well luckily there is an airspeeds limitations chart for the F-18 which puts its airspeed limitation at sea level at slightly below mach 1.1 ( 725 KCAS)
but then again just becasue the airspeed limit is 725 KCAS dosent mean that the hornet is able to reach it in level flight
That Manual is for the f/a18A
Which f18 are we talking about?
F18a/c early
F18c
F18e
fa18c is also mach 1.1 limit (at sea level)
Yeah, I just found the guy you where arguing with insistence that if it can’t get to mach 1.2 then that must mean it can get to just a hair under it to be headache inducing when there obviously has to be a significant margin of error due to mach numbers being inconsistent by their very nature.
If it cant get to mach 1.2 under ideal conditions then there will also be conditions where it’s mach numbers are even lower
Given that chart I really wonder why the navi isnt all over the new improved engine to get a superior aircraft
A super super hornet
cause even with a bigger engine that would allow it to go faster it would still limited in its speed just due to its design
ig there we have a documetn with the F-18C and F-18E max achiveable speed as well
with around mach 1 for the super hornet and slightly below mach 1.1 for the F-18C
seems like the super hornet is overperforming
Yes but it would perfom much better at the low speed the f18 was designed to fly
and it would burn more fuel
increacing the operating cost
the f-18 isnt used as a dogfighter by the navy but more like a strike aircraft
this doc right here is talking a bbit more of the useage of the leagacy hornet and what the superhornet is intented to do
https://www.gao.gov/assets/nsiad-96-98.pdf
Pretty sure the new engine was also supposed to decrease fuel efficiently slightly
Could actually be possible without breaking the law of physics by just increasing the bypass ratio and injecting more fuel into the afterburner
(Ofc needing more fuel for that)
Does this table show the maximum speed that an airplane can reach? In my opinion, this is the maximum speed that a pilot is prohibited from exceeding at a particular altitude. This does not mean that the engine is not capable of accelerating the aircraft above this speed.
It’s like with the MIG-29. You can’t fly faster than MACh 1.25(on sea level), but the engine can accelerate you faster.
The limit is primarily related to the strength of the structure.
that graph dosent
but the graph that @kizvy posted does
and it shows a max speed of around mach 1 for the super hornet and slightly below mach 1.1 for the F-18C
this also dosent mean that the engine is able to push past that speed
Yikes
Why does the f18e feel more and more like a f18c late sidegrade
it actually has worse flight performance than the 18C late
just look at engines operational limits
OFC plane can’t go over its engines operational limits
I’m NOT saying that a hornet should fly faster. I see the graph and I understand that this is IMPOSSIBLE.
But it seems to me that the engine power is somewhat underestimated in the game. I can’t accelerate a plane in level flight to the speed limit, even flying with a constant afterburner.
anything i have seen is suggesting otherwise
either suggesting that the hornets have too much thrust or not enough drag
i mean just test this one condition ingame
the superhornet will do that in around 20 to 25 seconds in WT
I expected it be worse
But just a straight downgrade across the board not really
Or how sharkstat puts it
Use the f18c for low speed and f15c for high speed
And f18e if you want the worst of both world’s
but yet in WT the superhornet outperforms the leagcy hornet in most if not all points
I think the culprit is pretty clear and common
Drag
It also seams to lose very litle speed in turns