Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet

Has anyone seen any information on why they moved the mounting of the inlet cheek missile forward? Does it have to do with the seeker head, aerodynamics at launch (of the missile), or a center of mass issue? I lean toward the latter, but I was just wondering why the change.
 
The inlet hardpoints not only look as if they moved forward but also seem to be extended down and out as well. Take a look at the model's left side (aircraft's left, not left side of photo) AIM-120, right at the end of the missile if looks like there is a curve in the mount going back into the main body of the airframe. My guesses would be maybe to allow larger stores to be mounted or to give targeting pods a better line of sight around the drop tanks. Right now they will fly with an asymmetrical load of a center line and right wing tanks to give the TGP the best field of view.
 
http://www.snafu-solomon.com/2017/05/advanced-super-hornet-leaders-brief.html
 
Grey Havoc said:
http://www.snafu-solomon.com/2017/05/advanced-super-hornet-leaders-brief.html

Please tell me we aren't referencing SNAFU Blog for stories... :eek:
 
Yeah I'd suggest going back to original source if you see things Solomon has re-posted that you think should be shared here.
 
I didn't think that the text of that particular Boeing handout would be so controversial.

Back to the topic:

http://www.scout.com/military/warrior/story/1775413-navy-details-plan-to-fix-f-18-oxygen-problem
 
This makes no sense to me. Boeing is still building 2 F-18's per month. How long will it take to get any new USN orders filled? Isn't there a backlog of orders for FMS?

Current production

USN - 15 Growlers from 2015 budget to be completed in 2017

So next wave of production bulk is for Kuwait and Canada

USN - 6 (ordered in 2016 - delivery in 2018?)
Kuwait - 28 (option for total of 40) 28 will extend production line through 2018
Canada - 18

52 aircraft not including Kuwait option for additional 12. That's 2.5 yrs of production.

So the following orders are probably going to be filled starting in 2020. Boeing not talking about increasing production to 3-4 per month until early 2020's which just won't happen if 2017 orders are less than 24 per year. I'd like to know if there is an contractual "enhanced delivery schedule" for the 2017/2018 orders. USN doesn't need to be waiting 3 years to get these airframes.

USN - 7 Growlers (ordered March 2017)
USN - 5 18E's (ordered March 2017)
USN - 2 additional (Total of 14 budgeted for 2017)
USN - 14 (proposed 2018 budget)
USN - 23 (proposed 2019 budget)
USN - 14 (proposed 2020 budget)
USN - 14 (proposed 2021 budget)
USN - 15 (proposed 2022 budget)

Boeing has stated that they need to build 24 per year to break even. Proposing to purchase 1/2 that in out budgets expects "someone" will purchase the other half or it's a non-starter.

If India selects the F-18 Boeing will build a production line in India to fill those orders. Is there an expectation that India will purchase the other half of that production while a plant is built in India? Is that why Boeing offered a bargain basement price of ~$70M for new jets?

Like I said, this makes little sense to me when full F-35 production is expected (17 per month) in 2019. Also, new engines for F-35 will be available ~2021.

Navy knows they're going to F-35C. IOC in 2018/2019. Price drop to ~100M by 2020 with current pitifully low production rates. Increase F-35 production rates, drop prices sooner, accelerate CAW integration.

Need more information about what's going on. Don't see USN purchasing F-18's built in India.
 
Like I said, this makes little sense to me when full F-35 production is expected (17 per month) in 2019. Also, new engines for F-35 will be available ~2021.

The Navy (as per the materials released along with the FY18 budget) intends on procuring 9 F-35C's in FY19, 16 in FY20, and 24 in FY21. This is obviously subject to change given that the OMB director specifically inserted that caveat during his rollout. One would imagine that a couple of strike fighter reviews that Secretary Mattis ordered may also contribute.

As far as ultimately how many strike fighters they buy per year, it would probably depend upon how many they loose in a given year (retirement), and how the Navy plans to grow the strike fighter fleet. I could see them buying higher numbers of both the F-35C, and F-18E/F, or the Navy could simply increase the F-35B buy rate while holding the F-35C rate steady until the 2020s. Given that the USMC has no other strike fighter supplier they may get priority with limited DON funding but I agree they should be pursuing a more aggressive F-35C buy rate.

The FYDP Purchase plan for the Super Hornet is of course subject to change, and it is always possible that the supplier base concerns will push the Navy/DOD or the Congress to add additional aircraft if some of the export orders they may be assuming do not pan out.

I don't think the Navy is done with the Growler either. I could see a few dozen Growlers being acquired over the top of those currently on order.
 

Attachments

  • F35RampUpDOD.jpg
    F35RampUpDOD.jpg
    56 KB · Views: 538
kitnut617 said:
The Canadian order is in doubt though.


I'd forgotten that they hadn't signed a contract yet. One of the NATO 1%'ers.

Rhino is just different than the C/D 18's that Canada flies. Unless they are going to replace their fleet w/Super Hornets that purchase is goofy. Different engines, avionics, simulators, etc, etc. Think of all the support equipment they would have to purchase for just 18 airframes. Just make the decision to purchase 150 Rhino's or commit to the 65 F-35's. They'll need that many additional F-18's.

Perhaps the Boeing kerfuffle will give them a political "out" to return to the 35's. I'd almost like to see them order a boatload of 18's. Helps keep the line going for the folks in St. Louis and makes room for the US to pick up additional 35's.
 
​Canadian plans put interim Super Hornet deal on hold

07 JUNE, 2017 SOURCE: FLIGHTGLOBAL.COM BY: LEIGH GIANGRECO WASHINGTON DC

Canada’s Liberal government has unveiled its new defence policy, proposing 88 new fighters for the Royal Canadian Air Force, but pushing back plans to acquire an interim fleet of 18 Boeng F/A-18E/F Super Hornets amid a rift between Boeing Commercial Aircraft and Bombardier.

At the top of Canada’s military aircraft priorities, defence minister Harjit Sajjan outlined the air force’s plan to acquire 88 new fighters – an increase from the previous government’s plan to purchase 65 jets – and to recapitalise the Lockheed Martin CP-140 Aurora anti-submarine warfare and surveillance fleet.

But the defence policy dodges a previous plan to acquire 18 Super Hornets as an interim solution for solving the service’s capability gap.

“At the time of publication, the Government of Canada is continuing to explore the potential acquisition of an interim aircraft to supplement the CF-18 fighter aircraft fleet until the completion of the transition to the permanent replacement aircraft,” the policy document states.

Last week, Canadian defence officials said talks with Boeing over the interim deal had dissolved after the US company accused Bombardier of "dumping" its CSeries jet onto the US market. During a defence policy roll-out, officials said the interim deal had been “interrupted and the moment”, but that the larger procurement of 88 aircraft would remain an independent and open competition.

Outside of fighters, Canada plans to invest in intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance platforms, including remotely piloted aircraft (RPA), and in several other aircraft recapitalisation efforts. Its new policy document outlines the need to invest in the air force’s next-generation strategic air-to-air tanker/transport capability, which would replace the Airbus A310-based CC-150 Polaris, and the de Havilland Canada CC-138 Twin Otter utility transport replacement. The government plans to acquire a next generation multi-mission aircraft to replace the CP-140 Aurora maritime patrol aircraft, and to fund medium-altitude RPA.

Canada also plans to make its fixed-wing search and rescue aircraft fleet operational, though Leonardo has challenged a contract award to Airbus Defence & Space with the C295.

In part, Canada’s new defence policy could be seen as a response to US President Donald Trump’s threats to NATO members to contribute their fair share. Canada has proposed a 70% increase to its defence budget over the next decade, from $19 billion annually to $32.7 billion. Those numbers isolated may seem robust, but total forecast defence spending as a percentage of gross domestic product is projected to reach 1.4% by 2024, according to the new policy document.

That would remain short of the 2% of GDP contribution recommended by NATO. Canadian defence officials appeared cagey when asked about the source of funding and whether it would remain predictable over the next decade, but Sajjan says funding exists.
 
GTX said:
​Canadian plans put interim Super Hornet deal on hold

07 JUNE, 2017 SOURCE: FLIGHTGLOBAL.COM BY: LEIGH GIANGRECO WASHINGTON DC

Canada’s Liberal government has unveiled its new defence policy, proposing 88 new fighters for the Royal Canadian Air Force, but pushing back plans to acquire an interim fleet of 18 Boeng F/A-18E/F Super Hornets amid a rift between Boeing Commercial Aircraft and Bombardier.

At the top of Canada’s military aircraft priorities, defence minister Harjit Sajjan outlined the air force’s plan to acquire 88 new fighters – an increase from the previous government’s plan to purchase 65 jets – and to recapitalise the Lockheed Martin CP-140 Aurora anti-submarine warfare and surveillance fleet.

But the defence policy dodges a previous plan to acquire 18 Super Hornets as an interim solution for solving the service’s capability gap.

“At the time of publication, the Government of Canada is continuing to explore the potential acquisition of an interim aircraft to supplement the CF-18 fighter aircraft fleet until the completion of the transition to the permanent replacement aircraft,” the policy document states.

Last week, Canadian defence officials said talks with Boeing over the interim deal had dissolved after the US company accused Bombardier of "dumping" its CSeries jet onto the US market. During a defence policy roll-out, officials said the interim deal had been “interrupted and the moment”, but that the larger procurement of 88 aircraft would remain an independent and open competition.

Outside of fighters, Canada plans to invest in intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance platforms, including remotely piloted aircraft (RPA), and in several other aircraft recapitalisation efforts. Its new policy document outlines the need to invest in the air force’s next-generation strategic air-to-air tanker/transport capability, which would replace the Airbus A310-based CC-150 Polaris, and the de Havilland Canada CC-138 Twin Otter utility transport replacement. The government plans to acquire a next generation multi-mission aircraft to replace the CP-140 Aurora maritime patrol aircraft, and to fund medium-altitude RPA.

Canada also plans to make its fixed-wing search and rescue aircraft fleet operational, though Leonardo has challenged a contract award to Airbus Defence & Space with the C295.

In part, Canada’s new defence policy could be seen as a response to US President Donald Trump’s threats to NATO members to contribute their fair share. Canada has proposed a 70% increase to its defence budget over the next decade, from $19 billion annually to $32.7 billion. Those numbers isolated may seem robust, but total forecast defence spending as a percentage of gross domestic product is projected to reach 1.4% by 2024, according to the new policy document.

That would remain short of the 2% of GDP contribution recommended by NATO. Canadian defence officials appeared cagey when asked about the source of funding and whether it would remain predictable over the next decade, but Sajjan says funding exists.


Is it just me or does anyone else think this is a price negotiation ploy?
 
bobbymike said:
http://aviationweek.com/combat-aircraft/us-navy-green-lights-new-and-improved-super-hornet
Good for Boeing and the Navy. B) Glad to see SuperBugs for decades to come. Although from reading the article I guess the proposed engine upgrades are a no-go :-[. Every other upgrade seems to be a go though, so that's good.
 
It is slightly disappointing that they couldn't get the internally fitted IRST (like with the Advanced Super Hornet demo airframe), but then again it apparently meant removing the M61.
 
Without the improved engines and internal IRST I can't say I'm very impressed by this upgrade.

Would they really have had to remove the M61 for that though? Seems a bit extreme.
 
I'm actually a bit confused now - the "original" Advanced Super Hornet airframe they showed off didn't have an IRST, but also didn't have an M61 - maybe they replaced it with a notional electronics pallet like on the Growler.

With the renders / photos of a later version with an integrated IRST, the gun makes a return - with an EOTS-style system, that's impossible, because the optics redirect light upwards to FPAs, etc above it (and on the Super Hornet the M61's drum sits there, between the radar back-end and nose gear bay), but I think they did what I was going to suggest - have all the electronics and optics external in what would essentially be a conformal SNIPER, etc pod.

The issue with doing it like this however is you lose a fair bit of field of regard, plus to do M61 maintenance you have to remove the IRST (because the gun is meant to drop down (IIRC once the nose cone hinges off and the radar is slid forward).
 
That the Navy had an IRST program for the F-14 but did not request an integrated IRST when they pursued the Super Hornet program speaks of their short sightedness. Since retrofitting hundreds of aircraft will not be easy they are forced to pursue the podded concept, either as a stand alone pod like the air-force or the centerline tank installation that they currently plan on procuring.
 
bobbymike said:
https://news.usni.org/2017/06/13/navy-intends-to-buy-80-more-super-hornets-in-fydp-to-ease-fighter-shortfall

80 over 5 years? Why bother... 200 over 5 years would be meaningful.
 
These Super Hornets are being bought to compensate for accelerated wear, not to increase the operational fleet size. I don't think increasing your total fleet by 40% would really fit those intentions.
 
Colonial-Marine said:
Without the improved engines and internal IRST I can't say I'm very impressed by this upgrade.

And the Super Bug could certainly use an improved engine with some more thrust :-\
 
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/11355/this-syria-bound-super-hornet-is-carrying-a-uniquely-massive-bomb-load
 
Any news on what version F414 the Block III will have? Seems like it's been a while since any news on the EPE or EDE versions has come out.
 
From the articles I've read thus far, the Block III won't itself bring a new engine; they'll likely just bring in EPEs, EDEs or something even newer in the future (I doubt it'll be that long of a wait though).
 
http://aviationweek.com/defense/boeing-touts-advanced-fighter-versions-different-animals
 
bobbymike said:
http://aviationweek.com/defense/boeing-touts-advanced-fighter-versions-different-animals

The U.S. Navy already has all the Super Hornets it originally intended to buy, but new threats and force requirements could prompt it to buy as many as 120 additional F/A-18E/Fs while transitioning to Boeing’s Block 3 model beyond fiscal 2019.

On the F/A-18 side, the Navy has decided to keep buying Super Hornets alongside the F-35C to meet an immediate need for greater numbers of strike fighters. The service’s program of record was 563 F/A-18 E/F aircraft, but now Boeing sees opportunities for significant follow-on orders. All aircraft delivered after fiscal 2019, for domestic and international customers, will be Block 3 versions.

Kuwait has been approved to buy “up to 40” F/A-18E/Fs, and Canada is considering an “interim fleet” of about 18 aircraft to bolster its outdated CF-18 Hornets. The Canadian deal could fall through, depending on how hard Boeing pushes its trade dispute with Canada over government subsidies to Montreal-based Bombardier in the commercial aircraft market. The Super Hornet is also being promoted to India and Finland. Boeing recently lost to Lockheed’s F-35 in Denmark.

Larry Burt, Boeing’s director of global sales and marketing for global strike programs, says near-term opportunities would take F/A-18 production into the mid-2020s. The company needs to build about 24 Super Hornets per year for production to remain viable.

As different as the Block 3 version of the Super Hornet is from its predecessors, Boeing is already looking at capabilities for Block 4.

“We’re not trying to be the F-35; you don’t need a fifth-gen for all missions,” he says. However, he adds that it is easier to evolve and enhance the F/A-18 and F-15 airframes than low-observable platforms like the F-35.

“You could keep evolving the mission systems, sensors and capability of the Super Hornet and maybe eventually put a new wrapper on it,” Burt notes.

The Growler is a story of “incremental innovation” for Boeing. The Navy has almost doubled its original program of record to about 160 from 88.

The service is now moving forward with planned upgrades that will keep the aircraft relevant into the 2040s. The centerpiece of the “Advanced Growler” is Raytheon’s Next-Generation Jammer, which passed a critical design review in April. Complementary features are improvements to the Growler’s integrated ALQ-218 radar warning, electronic support and electronic intelligence systems, which also are produced by Northrop.

Boeing says it is still in contract negotiations with the U.S. Navy to pull all of the planned Growler upgrades into a single service-life upgrade program, which would include an extension of the aircraft’s structural service life to 9,000 from 6,000 hr. The airframer also is pushing the GE F414 Enhanced Engine for the Growler and Super Hornet, which would provide 18% more power.
 

Attachments

  • DF-BOEINGSTRAT_factbox3.jpg
    DF-BOEINGSTRAT_factbox3.jpg
    257.9 KB · Views: 1,407
Hood said:
It looks like Boeing could lose out after all on getting any Super Hornet orders from Canada.
They seem to be looking at ex-RAAF airframes instead.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/canada-entertains-australian-hornet-buy-to-fill-int-440940/

The Australian option is only for classic Hornets not Super Hornets. Moreover, it would only be a very interim option giving more spares etc to stretch the life of the CF-188s. Others such as Malaysia are also interested in the RAAF Classic Hornets.
 
"Liberals looking at alternatives to Super Hornets as dispute with Boeing rages"
by Lee Berthiaume, The Canadian Press

September 6, 2017

Source:


OTTAWA — It once appeared the Liberal government would almost certainly buy Super Hornet fighter jets from U.S. aerospace giant Boeing Co. — but it's now clear that other options are on the table.

Aside from the Super Hornets, the government are also pondering used jets and could even end up extending the lives of Canada's CF-18s as its dispute with Boeing continues to escalate.

Speaking to reporters in Kelowna, B.C., where Liberal MPs are meeting before the return of Parliament, Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan said the government is actively looking at alternatives to the Super Hornets as an interim fighter.

"We had identified that the Super Hornets could potentially fill that gap, but ... Boeing has not been a partner, especially when it comes to dealing with our aerospace sector," Sajjan said Wednesday.

"So we are looking at other options."

Those alternatives include deploying a team of defence officials in the past few weeks to look at some of Australia's used F/A-18s, which the country is selling as it prepares to receive new F-35 stealth fighters.

Several retired air force officers say the F/A-18 is very similar to Canada's CF-18s, and buying the used planes from Australia would be much more cost effective than new Super Hornets.

"It's a far better idea than buying Super Hornets because you're at least conceptually using the same airframe," said former chief of defence staff Tom Lawson.

"If they are interested in addressing the short-term capability gap, then they may want to consider that, and it's a far, far better plan, far less expensive and far less interruptive than purchasing Super Hornets."

But Australia isn't the only option if the government is looking to strengthen Canada's CF-18 fleet on a temporary basis until they can be replaced in a full competition.

Kuwait is also looking to sell its used F/A-18s in favour of Super Hornets, while several allies will be getting rid of used F-16s and other fighter aircraft in the coming years as they are replaced by F-35s.

National Defence said officials have not visited any other countries, but it would not say whether there have been discussions about the availability of used aircraft.

Some experts have also suggested that with the U.S. Navy looking to keep many of its own F/A-18s flying past 2025, it might be time for Canada to consider extending the lives of its CF-18s again.

Officials have previously considered the option, but it was deemed too expensive because of the expected difficulty in finding parts — which would be less of a problem if the U.S. kept its jets flying.

Lisa Campbell, head of military procurement at Public Services and Procurement Canada, would not comment on specific options being considered.

"You can make sure we do our due diligence," she said in an interview. "We really do. We and the Department of National Defence. These are major purchases. They have big implications."

The Liberal government has not officially walked away from its plan to purchase interim Super Hornets, which it announced last November amid claims Canada didn't have enough fighter jets.

Campbell said officials are still waiting for the U.S. to say when the Super Hornets could be delivered, and at what cost.

The information was requested in March, and expected by the beginning of September, but it still hasn't materialized.

"We had submitted something that said: 'Here's the capability that we need, here's when we need it, here's the cost that we need it,'" Campbell said.

"We do expect a response back from them ... and we do expect that in the next couple of weeks."

Many defence insiders and industry representatives have circled Sept. 25 on their calendars as the make-or-break moment for interim Super Hornets.

That is when the U.S. Commerce Department will present the findings of its investigation — prompted by a complaint from Boeing — into whether Bombardier sold its CSeries passenger jets at an unfairly low price with help from federal subsidies.

An adverse finding could result in fines or tariffs being imposed on Bombardier, but could also prompt the Liberal government, which has criticized the investigation, to pull the plug on any deal with Boeing.

Boeing has said it won't drop its complaint to the U.S. Commerce Department because the case is important to its long-term prosperity.

During a frank phone call Tuesday with the governor of Missouri, where the Super Hornets are built, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in turn accused Boeing of receiving billions in subsidies.

Trudeau also noted of the number of Missouri jobs that depend on the jets, and the fact Canada is the state's largest trading partner.
 
Triton said:
"Liberals looking at alternatives to Super Hornets as dispute with Boeing rages"
by Lee Berthiaume, The Canadian Press

September 6, 2017

Source:
http://rdnewsnow.com/article/551043/former-brass-urge-liberals-buy-used-australian-jets-not-new-super-hornets


OTTAWA — It once appeared the Liberal government would almost certainly buy Super Hornet fighter jets from U.S. aerospace giant Boeing Co. — but it's now clear that other options are on the table.

Aside from the Super Hornets, the government are also pondering used jets and could even end up extending the lives of Canada's CF-18s as its dispute with Boeing continues to escalate.

Speaking to reporters in Kelowna, B.C., where Liberal MPs are meeting before the return of Parliament, Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan said the government is actively looking at alternatives to the Super Hornets as an interim fighter.

"We had identified that the Super Hornets could potentially fill that gap, but ... Boeing has not been a partner, especially when it comes to dealing with our aerospace sector," Sajjan said Wednesday.

"So we are looking at other options."

Those alternatives include deploying a team of defence officials in the past few weeks to look at some of Australia's used F/A-18s.....

Hmmm. I'm guessing that support costs from Boeing will be high. Boeing is going to get it's "pound of flesh" one way or another.
 
The unit cost paid by the USN has been published. There are no secrets. The cost that Canada could pay is that of a new design with advanced capabilities that still have no logistical framework in the country. It's not the plane, it's the plane, the surrounding eco-system, the weapon, the training of personnel etc... You can't divide the total cost per the number of items here. What you can do however is to get an idea of the cost of all the surrounding expenses ;)

The SH remains a substantial evolution from the classical Hornet. What we can hope is that this investment won't be divested with yet another switch in the future.
 
TomcatViP said:
The unit cost paid by the USN has been published. There are no secrets. The cost that Canada could pay is that of a new design with advanced capabilities that still have no logistical framework in the country. It's not the plane, it's the plane, the surrounding eco-system, the weapon, the training of personnel etc... You can't divide the total cost per the number of items here. What you can do however is get an idea of the cost of all the surrounding expenses ;)

The SH remain a substential evolution from the classical Hornet. What we can hope is that this investment won't be divested with yet another switch in the future.

I hope it get's 25% more thrust.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom