Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet

NMaude said:
No doubt the USN will attempt to salvage the F/A-18E wreck to stop hostile foreign powers (PRC, Iran or maybe even Russia) from trying to raise would is no doubt a largely intact aircraft to examine its' tech.
Click to expand...

While I'm sure neither of these sides would complain about such an opportunity, one has to ask realistically if:

a) is there still a lot to learn for China and Russia from an aging Super Hornet

and

b) if that potential intel is worth trying to salvage the wreckage with an entire US Navy CSG in close proximity

By the time the Truman leaves, significant portions of the aircraft would most likely be unusable. I think the US may raise the wreckage, but not necessarily because they're afraid of intel getting leaked. In the age of cyberwarfare and large scale hacker attacks, I wouldn't be surprised if China and Russia have plenty of digital Intel on various US systems. Same thing the other way around, obviously. Surely the "real deal" is always a bit different, but cost, time and effort have to be taken into account as well.
 
Moose said:
We've been hitting them for months, just blew up a port a few days ago. All it's accomplished it's getting a bunch of reapers shot down, a Rhino in the drink, and using up weapons we could be detering PRC with. But hey at least the President Who Will End All Wars has articulated a coherent strategy about.....well F-ing nothing at all really.
Click to expand...

I don't really understand what the point of the US involvement is anyway. If a multi year, Saudi led coalition couldn't root them out, how is an half assed bombing campaign supposed to do that??? Just like the Taliban, the Houthis are most likely here to stay, like it or not. In my eyes the only viable options are diplomacy and funding regional proxies as rivals to undermine and degrade them. Such approaches also wouldn't waste precious munitions, let alone my beloved F/A-18E/Fs.

Obviously there would also be the option of a real invasion, but that would be political suicide for the current US government.

I bet China loves to see all the material getting wasted for nothing in the Red Sea.
 
Two comments with reference to the Chinese and the mission and matériel being used.

If this level of military conflict and use of ordinance emboldens the Chinese to invade Taiwan (or weakens deterrence to the same end) we’re in far worse shape militarily than anyone can even imagine.

The Cold War 2 1/2 war doctrine has become the “fight one small regional terrorist organization and leave the rest of the world to our adversaries doctrine”
 
Realistically a war with China would take up all the U.S. bandwidth except for minor contingencies. I doubt the Red Sea is a serious consideration for the Chinese one way or other, but it does seem to be ineffective and a waste of resources.
 
Last edited:
ComradeVortex said:
so they managed to lost 3 F-18s during the operations against Houthis?
1 because of "friendly fire", 1 due to it being unsecured while the carrier was taking evasive manuevers and now this?
Click to expand...
I mean come on thats enough help for the Houthis. Anymore and they actualy get close to an good K/D Ratio
 
bobbymike said:
If this level of operation is risking world wide critical munitions shortages then start learning Mandarin cause it’s over.
Click to expand...

Given the assertion that these strikes might enable the "govt of Yemen" to displace the Houthis, the rest of the article is completely non-serious.
 
BlackBat242 said:
SEAD mission, not DECM escort with the capability to knock off 1 radar site if needed.

Back in Desert Storm there were strike missions flown with A-6Es and with EA-6B escort jamming - some of the A-6Es carried a HARM in addition to their main ordnance load, while there was also an A-6E or two carrying 4 HARMs.

The all-HARM A-6Es were tasked solely with radar site destruction, while the "bomber" A-6Es used their HARMs on SAM radars near their strike target.

See Angles of Attack: An A-6 Intruder Pilot's War by Peter Hunt for the above actions.

He was piloting one of the strike A-6Es that carried a HARM "for self-defense" - because in the pre-strike briefing he had noticed a SA-2 site near his planned flight path to his target that had not been allocated to one of the SEAD aircraft. He requested, and received, permission to adjust his ordnance to accommodate the missile.

When the SA-2 site launched missiles then "went active" to guide them, he fired the first HARM ever launched from an A-6E in combat - the radar went dead, and never came back on the entire air campaign. ;)
Click to expand...
Apparently on opening night of Desert Storm, at one point, they had 200 HARMs in the air at the same time.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom