It doesn’t offer an increase in performance large enough to justify taking money away from a larger JSF buy (reference the now infamous GAO report on F-18E/F performance evals).

I wouldn’t take that GAO report too seriously. A lot of the information in that thing was incorrect. Ask some of the pilots who fly the SH. Yes, it’s still relatively slow but a lot of info out there just isn’t right.

Hard to believe when a clean F-18E/F cannot even brake the sound barrier under 10000 feet. This would require a pair of F119 i guess. 😀

Wrong. I have read posts from two pilots on other forums saying this isn’t true. It might take a long time to get there but it will do it. Hopefully those new engines will get installed into the SH sometime soon.

What about BVR with the latest AMRAAMs and an AESA?

For BVR it will be fine. The SH will be able to fufill the tasks that the Navy asks of it.

Ah the Foxbat. The Raptor destroyer and the greatest interceptor of all time. I hope firebar doesn’t see this thread.

The Super Hornet is in severe risk in most air to air combat against a lead player. All the big real fighters: F-14, F-15, SU-27/3x, Rafale, Eurofighter can display contempt of engagement. If they don’t want to engage a SH, they don’t have too. They can drive around it. SH can engage things that it BarCaps or space it occupies. It can’t chase down and dominate against an equal force of other high end fighters. It is very very short in the speed department. As for WVR, big deal. As it will be fielded with the X and the helmet it is dangerous. However lots of others do HOBS_helmet_heaters also. SH is a nice strike platform with AESA and it’s diverse wep loadout. However, it’s raw airframe performance…. in total….sux. Claiming RCS methods as being useful on that drag queen is like putting lipstick and a nighty on a pig.

I wouldn’t say severe risk. While the Super Hornet is slower acclerating fighter than those you listed, it’s still a formidable opponent. If the pilot knows his plane he’ll know what to do. WVR it’s always nice to have manueverability even with the AIM-9X in service. Hopefully the uprated F414’s come on line soon to help the SH out.

I wouldn’t worry much about the SH. For what the Navy is using it for, it’s going to be great. It’s not a dedicated interceptor/air superiority fighter but it’ll do a good enough job protecting the fleet. The APG-79 and AIM-120D combo should project it’s power better in the coming years. As for the RCS, every little bit helps. Even with a good-sized loadout, I bet the SH gives off a pretty small return. As with the Typhoon and Rafale, RCS reduction measures are always a plus.

Yes, the Tomcat was faster and could fly longer but for sheer versatility, it’s hard to beat the Super Hornet.

That’s pretty cool. I’m starting to like the Super Hornet more and more. For some reason it looks much better than the legacy Hornets.

Ok, now the Eurofighter. As fourth. Underpowered. Agonizes in going over the top in loops, climbs loud and slow and not too step, and if he does it’s slow. And that strange effect that its wing doesn’t “grip” when coming out of a loop. Nothing new, but I think it’s getting worse every year.

That’s strange. From I’ve read the Eurofighter seems to be a very quick plane with power in reserve. It”s TW ratio is very good as are its wing loading numbers. Maybe it was the heat. :confused: