to fund in all the package. They don't want the EPE, Cockpit, missile laser systems and the IRST in the Super Bug fleet. The Navy just wants CFT's and WP for CAS. The Navy are ding dongs. No pilot would want to fly with CFT's and WP's. Very embarrassing for the Navy and it's pilots. Haha i luaaaagh.

I just can't believe the Navy wants that just or CAS.

 

[USN_force]

Does maneuverability effect it with CFT's?

LOL. The Navy is only going to get the CFT and the stealthy weapon pod. They are not going to fund in all the package. They don't want the EPE, Cockpit, missile laser systems and the IRST in the Super Bug fleet. The Navy just wants CFT's and WP for CAS. The Navy are ding dongs. No pilot would want to fly with CFT's and WP's. Very embarrassing for the Navy and it's pilots. Haha i luaaaagh.

I just can't believe the Navy wants that just or CAS.

I believe they want CFT's because of more range. WP for lower RCS for the rhino

 

[Cat12345]

Does maneuverability effect it with CFT's?

No

I believe they want CFT's because of more range. WP for lower RCS for the rhino

Sabia eso antes. Eso no es complicado de entender. solamente es recuerdo. Gracias

 

[TexasJohn]

[/QUOTE]Sabia eso antes. Eso no es complicado de entender. solamente es recuerdo. Gracias [/QUOTE]

Ok so I live in Texas - should know Spanish but why? Care to make your point in English?? This is not a bi-lingual forum. Get it?

 

[TexasJohn]

LOL. The Navy is only going to get the CFT and the stealthy weapon pod. They are not going to fund in all the package. They don't want the EPE, Cockpit, missile laser systems and the IRST in the Super Bug fleet. The Navy just wants CFT's and WP for CAS. The Navy are ding dongs. No pilot would want to fly with CFT's and WP's. Very embarrassing for the Navy and it's pilots. Haha i luaaaagh.

I just can't believe the Navy wants that just or CAS.

And you know this how? any links to substantiate your statement? btw "luaaaagh" is really spelled "laugh" - if that's what you meant

 

[Cat12345]

Ok so I live in Texas - should know Spanish but why? Care to make your point in English?? This is not a bi-lingual forum. Get it?

Ok translation is....... I knew that before. That's not difficult to understand. only is memory. thanks. Now you happy?

And you know this how? any links to substantiate your statement? btw "luaaaagh" is really spelled "laugh" - if that's what you meant

I read about the Super Hornet Block III. They only want CFT's and WP for CAS. They always wanted the range and stealthiness for Bombing Missions. Luaagh was an expression.

 

[TexasJohn]

Ok translation is....... I knew that before. That's not difficult to understand. only is memory. thanks. Now you happy?



I read about the Super Hornet Block III. They only want CFT's and WP for CAS. They always wanted the range and stealthiness for Bombing Missions. Luaagh was an expression.

Again, any links to substantiate your statement? from anywhere reliable?

 

[janon]

I wish these enhancements (especially IRST and EPE) were available in the Indian MRCA trials. Would have been more value for money, than the uber costly Rafales.

 

[Cat12345]

Again, any links to substantiate your statement? from anywhere reliable?

No i just know what the Navy needs on the Block III roadmap. They were always interested with the CFT's ans WP. I want them to go with the EPE Engine instead which gives Hornet more thrust about 20%.

I wish these enhancements (especially IRST and EPE) were available in the Indian MRCA trials. Would have been more value for money, than the uber costly Rafales.

I wish i'd seen the SH with IAF Colors too. EPE and IRST should make it a potent A2A fighter. CFT's and Weapon Pod should make it a suited striker.

Super Bug= $66.9mil

Rafale= $90.5mil

 

[janon]

I wish i'd seen the SH with IAF Colors too. EPE and IRST should make it a potent A2A fighter. CFT's and Weapon Pod should make it a suited striker.

Super Bug= $66.9mil

Rafale= $90.5mil

I suppose the USN doesn't really need that additional thrust, since their fighters always take off from sea level (off aircraft carriers). I don't know if that additional thrust can make a difference in A2A or other operational parameters. Maybe @gambit can way in on this. But the IAF wanted to to take off from several different airfields, and it failed to take-off from Leh, which is an airfield at a very high elevation. In the IAF's words, it failed the take-off test under "hot and high" conditions. Only the Eurofighter and the rafale passed that test. And that was important for the IAF, because we have several airfields high up in the Himalayas.

Coming to cost, it is not just the cost of the aircraft that is important. US munitions would cost only a fraction of what the European ones do. Those French missiles come at more than a million dollars per unit, while AMRAAMs come for less than a tenth of that, due to the large volumes that the US manufactures. All in all, India could have bought a lot more super hornets and associated spares, support and weapons than the rafales for the same money. It is a pity that the superbug failed to take off at Leh, because now the IAF is about to purchase the costliest non stealth fighter on the planet. With the additional thrust of the EPE, I'm sure the super hornet would have taken off from Leh.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

I suppose the USN doesn't really need that additional thrust, since their fighters always take off from sea level (off aircraft carriers). I don't know if that additional thrust can make a difference in A2A or other operational parameters. Maybe @gambit can way in on this. But the IAF wanted to to take off from several different airfields, and it failed to take-off from Leh, which is an airfield at a very high elevation. In the IAF's words, it failed the take-off test under "hot and high" conditions. Only the Eurofighter and the rafale passed that test. And that was important for the IAF, because we have several airfields high up in the Himalayas.

Coming to cost, it is not just the cost of the aircraft that is important. US munitions would cost only a fraction of what the European ones do. Those French missiles come at more than a million dollars per unit, while AMRAAMs come for less than a tenth of that, due to the large volumes that the US manufactures. All in all, India could have bought a lot more super hornets and associated spares, support and weapons than the rafales for the same money. It is a pity that the superbug failed to take off at Leh, because now the IAF is about to purchase the costliest non stealth fighter on the planet. With the additional thrust of the EPE, I'm sure the super hornet would have taken off from Leh.

naval operations require higher thrust engines than ground based operations.
The Hindu : National : Tejas’ naval variant to take to the skies in 2009

 

[janon]

naval operations require higher thrust engines than ground based operations.
The Hindu : National : Tejas’ naval variant to take to the skies in 2009

Because our naval fighters (mig 29K and NLCA) are STOL. US Navy uses CTOL, and the take-off is assisted by catapults. So our naval fighters have to take off from a shorter distance using their own thrust, while theirs have longer runways, and catapults to launch them. Hence the USN may not require additional thrust compared to IAF, which has to operate them from Leh and other such "hot and high" airfields.

 

[Abingdonboy]

I wish these enhancements (especially IRST and EPE) were available in the Indian MRCA trials. Would have been more value for money, than the uber costly Rafales.

If the IAF had gone for the F-18 it would have come with the enclosed weapons pod, CFTs, improved cockpit, IRST etc etc.



A nice walk around of the advanced Super Hornet upgrades on display at Aero India 2011:

Aero India: Boeing's advanced Super Hornet upgrade options - YouTube