On messageboards most posters put a huge emphasis on perceived air to air performance and more or less assume that every jet is good at “other” missions.
When you read people saying some variation on “the Super Hornet is a poor performer” you know you are talking to someone that is concerned exclusively with a vision of air combat where the fastest plane always wins…
Don’t get me wrong, speed is an asset, but it is not the primary determinant of favorable outcomes.
The charts posted above are worth considering for a few reasons. First they illustrate how different spec sheet numbers can be from reality once you start loading a plane up.
With four air to air missiles and one drop tank the Super Hornet’s theoretical max speed of M1.8 drops to about M 1.5. (This is why many people misunderstand the F-35’s top speed of M 1.6. An F-35 with four air to air missiles and sufficient fuel to fly the same radius would have a max speed of M1.6, faster than the Super Hornet in this comparison.)
If you look at the original Hornet above, it has the same top speed as the Super Hornet, but its speed is limited to M1.2 because of all the tanks it needs to carry to achieve the specified range. (Again this is relevant when you start comparing aircraft like the Gripen to a Super Hornet. A Gripen can fly a long way if you put tanks on it, but these tanks are not without performance penalties.)
So finally returning to the subject of this whole thread, the proposed upgrades to the Super Hornet. If you imagine putting the conformal fuel tanks on the Super Hornet then it could fly farther with less drop tanks. In the above comparison it could go without the centerline tank, reducing its drag and increasing its speed. That would also free up the centerline station for a weapons pod, which would allow the Super Hornet to carry four AMRAAMs with less drag, which again would improve speed and range.
Summing it all up, the conformal tanks, weapons pod, and enhanced engines all work to improve the Super Hornet’s weakest area, its kinematic performance.(with some additional benefits in the way of reduced RCS) If all three upgrades were pursued then the Super Hornet would be substantially quicker and faster in an air to air configuration.
Well the how could the faster plane could win? But anyways it’s speed is still fast, but you didn’t mention that the Rafale has a same speed as the Rhino? Anyway speed doesn’t really matter anyway. You need speed when your trying to intercept a aircraft like a TU-95 plane which is the most intercepted aircraft no? But anyways why is it that the Super Hornet has this drag thing? why does it receive drag? Is it it’s heavy payload or it’s aerodynamic features?
Sign In
