• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet upgrades

donnage99

"Robert Gates, is that you??" sublight
Joined
Jun 17, 2008
Messages
970
Reaction score
9
AeroFranz said:
you mean what's DIRCM?
No. I know what DIRCM is. It's planned for the f-35 in later blocks. I meant to ask whether it's true that DIRCM is an near term option for super hornet.
 

Trident

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
867
Reaction score
58
No DIRCM on any Flanker version so far. Just MAWS of various types (Russian MAK-F on the Su-27M, Saab Avitronics MAW-300 on the Su-30MKM IIRC).

EDIT: as for DIRCM on fast jets, making them retractable may be an option. There's a precedent, too: the two units in the fuselage sides on the C-17 retract into fairings for cruise efficiency (the third turret under the tail is fixed though, I think).
 

Abraham Gubler

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
3,559
Reaction score
49
There is a big difference between using a DIRCM on a transport aircraft or helicopter to intercept ground launched missiles and using one on a fighter against air to air missiles. In particular the extreme difference in change to angular variation between the two. Any fighter DIRCM would have to be immensely agile in its gimbal to keep the laser pointing at the seeker head. We are more likely to see AESAs used as high power microwave generators for anti missile use.
 

bobbymike

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
9,398
Reaction score
434
Abraham Gubler said:
There is a big difference between using a DIRCM on a transport aircraft or helicopter to intercept ground launched missiles and using one on a fighter against air to air missiles. In particular the extreme difference in change to angular variation between the two. Any fighter DIRCM would have to be immensely agile in its gimbal to keep the laser pointing at the seeker head. We are more likely to see AESAs used as high power microwave generators for anti missile use.
Detect IR missile launch, fly straight, zap missile with DIRCM, maneuver, flares, break lock?
 

flanker

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
835
Reaction score
9
GTX said:
Are we talking Directional Infrared Counter Measures (DIRCM) or Missile Approach Warning (MAW)? They are different! As far as I am aware, the systems such as the Saab Avitronics MAW-300 (from the Su-30MKM) are purely MAWs and thus do not directly 'attack' the threat such as a true DIRCM such as Northrop Grumman's AN/AAQ-24 system.

Regards,

Greg
Thank you for correcting me, i have a lot to learn in terms of electronics on modern fighters.

Btw:

Before:

http://pilot.strizhi.info/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/bng1.jpg

After:

http://pilot.strizhi.info/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Resize-of-IMG_9506.JPG

Or other way around. :)
 

fightingirish

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
2,184
Reaction score
226
Boeing Reveals Details Of International F-18
Nov 4, 2011By Andy NativiGENOA, Italy — Engineers from U.S. behemoth Boeing are offering further glimpses into the so-called “international road map” variant of its F-18 Super Hornet, starting with its two shoulder-mounted conformal fuel tanks (CFTs) and numerous Enclosed Weapons Pods (EWPs).The details are emerging as Boeing and rival Lockheed Martin, with its Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), move from being cut out of the Indian Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft and look to non-JSF partners like Japan for new business.Several other air forces also are looking around for new fighters and will evaluate not only radar and avionics performances, but also how the fighters fare in both beyond-visual-range and close combat. Boeing has been promoting F-18 improvements under its international road map concept since last year, but it continues to dribble out more information as potential non-U.S. customers like Japan are targeted.[...]
Article continued @ Aviation Week
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,841
Reaction score
351

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,841
Reaction score
351

Creative

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Feb 15, 2008
Messages
241
Reaction score
1
I wonder if that pod is designed with the Super Hornet's RCS in mind or can it be used by other aircraft?
 

quellish

I am not actually here.
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
2,074
Reaction score
30
Creative said:
I wonder if that pod is designed with the Super Hornet's RCS in mind or can it be used by other aircraft?
On other aircraft it may actually increase the signature. Many concepts for conformal/buried weapons stores ran into the same problems - an external shape that reduces or mitigates the signature of host aircraft X may do the opposite for host aircraft Y.
 

LowObservable

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
2,170
Reaction score
34
Quellish is most likely right. However, it's one of those things where if you get it right for one design, you have demonstrated the codes &c that will work for another.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
265
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
I understand that it is named the Boeing F-18 Advanced Super Hornet:

"Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet flies with CFTs and weapons pod"
by Dave Majumdar on 9 August, 2013

Source:
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2013/08/boeing-fa-18f-super-hornet-flies-with-cfts-and-weapons-pod/

Boeing has released this photo of a US Navy F/A-18F Super Hornet in the air equipped with conformal fuel tanks and a weapons pod near Saint Louis, Missouri. The hardware is not functional, but is designed to test the aerodynamic qualities of the tanks and pod. Some advanced low-observables treatments are also expected to be tested on the jet which is being leased by the company for the trials.
 

Attachments

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
265
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
Boeing Advanced Super Hornet Media Brief

http://www.aereo.jor.br/wp-content/uploads//2013/08/Advanced-Super-Hornet-Media-Brief.pdf
 

SpudmanWP

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
1,079
Reaction score
27
Really???


One bomb and no AMRAAMs when caring a 1k or 2k bomb. ::)
 

SOC

I look at pictures all day
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
1,182
Reaction score
11
Well the pod isn't huge, and they can carry up to three of them, although I'm not sure if hanging them on the wings wouldn't have a bigger LO impact than if you used, say, a RAM-treated JDAM or something fitted to the engine hardpoints.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,512
Reaction score
579
SOC said:
Well the pod isn't huge, and they can carry up to three of them, although I'm not sure if hanging them on the wings wouldn't have a bigger LO impact than if you used, say, a RAM-treated JDAM or something fitted to the engine hardpoints.
And can you say drraaaaaggggg. Slap those on the Super Hornet's airbrakes and A-10s will be blowing past you.
 

SOC

I look at pictures all day
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
1,182
Reaction score
11
sferrin said:
And can you say drraaaaaggggg. Slap those on the Super Hornet's airbrakes and A-10s will be blowing past you.
I just didn't feel the need to dwell on the obvious ;D That was actually where my LO JDAM idea came from.
 

Mark Nankivil

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2007
Messages
1,559
Reaction score
239
Hi All -

I had the opportunity yesterday to attend the press briefing at Boeing St. Louis for the Advanced Super Hornet. Triton has already posted the link to the briefing powerpoint so need to rehash that. The CFTs make lots of sense when you look at the numbers and getting rid of the 480 gal tanks on the inboard wing points. The EWP makes sense too for a 1st thru 2nd or 3rd day environment. The Growler community is wanting the CFTs as they will make a big difference on range and coverage as the external gas bags impact jamming coverage. I'll bet the CFTs show up on Growlers first...

Attached are a few photos - you can see more at our blog: http://aeroexperience.blogspot.com/

Enjoy the Day! Mark
 

Attachments

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,512
Reaction score
579
After chuckling my way through that brochure I think the Super Hornet needs a new nickname - Captain Kludge. 1st day stealth eh? ::)
 

JFC Fuller

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Messages
3,247
Reaction score
240
SpudmanWP said:
My favorite is

2030+ A2AD Environment

.../...

Total Survivability Solution to Counter Emerging Threats
It's a media brief, they were hardly going to start with "This decidedly average aircraft is a warmed-over version of the airframe that lost to the F-16 desperately attempting, and failing, to now compete with the F-16's successor".....
 

SOC

I look at pictures all day
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
1,182
Reaction score
11
sferrin said:
After chuckling my way through that brochure I think the Super Hornet needs a new nickname - Captain Kludge. 1st day stealth eh? ::)
Hey, LockMart claims the same thing about the JSF and nobody's complaining ;D
 

SpudmanWP

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
1,079
Reaction score
27
Nobody's complaining because the JPO and LM have the operational expertise to back it up.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,512
Reaction score
579
SOC said:
sferrin said:
After chuckling my way through that brochure I think the Super Hornet needs a new nickname - Captain Kludge. 1st day stealth eh? ::)
Hey, LockMart claims the same thing about the JSF and nobody's complaining ;D
When it's real nobody does. ;)
 

LowObservable

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
2,170
Reaction score
34
General Nankivil: What of Boeing? If St Louis has obtained a complete technical reading of the F-35, it is possible, however unlikely, they might find a weakness and exploit it.
Admiral Sferrin: Any attack made by Boeing against the F-35 would be a useless gesture, no matter what technical data they have obtained. This aircraft is now the ultimate power in the universe!
Darth Tuber: The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of FifthGenerationTM Technology by Lockheed Martin. I find your lack of faith disturbing.
(Intelligent discussion makes choking sound)
 

Sundog

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,677
Reaction score
115
LowObservable said:
General Nankivil: What of Boeing? If St Louis has obtained a complete technical reading of the F-35, it is possible, however unlikely, they might find a weakness and exploit it.
Admiral Sferrin: Any attack made by Boeing against the F-35 would be a useless gesture, no matter what technical data they have obtained. This aircraft is now the ultimate power in the universe!
Darth Tuber: The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of FifthGenerationTM Technology by Lockheed Martin. I find your lack of faith disturbing.
(Intelligent discussion makes choking sound)
ROFL!!!
 

nova10

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
56
Reaction score
1
Mark Nankivil said:
Hi All -

I had the opportunity yesterday to attend the press briefing at Boeing St. Louis for the Advanced Super Hornet. Triton has already posted the link to the briefing powerpoint so need to rehash that. The CFTs make lots of sense when you look at the numbers and getting rid of the 480 gal tanks on the inboard wing points. The EWP makes sense too for a 1st thru 2nd or 3rd day environment. The Growler community is wanting the CFTs as they will make a big difference on range and coverage as the external gas bags impact jamming coverage. I'll bet the CFTs show up on Growlers first...

Attached are a few photos - you can see more at our blog: http://aeroexperience.blogspot.com/

Enjoy the Day! Mark


The Growler community might want the External Weapons Pod too, does anyone else think the EWP could (without the bomb bay doors of course) be a good candidate to house the Next Generation Jammer?
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,512
Reaction score
579
Sundog said:
LowObservable said:
General Nankivil: What of Boeing? If St Louis has obtained a complete technical reading of the F-35, it is possible, however unlikely, they might find a weakness and exploit it.
Admiral Sferrin: Any attack made by Boeing against the F-35 would be a useless gesture, no matter what technical data they have obtained. This aircraft is now the ultimate power in the universe!
Darth Tuber: The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of FifthGenerationTM Technology by Lockheed Martin. I find your lack of faith disturbing.
(Intelligent discussion makes choking sound)
ROFL!!!
He has to resort to mockery because the facts don't support him. ;) (And yeah, that was actually pretty funny.) A more apt comparison would put the Super Hornet in the role of Wile E. Coyote with the F-35 as the Roadrunner. One is constantly coming up with all kinds of crazy ideas in an effort to catch up with the Roadrunner and always coming up short. ;D
 

Mark Nankivil

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2007
Messages
1,559
Reaction score
239
Now I have the Star Wars (original) soundtrack playing in my head and I CAN NOT GET IT OUT OF THERE! ;D

I need to look at the briefing PP again but there was a slide that had the NGJ shown under wing and the pod had a low RCS look to it.

The CFTs make loads of sense - get the 480gal bags off the wings, drop the drag and free up a pylon for a weapon. Or if you're the poor pilot that's low end of the totem pole, more fuel to pass along when you are in the KF/A-18E/F role off the carrier...

They admit the EWP is not to any near term requirement but as I see it, if you cannot afford F-35s, getting part way to LO is better than nothing. Might make for a nice SIGINT/Recce pod too....

Doom, doom, doom, doom de doom..... Mark
 

F-14D

I really did change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
1,741
Reaction score
41
Mark Nankivil said:
Now I have the Star Wars (original) soundtrack playing in my head and I CAN NOT GET IT OUT OF THERE! ;D

I need to look at the briefing PP again but there was a slide that had the NGJ shown under wing and the pod had a low RCS look to it.

The CFTs make loads of sense - get the 480gal bags off the wings, drop the drag and free up a pylon for a weapon. Or if you're the poor pilot that's low end of the totem pole, more fuel to pass along when you are in the KF/A-18E/F role off the carrier...

They admit the EWP is not to any near term requirement but as I see it, if you cannot afford F-35s, getting part way to LO is better than nothing. Might make for a nice SIGINT/Recce pod too....

Doom, doom, doom, doom de doom..... Mark

The Boeing Hornet E/F program managers no doubt feel they have to come up with something. USN orders for Super Hornets are over and the end of Growler orders are in sight. Except for the special circumstance of Australia, its performance in international sales competitions is notable for its lack of results. Once the long lead term items start going out of production and suppliers exit the program, the plane rapidly becomes unaffordable, because there's nothing so exceptional about this plane that anyone would want to fund restarting the production line. So somehow they've got to get the USN to do something to keep the program open in hopes of also selling some somewhere.

Something that puzzles me...the briefing talks about how drag goes down, but the description is parsed somewhat carefully. Usually when you add conformals, unless the a/c was designed for them from the start (which the F-15 was), it would you get a significant drag reduction over external tanks, but some rise over a purely "slick" aircraft. Since Boeing has in the past said they need the F414 EPE (which no one is willing to fund) to maintain performance, what changed? I note that "enhanced engine" is in one of the slides. Maybe they're just concerned that with external tanks you can blow the whole assembly of if necessary, but with CFTs there's no way to quickly shed that 4,370 lbs. of extra weight. That was one of the things India noted about the F-16E.

I'm also wondering about that, "More Than 50% Improvement Over Current LO Signature". Generally when they talk about LO with the SH, it's referring to a clean a/c, since even with work on the fuselage, the enemy's radar is going to see the weapons and pylons on a loaded SH. But here are they saying that it's a 50% reduction over an SH with external stores, which would not be surprising, or over a clean SH? If the latter, that's excellent new design, but it could also mean that the original wasn't that low to begin with, except relative to a Classic Hornet.

This could be interesting to watch.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,512
Reaction score
579
Without the new engines it's just going to stay a pig (or become more of one with those draggy external internal bays).
 

Sundog

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,677
Reaction score
115
F-14D said:
The Boeing Hornet E/F program managers no doubt feel they have to come up with something. USN orders for Super Hornets are over and the end of Growler orders are in sight. Except for the special circumstance of Australia, its performance in international sales competitions is notable for its lack of results. Once the long lead term items start going out of production and suppliers exit the program, the plane rapidly becomes unaffordable, because there's nothing so exceptional about this plane that anyone would want to fund restarting the production line. So somehow they've got to get the USN to do something to keep the program open in hopes of also selling some somewhere.

Something that puzzles me...the briefing talks about how drag goes down, but the description is parsed somewhat carefully. Usually when you add conformals, unless the a/c was designed for them from the start (which the F-15 was), it would you get a significant drag reduction over external tanks, but some rise over a purely "slick" aircraft. Since Boeing has in the past said they need the F414 EPE (which no one is willing to fund) to maintain performance, what changed? I note that "enhanced engine" is in one of the slides. Maybe they're just concerned that with external tanks you can blow the whole assembly of if necessary, but with CFTs there's no way to quickly shed that 4,370 lbs. of extra weight. That was one of the things India noted about the F-16E.

I'm also wondering about that, "More Than 50% Improvement Over Current LO Signature". Generally when they talk about LO with the SH, it's referring to a clean a/c, since even with work on the fuselage, the enemy's radar is going to see the weapons and pylons on a loaded SH. But here are they saying that it's a 50% reduction over an SH with external stores, which would not be surprising, or over a clean SH? If the latter, that's excellent new design, but it could also mean that the original wasn't that low to begin with, except relative to a Classic Hornet.

This could be interesting to watch.
They just had a post at AvWeek about this today, and it seems they are getting some of the signature reduction from using a new design fan blocker, in combination with the lack of external stores.

With regard to the drag reduction, everything I've seen earlier stated that it gave the aircraft better area ruling in the transonic region. So it's lowering wave drag, with a modest increase in parasitic drag at lower speeds. Though I have to say they have integrated them well into the aircraft.
 

fightingirish

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
2,184
Reaction score
226
Thanks to Mark & Creative for posting the great pictures!


Here a video from Boeing posted by defenseupdate at YouTube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oaXsK60EB0

Code:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oaXsK60EB0
 

F-14D

I really did change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
1,741
Reaction score
41
Sundog said:
They just had a post at AvWeek about this today, and it seems they are getting some of the signature reduction from using a new design fan blocker, in combination with the lack of external stores.

With regard to the drag reduction, everything I've seen earlier stated that it gave the aircraft better area ruling in the transonic region. So it's lowering wave drag, with a modest increase in parasitic drag at lower speeds. Though I have to say they have integrated them well into the aircraft.

"Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain"!
 
Top