at slow speed it will not keep up with the F-16 in a prolonged/sustained dogfights.
There is no thrust for it nor there aerodynamics. It has no stamina.
It weighs as much as Mig29SMT and has much less thrust than it.
1 Like
No need to maneuver for long, just shoot the AIM-9X F-16 in the face as fast as possible.
1 Like
True, that is tactic I have read, they want to end the fight as soon as possible
Information about JHMCS symbology for F/A-18 series aircraft, taken from public document.
Seems to be accurate compared to the real one.
2 Likes
Hornet would dominate almost anything in a 1v1. If you get slow with a hornet you are in a lot of trouble as that thing can point its nose easily at low speed. Unfortunately that is not what the meta is which is stay fast, which is something the hornet is not good at.
1 Like
It is testing conducted by our member @RideR2 You can find it here
The original F/A-18A was limited to 7.5G, I believe the C models and later were unrestricted up to 9G’s as the airframes were found to have a much more extensive lifespan than they had previously thought or something. Don’t quote me on that, I’d have to dig into it again to remember exactly what was going on with that. It’s not like the F-15 which was limited in G’s due to concerns pilots would accidentally exceed the G limit too easily since the F/A-18 had a proper FBW.
Let’s not forget that the sustained turn rate is almost on par with the F-16 and superior to the F-15 in many regards. People seem to think the low static thrust to weight is a bad thing, the poor acceleration comes mostly from the low speed angle and higher drag from the high-lift devices.
Again, it can do perfectly fine against any of its’ adversaries in sustained turn rate as well.
I disagree, it will be able to maintain a high subsonic mach number. Supersonic speeds are where it really suffers. You can see in the public data the acceleration really only slows down at high subsonic speeds… below which it is superior than even the Gripen and that thing does fantastic in-game currently… the Gripens’ advantage is the transonic and supersonic regions where the delta design excels though hence supercruising.
Although, yes… it will most certainly dominate anything in a 1v1 when it is added to the game. At least, it should… but we saw how Gaijin has been modeling things as of late. Must be a new FM dev or something imo.
2 Likes
The Hornet C ( and Super Hornet) is limited to the same weight as the A version, 7.5g. The Navy has it that way. The airframe can take more, but in terms of operational economy the g limit is electronically set. It can be turned off for a very limited time by the pilot. But it doesn’t happen because the pilot has to explain why he overloaded the aircraft by more than 7.5g. If he didn’t have a good reason, like a collision with the ground, he can be penalized for it. The aircraft has to be checked and the airframe endurance is reduced. The Navy doesn’t like to see that.
The sustained maneuvering of the Hornet is usually not good at all altitudes compared to the F-15 and F-16. If these two aircraft maintain speed the Hornet will be at a disadvantage unless it can make quick decisions and pull the fight down to lower speeds/high AoA. There it has a great chance of beating the F-16 and a slightly lesser chance of beating the F-15 ( the F-15 has better high AoA maneuverability than the F-16).
But it’s up to the pilots, the Hornet can win even in sustained maneuvering if the F-15/F-16 pilots are worse or make bad decisions. DACT is highly dynamic and the pilot has to make the right decision in a split second.
2 Likes
The F-18C is also slower than both the F-8E Crusader and the F4E Phantom II (much slower).
F-18C is over 130 km/h faster than the F-8E at sea level…F-8E is literally the slowest afterburning jet, as far as I know.
1 Like
The F8 was notoriously fast my friend you are thinking of the Demon.
The F8E Crusaders top speed is 1,227 mph, 1,974 km/h) at 36,000 ft.
The F-18C’s top speed is 1,190 mph, 1,915 km/h) at 40,000 ft.
The F-18 is slower than the Crusader even flying 4,000 feet higher.
We have the acceleration for both, we can test. I know already the F-8 is certainly going to lose in regards to acceleration right off the bat… that’s obvious.
These limits are completely ignored in war thunder, (see the F-15, MiG-29, F-16, Gripen, ETC) …and have no negative effect on the performance in-game. It just expands the envelope into areas where it will excel even further. A low-fuel Hornet will simply dominate an F-15 in-game and the F-16 will only give it a challenge in a low altitude and high speed sustained turn. The F-18’s ability to tighten down or get position before they end up that low will be all he needs to dominate the F-16 even in sustained turn engagements. It will be similar to how the Mirage 2000 fights the MiG-29 currently.
We have to understand that this is War Thunder. The pilots can handle extreme G forces and we fly to fuel levels far below bingo regularly. The Hornet will be an absolute monster in a 1v1.
5 Likes
The acceleration of the F8E was legendary in the Vietnam war. .
I do not doubt the F-18C is better in acceleration, but the point is the Crusader and the F-18C are comparable in acceleration and speed performance. Not comparing it to the Gripen or any other 12.7 fighters like you been trying to do lol.
It cannot even outrun a phantom. It will get ran down at any altitude by it.
MiG-17F wants to have a word
2 Likes
F-18 will rip at 10-11G’s at low weighs, decreasing with weight.
4 Likes
Yes, you’re certainly right, there are a lot of things in the game that are different than in reality, I think the Hornet will be a pretty good dogfight machine in the game. King of AoA and with bingo fuel it will be an absolute carnage, yes I think so.
1 Like
No, it’s not the King of AoA, the Flanker is, and will always be better than any version of the F-18 to ever enter service. It has stronger engines, more lift, aerodynamic integral design and vortex generators for its elevators.
The F-18C has none of these technologies except a leading-edge root extension that the Navy had to increase in the super hornet to offset its previous versions poor carrier operation performance and increase payload.
It’s the Navy’s pickup truck. Nothing more, nothing less. It is not the premier air to air platform the Navy preferred. The F-14 was but cost too much.
The F-18 is known for its high nose authority not alpha. It’s not supermaneuverable. It is probably going to be just like the Crusader with a very tight turn radius at slow speed but will die out in any long-sustained turn fights.
1 Like
If we’re talking about slow speeds. In pure handling and maneuverability terms, the F-18 Hornet is better. It can roll well above 35 AoA and the pilot doesn’t have to worry about falling into a spin. It’s full under pilot control. The Su 27 can’t do that. It can’t fly like that. The Su 27 has a thrust advantage, very properly, and a good pilot can beat the Hornet, surely. But he has to watch out for the Hornet’s better maneuverabillity in this speeds
1 Like
How slow though? 200 knots is landing. The Flanker can turn better and do it at higher speeds and go vertical.
I agree the F-18 is probably better at landing on a boat. But it’s not going to matter much in anything else because its weak thrust to weight. Then when the naval Flanker comes then what? That insanely slow speed handling that may have been an advantage is no more.
The F-18 is not a dogfighter (like the F-16) or air superiority fighter (like the Flanker/Tomcat). It’s a pickup truck for the Navy that is sole reason why they brought it in service. To cut cost and fill a multirole assignment while the F-14D was the preferred designated air superiority platform. The Navy did not want to keep the F-18 as its main air to air platform but was forced.
It has no top speed; 3rd generation fighters are faster. The acceleration is slightly better than a Crusader. It definitely cannot catch or outclimb the F-104S ASA. It cannot outrun the Mig23ML/MLD. The Harriers and Yak-141 will blow it out of the water in acceleration.
Its 12.0-12.3 aircraft at best.
It’s going to sit with the J8F, Yak-141 & F-14A early. Especially when active missiles come. Along with the Aim-120 Harriers, F.3 Tornados and F-16As like the MLU.
2 Likes
The F-18 is a very good dogfighter, in a clean configuration, absolutely. The F-15 has more thrust and good handling at low speed and high AoA, and the Hornet can play with the Eagle ( shhh, I’m a big Eagle fan).
1 Like
The F-14 was excellent, but a political decision favored the F-18E/F, which to me is a shame about a good aircraft.
2 Likes