bigross86

The Chinese are mighty beligerent (spelling?) and probably have enough fighter-bombers and bombers to cause a CVBG some serious annoyance.

__________________
You're a naughty girl, go to my room!

TopHatter

Agreed, that is a possibility but let's be honest here. If the Chinese can sink a carrier because there was no F-14s there, then the USN has much bigger problems than the disparity in performance between the -18E/F and the -14D.

__________________
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.
~John Quincy Adams

bigross86

Eastern and Western thinking is different. They have no problem sending hundreds of pilots and planes against a target like a CVBG. Some missiles have to get through, and if enough missiles are launched, chances are at least some will hit the CVN. The F-14D can engage bandits later out before they launch, whilst the F/A-18E/F has to wait for them to get into AMRAAM range, well into launching parameters, especially with the F/A-18E/F's short legs.

Stinger

Ross is right Tophatter the difference between a 20 mile buffer zone and a 100 mile buffer zone makes a big difference

__________________
Your look more lost than a bastard child on fathers day.

TopHatter

Ok but let's remember that the shelf life of the Phoenix has just about come due.
Guys, believe me, I don't want to see the -14 go. It's obviously a better aircraft than the -18E/F. I'm just saying that nothing lasts forever. There is but a single squadron of Tomcats on each carrier and in some cases none at all.
What I'd really like to have is some former -14 drivers-turned-18E/F drivers and get their assessment (off the record, on the QT, and very hush hush). Then talk to some CAGs and some CVBG commanders and see what they think (also off the record)

bigross86

There are those and more at Whiskey Tango. It's an ongoing argument. PM Snipe or myself and we'll give you the addy.

Anon

"Ok but let's remember that the shelf life of the Phoenix has just about come due."

The AIM-54C Sealed ECCM reached IOC(Initial operational capability) in 1991.

It is easily the most advanced, longest ranged, fastest AAM in service in the world, and is nowhere near it's shelf life limits(as the name implies, it is a sealed missile).

All due respect TH, but that's a really innacurate argument.

The F-14D will outperform the F-18E/F in nearly every measurable PERFORMANCE category.

I definitely agree that the loss of the F-14 from the fleet will put our carriers in much greater jeopardy.

This is why the are fitting ESSM and RAM to carriers now...cause because of the F-14's absence, they NEED much greater AAW capability to defend themselves.

When you add that into the cost, how is the F-18 cheaper?

The USN made the mistake of it's life cancelling the F-14D program. It was pure idiocy.

Anon

I can probably take this debate as far back and technical as one wishes, if any are so inclined.

It all stems from the A-12 fiasco, and the USN's foolhardy surrendering of the A-6 to the single mission airframe elimination of 1991, when the tooling was destroyed and further construction of F-14D's suspended.

If the USN had cancelled the F-18C program in 91 instead of the A-6F and F-14D programs, today's CVBG's would have IMMENSELY GREATER STRIKING POWER.

bigross86

Don't forget the Recce capabilities lost by F-14 TARPS birds

TopHatter

Snipe
No need to debate on me on this subject, I'm well versed in all of the particulars

Believe me, I'm not trying to compare the Super Hornet to the Tomcat or the Intruder for that matter. I guess I'm trying to make the best of a bad situation. No matter how much you or I want to, we can't raise the Intruder fleet out of the ocean (Although it's not that far from me....) nor can we get the Navy to ditch the E/F Hornet.
During the 90s, the Navy managed to hit rock bottom and start digging. Now they have to climb out of the hole and they have to use the Super Hornet to do it. In other words, it's a big **** sandwich and we have to take a bite

bigross86

With any luck (and very few conflicts) the JSF will be able to pick up the slack that will happen once the F-14D leaves.

TopHatter

I wonder if the JSF is any more capable, performance-wise, than the Super Hornet?
Any thoughts or data?

Anon

The F-35 can supercruise, is truly supersonic, and should easily outturn and outaccelerate the F-18E/F IF it works as advertised. At any rate, the USN sure better hope it does.

"nor can we get the Navy to ditch the E/F Hornet."

I figure the USN will do that of it's own accord right about the time they finally get it right. Same as they did with the F-14 fleet.

TopHatter

"Truly supersonic"? I thought that was just Mach 1, or do you mean the JSF can do Mach 2? The data above shows the Hornet can't break Mach 2 which is rather annoying, to say the least.

As far as the Navy getting right eventually with the Hornet, I don't see how that's possible with these performance data.
I wonder if the E/F can carry TARPS.

Oh, thanks for the info on the Phoenix, I was not aware that it was a sealed round.
What was all that flap awhile back about it being retired anyway?

Anon

The deal with the pheonix was one of "There is no threat to justify it's presence, and it is expensive".

You've heard that argument before on numerous systems....they try to use the same argument to kill the F-22 all the time. In my opinion, it's hogwash.

The F-18 is subsonic ONLY below 10,000 feet- even when it is totally 'clean'.

With even an AAM loadout, it cannot break Mach 1 under 15,000 feet.(The F-14D could do Mach 1.4 at sea level with a full AAM load).

I will probably get heat for this, but all the F-18E/F really needs is modern supercruising vectored engines....not legacy F-404 derivitaves with fixed nozzles. It is wholly underpowered. With another 10,000lbs or so of (vectored) total thrust, the F-18E/F would be a whole different animal.

The F-35's actual top speed is yet to be determined(it's not just classified, but truly unknown by anyone), but is believed to be close to Mach 2 based on it's T/W ratio and it's aerodynamics. Also, as i said, it can supercruise.

The F-18E/F has a max cruising speed of about 430 kts(it's listed above in an earleir post), compared to the F-35's MCS of Mach 1.0+... or over 700mph. That SHOULD confer a massive increase in tactical combat radius vs the Hornet(all models), as well as decreasing reaction time, and increasing sortie generation rate.

The F-18E/F isn't the enemy of perfection, but also the enemy of good enough. Cause right now, in my humble opinion....it is neither.

The F-14D was good enough(it must be compared to the F-22 and EF2000, Rafale and SU-30MkI). The F-18E/F isn't.