This is due to the 1947 Paris Peace Treaty which prevented Finland to operate aircraft with internal bomb bays and air-to-ground guided missiles, so Finland ordered F/A-18C/Ds without A2G capabilities.
Later, the LITENING targeting pod and JDAM, JSOW-C, JASSM were integrated to Finnish Hornets by MLU 2 program.
That means F/A-18C early from finnish might be all-weather tactical fighter aircraft like F-15 Eagle & F-14A Tomcat ?
F/A-18C MLU 2/Mod. 2015 for finnish air force upgraded nearby F/A-18E Super Hornet Block II standard ?
No Legacy hornets are upgraded to super hornet, they’re two separate aircraft entirely.
It definitely improved a lot by MLU upgrade, but not that much.
You guess rank IX (13.0-13.7) for 4+ gen & 4++ gen Multirole fighter only ?
And 4th gen fighter aircraft upgrade technology similar to 4+ gen fighter standard might place at rank IX ?
Maybe or maybe not. Quite hard to predict it at the moment.
As some of you may or may not be aware
The suggestions sub forum is finally open so I took that chance to (re)post the F/A-18A Hornet suggestion there
Currently, it’s pending approval but if I did everything correct, it should be approved soon(ish).
EDIT: @Acroute I used the specifications you posted in this topic, I have credited you in that post and hyperlinked it to that post which lists the sources. I hope you don’t mind.
Well it’s a bit off topic, but you’re wrong. You can keep posting the walls of text you come up with on the spot if you want. Just be aware that someone will likely always show up to dispute your nonsense as seen in the last week or so. Next slide.
Literally navy.mil, it’s a primary source. It’s literally the best source short of the manufacturers documentation (still classified currently, but a lot of it is available online).
That’s not true, but that’s also not what I was saying. I said the larger LERX and fuselage modifications allow it to perform all of the same duties as the legacy hornet while carrying an additional two pylons.
That is, it can do carrier operations (which require it to come in at slow speeds and high AoA for landing or takeoff). It can do this carrying additional weight and pylons. It’s really just simple like that. The aircraft was made larger as well, so larger surfaces are pretty much a standard you’d expect from up-sizing the aircraft.
The MiG-29 and F/A-18 have similar aerodynamic features from convergent evolution of design, but the F/A-18 utilizes them better. It just makes sense afterall, it’s a newer design. Even in a dogfight the F/A-18 is a better fighter than the MiG-29. They better utilized relaxed static stability and didn’t make the same error as the F-16 by making the design itself resistant to departure. They allow the pilot to stall the aircraft in high AoA conditions which was a chief complaint of the fighting falcon pilots.
Just because the aircraft doesn’t perform the Cobra regularly does not mean it’s worse, the T/W of the F/A-18 is ~1.54 on empty weight. The MiG-29’s (9-12) is 1.277…
They drop to 1.34 and 1.12 with +1500kg weight (assuming fuel and gun ammo) respectively…
So yes, you don’t want to believe me and wanted to say that 1:1 T/W was everything. I pointed out it’s not… you’re wrong… but the F/A-18 having <1:1 means little because neither does the Su-27 in similar circumstances. Even against the MiG-29 carrying similar fuel and ordnance it has higher. The F/A-18 will simply curb stomp the MiG-29 series into the dirt, especially since it will be fighting the fatter models for the most part.
You gotta do some research and follow up what you say with a source cuz all this babbling is just harming any credibility and people are constantly wondering why you are even here if you’re not gonna really try to contribute to good conversation.
I advise you start reading those walls of text, lest you end up copying paste something I said earlier, that you previously denied a reality once again.
I do not care to discuss the F-18 at the moment.
Thanks for pinging me when I said stop, your elementary knowledge on aviation is worthless to me. Stick to tractors my boy.
The source directly contradicts the wall of text. As stated. Please bring one next time you want to write nonsense, and stop complaining about me pinging you when you’ve done nothing but refer to me in every other comment for the last month. (and literally tagged me by username, can’t pretend you were referring to people in a derogatory manner and not implying myself)
I’ll stop pinging you now, don’t summon me if you don’t want to interact. If you don’t want to be corrected, stop making stuff up.
My apologies, when I mention the uneducated. That covers an entire unspecific class, not specifically you, though you certainly fall under the umbrella.
Sorry for the confusion and mix up.
isnt f18 closer in production date to su27 than f15 is? why does russia get 8 years younger plane
because their planes are worse and would be stomped?
Production dates have been deviated by GJ its about capabilities now a days.
The SU27 and F-15 & F-14 have strategic range and capabilities. Powerful radars, missile counts etc.
The F-18 is simply the workhorse fighter that lost the LWF program against the F-16. The F-14 is the prefferred air to air platform of the Navy but was too expensive to continue to maintain and was forced to retire in 2006.
Hope that helped answer your question.
:( and destroyed
Thanks Iran and their based clandestine espionage & smuggling programs! BOO!
One of the official reasons was cost, sure… but the main issue looking forward was the ability to upgrade the thing. It didn’t have the room, and it increased complexity on something already absurdly expensive.
The F/A-18E/F was already in full swing and is simply better than the F-14 series in practically every way. It fully meets the current and future requirements for the NAVY.
Wasn’t the swept wings making the maintenance worse due to it being a massive moving part
As well as all of the 60s era hydraulics, wiring, etc.
Wrong.
Top speed. The F-18 is regular traffic speed compared to the speed demon Tomcat.
The radar as well, detection & targeting range.
AWG-9 was the most powerful radar in US inventory until the F-22 Raptor’s AN/APG-77. The F-14 was the paired with the only long-Range Air to Air missiles in US service. The Aim-54.
The F-14 had a strategic capability of shutting down airspace farther than any F-18 can ever dream of. Hence why it is a class of Strategic fighters. F-18 is not. There is a reason Iranians barely bought inferior Chinese fighters and the Tomcat is still the pride and face of the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force. EVEN after all these years.
Stick to tractors boy.
The F/A-18 has better speed with missiles loaded, air to air combat doesn’t occur at mach 2.
AESA radar…next slide.