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

Ultra Hornet

Evil Flower

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
223
Reaction score
2
This is a concept I've been working on for fun lately. It's basically a very upscaled F-18 to fill the same 'Rapid Theater Strike" role as the F/B-23 concept, except carrier-based. So to this end it's scaled up, has a larger wing with more sweepback and larger flaps, more powerful engines (F119?) and an internal bay to carry 3x GBU-24 or B61 nuclear weapons. Of course external pylons can be fitted when LO is not a huge concern.


Here's my initial sketchout. You can see it is substantially larger than F/A-18E. There is a single fin variant to the left that came out very A-5 like but I've been told twin tails is where it's at so I went for those. There are also some different ideas for stores carriage including ventral conformal bay pod not unlike the F-15SE conformal fueltank bays but I went for an internal bay equipped with a rotary launcher. Right now there are no additional bays for anti-air missiles but I figure the main bay can be configured to hold AIM-120C for long range fleet defense if that capability is needed.


Also a couple color profiles below - comment away!
 

Attachments

red arrow jag

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Jan 9, 2008
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Thats really looks cool and very modern. A 'money no object' alternative to the Tomcat prehaps! your designs could even be made more stealthy to be brought into line with the F-22?

I now really want to make a scale model of this design!!!
good call evil flower.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,512
Reaction score
579
red arrow jag said:
Thats really looks cool and very modern. A 'money no object' alternative to the Tomcat prehaps! your designs could even be made more stealthy to be brought into line with the F-22?

I now really want to make a scale model of this design!!!
good call evil flower.
Looks like a Vigilante (that's not a bad thing). Power it with a pair of F110-132s with 3D TVC and it will be what the Super Hornet should have been.
 
O

Overkiller

Guest
I have to add my voice to the chorus that it looks very Vigilante-esque B)

Very nice artwork, I'm building a number of what-if Vigilante models at the moment, a mix of RAAF and SAC birds, now I think your "Ultra Hornet" has me inspired to do something similar to a Vigilante.

Cheers

Duncan
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,512
Reaction score
579
Overkiller said:
I have to add my voice to the chorus that it looks very Vigilante-esque B)

Very nice artwork, I'm building a number of what-if Vigilante models at the moment, a mix of RAAF and SAC birds, now I think your "Ultra Hornet" has me inspired to do something similar to a Vigilante.

Cheers

Duncan
Has anybody ever told you you have excellent taste in movies? (your avatar/quote)
 

jsport

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
1,482
Reaction score
60
Yes, A-5 like but also very creative and skill full as well as, yes, original .. Great job
 

fightingirish

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
2,185
Reaction score
228
Great art, Hot Rod transforms into Rodimus Prime... ;) :D
If the front gear was moved a little forward, there could be an additional smaller weapons bay for 2 AIM-9X's or 2 SDB's.
No TVC, but chevron nozzles like on the F-35C.


Just my 2 cents...
 

Evil Flower

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
223
Reaction score
2
Chevron nozzles? Are those the ones with pointy-end petals?


When it comes to weapons carriage, is there any specific reason as to why a fully internal bay is preferable over other solutions? I remember reading about the FB-22 being supposed to use external weapons-carrying stealthy pods (which sounds very B-58 to me at least). IIRC the ventral recon canoe of the RA-5C didn't have a negative impact on speed or fuel consumption, so would it be feasible to use a similar approach for a semi-recessed weapons bay?
 
O

Overkiller

Guest
Evil Flower said:
Chevron nozzles? Are those the ones with pointy-end petals?


When it comes to weapons carriage, is there any specific reason as to why a fully internal bay is preferable over other solutions? I remember reading about the FB-22 being supposed to use external weapons-carrying stealthy pods (which sounds very B-58 to me at least). IIRC the ventral recon canoe of the RA-5C didn't have a negative impact on speed or fuel consumption, so would it be feasible to use a similar approach for a semi-recessed weapons bay?
Just my two'pennarth...

I think as far as internal carriage goes, these days it's less about reducing drag and enhancing top speed with a payload, than signature reduction. So an internal bay would be better from an signature reduction point of view.

On the SAC Vigilante I am building, I am making a new ventral fairing to go were the recon pallette would be, so that it can carry two SRAM's in tandem, it's a bit tight for space, but doable, so I can't see any immediate reason not to have semi recessed carriage of stores, other than the aforementioned signature reduction issues.

As I say, just my own ill informed opinion.

sferrin said:
Has anybody ever told you you have excellent taste in movies? (your avatar/quote)
Thank you. ;D

The Thing is one of my all time favourite movies, I saw it for the first time when I was twelve, and it just blew my mind. That, Alien and Blade Runner were big influences on me as far as the sort of movies I like is concerned. Unfortunately, I actually got round to seeing last year's prequel to The Thing just last night, and it has left a distinctly sour taste in my mouth... :mad: Not a patch on the John Carpenter masterclass.

cheers

Duncan
 

Evil Flower

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
223
Reaction score
2
As it happens, after test-fitting some F135's and the requisite S-ducted inlets and cutouts for the main gear, I found there really is no space for an internal weapons bay with larger capacity that 1 GBU-24 or AGM-84E. Hmm, rethink needed. Perhaps a ventral-conformal weapons pod isn't a bad idea?
 

Evil Flower

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
223
Reaction score
2
Well after modelling a GBU-24 to scale it seems JimBib's layout of 2+1 actually does fit:
 

Attachments

Stargazer2006

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,242
Reaction score
199
Awesome!!! Looks like the little Hornet made the big old Vigilante pregnant and they gave birth to this amazing child... Love it! I definitely want to see more of your work.
 

Evil Flower

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
223
Reaction score
2
Vertically stacked bay as per that Northrop patent. If the bay is loaded with modular "box" racks like that I guess a small but deep bay could easily fit 6-8 AIM-120C to fulfill the fleet defense mission. Also rerouted the inlets again to mask compressor faces.
 

Attachments

utahbob

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Jul 27, 2007
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
I was thinking of doing the same for a kit bashed model! Great renderings and kudos to Evil Flower for images. Time to figure what to get at the local hobby shop.
 

Evil Flower

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
223
Reaction score
2
Did a bit of a redesign today after reading that thread with the Super Hornet upgrades.





So that's CFTs, redesigned cockpit, bigger spine, F135 engines and a conformal weapons pod underneath.
 

fightingirish

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
2,185
Reaction score
228
Awesome picture, Evil Flower! With that conformal weapons pod underneath, it reminds me now more of the RA-5 Vigilante.
Does the canopy now open to the starboard side like on the Rafale or X-35, or upwards like on the Tomcat, Superhornet etc.?
 

Evil Flower

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
223
Reaction score
2
I'd assume it opens upwards like on most US jets but perhaps sideways is simpler?
 

jsport

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
1,482
Reaction score
60
Wow EF, amazing work. :)
 

utahbob

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Jul 27, 2007
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
I picked up a FA-18F in 1/72 and is looking for F-35 in 1/72 or aftermarket F135 cans to kitbash. This will be my fall project. Will post images here or at whatifmodels.com. Can we get a front, top, bottom and rear view?
TIA, Bob
 

Evil Flower

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
223
Reaction score
2
Sure. I'm kind of busy moving this weekend but sometime next week perhaps.
 

drakken

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Dec 10, 2010
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Congratulations,
That's a great design update of the old Hornet. It's an hardest job to update an existing aircraft than create a new one. I had had this idea before creating my own fighter concept and I know how it's difficult.
Now Boeing can study your proposal ;D
Regards
 

malipa

TU Delft AE student
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
190
Reaction score
1
You COULD make the fuselage a bit wider, make the 'hump' of the fuselage longer for more fuel-storage space. you could also arch the wings downward and blend the air intakes with the wing and fuselage to get some sort of triangle with one wide point, lightly bigger wings, so the leading edge is at an 45 degree angle to the fuselage, give the aircraft the f-23 tail (only the rudder-elevators) and due these changes a bigger weapon bay could be possible...
 

Blackscorpy

Hornets, who doesn't love them?
Joined
Sep 1, 2012
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Sweet! Always had a soft spot for Hornets... well maybe that's something to do with the year spent studying and maintaining the things...

Looks like the A-5 had an affair with the PAK FA and Hornet joined up for a threesome... which isn't bad as A-5 is also a sleek bird, yet with the looks for pure power.

I've a few questions though:
1. How does the bend in the inlet duct affect airflow, and to some extent, maintenance? Apparently has a huge effect in RCS reduction though?
2. Would the plane be configured for external pylons for non-stealth/heavy missions? Would integration of LAU-127s and alike be reasonable?
3. Due to the AMRAAM capability, how about the other offensive capabilities? Is it fitted with multirole radar etc or aimed mostly for mud moving?
4. Does it come with internal ladder for the crew? ;D

Keep up the good work...
 

topspeed3

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jan 31, 2011
Messages
215
Reaction score
1
Website
max3fan.blogspot.com
With two F135s it has 382 kN thrust..it need fuel 2.5 times more as a C model...where you gonna cast all that fuel as you have internal weapon bays etc ? ???
 

Evil Flower

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
223
Reaction score
2
This would be much larger than a C or E/F - think about the size of an RA-5C. Also the latest concept carries the weapons in a ventral canoe-type pod.
 
Top