"Ultra Hornet" Takes Flight

[Phantom88]

Boeing's F/A-18F with Conformal Fuel tanks takes to The Skies

http://aeroexperience.blogspot.gr/2013/08/boeing-ultra-hornet-takes-off-on-maiden.html

Edited August 7, 2013 by Phantom88

[SkateZilla]

Now all she needs is the enhanced engines..

[Supersheep]

That's a funny gap between the intakes and the chines (?).

Maybe good for shielding the wing from stuff (heat? blown compressor blades?), but I wonder why it is not covered for drag reasons.

[Nealius]

Those CFTs look kind of small....how many pounds of fuel do they hold?

[GGTharos]

There's nothing dumb about the F-35 project. The F-18 will be obsolete before the F-35 becomes so.

 

Isn't this new Advanced Super Hornet fitted with new F414 engines? 20% more power then the regular Super Hornets? Very glad that the Navy made this choice apposed to the dumb F-35 project.

[aaron886]

Very glad that the Navy made this choice apposed to the dumb F-35 project.

 

Navy hasn't bought any of these yet, as far as I know. :doh:

[Phantom88]

There's nothing dumb about the F-35 project. The F-18 will be obsolete before the F-35 becomes so.

 

The Hornet wont be the ONLY thing Obsolete by The time The F-35 becomes Operational :D

[Yob]

The Hornet wont be the ONLY thing Obsolete by The time The F-35 becomes Operational :D

 

If it does have you heard to cancel rumors, that have been leaked from the pentagon

[popcorn]

Unless the Su-50, J-31 and J-20 turn out to be really unstealthy, the F-35 will spend its entire life getting raped.

[GGTharos]

What do they have that the F-35 doesn't?

 

Unless the Su-50, J-31 and J-20 turn out to be really unstealthy, the F-35 will spend its entire life getting raped.

[Cedaway]

What do they have that the F-35 doesn't?

 

Flying through clouds?:music_whistling:

OK, that was just a gentle troll, don't fire at me...

[GGTharos]

No, no, you've earned it :)

 

:gun_sniper:

 

Flying through clouds?:music_whistling:

OK, that was just a gentle troll, don't fire at me...

[popcorn]

The question is more what the F-35 has that they haven't.

[NineLine]

The question is, why arent we discussing the F-35 in the F-35 thread and just enjoying the awesomeness of the picture in the OP ;)

[popcorn]

Because trolling is more fun. Oops!

[Phantom88]

Interesting,Weapons Pod? On This new Hornet.......

[Phantom88]

^Cheers,Thank You^USNAF

[Pilotasso]

Now all she needs is the enhanced engines..

 

I never fancied the idea of having to have overpowered engines to get decent performance out of an airplane that otherwise is unremarkable kinatically. Interesting electronics powerhouse. Makes a good striker but if anyone uses it for the interceptor role Im gonna laugh. :D

[mikoyan]

I'll take the super hornet over the scripted alpha f-16.

[NOLA]

What do they have that the F-35 doesn't?

 

Oh my. Since you asked, guess it is ok to answer it. Can't speak for J-20 and J-31, but regarding T-50:

 

- Top speed. Conservative, mach 2. If "leaked" test info is correct, 2.35.

- Super cruise, nuff said.

- Range. And having super cruise T-50 will reach target much faster. (it is 1500+ km on supercruise and over 3500 km in total)

- Radar. The main radar N036 has more modules, 1522 vs around 1200 (?) in APG-81.

- Moar radars, fusion between them, nuff said.

- Maneuverability. Any questions there?

- Weapon bays able to carry 6 air to air missiles. 4 long range, 2 short. F-35 will be able to have same internal number in some years tho.

- External pylons number is the same. 0-0 there.

- Can F-35 use 4 long range anti ship missiles? Nuff said there as well.

 

Think i am about done, but i am sure more things can be thought of.

[Exorcet]

Oh my. Since you asked, guess it is ok to answer it. Can't speak for J-20 and J-31, but regarding T-50:

 

- Top speed. Conservative, mach 2. If "leaked" test info is correct, 2.35.

- Super cruise, nuff said.

- Range. And having super cruise T-50 will reach target much faster. (it is 1500+ km on supercruise and over 3500 km in total)

- Radar. The main radar N036 has more modules, 1522 vs around 1200 (?) in APG-81.

- Moar radars, fusion between them, nuff said.

- Maneuverability. Any questions there?

- Weapon bays able to carry 6 air to air missiles. 4 long range, 2 short. F-35 will be able to have same internal number in some years tho.

- External pylons number is the same. 0-0 there.

- Can F-35 use 4 long range anti ship missiles? Nuff said there as well.

 

Think i am about done, but i am sure more things can be thought of.

 

The F-35 supercruises. Number of modules doesn't make a better radar. Manuverability is an open question, though I do expect the PAK to have an edge. On range, the F-35's flight profile isn't know. It holds a lot of gas though and the engine is pretty efficient.

[NineLine]

I'll tell you what the F-35 has, its own discussion thread ;)

[wilky510]

Oh my. Since you asked, guess it is ok to answer it. Can't speak for J-20 and J-31, but regarding T-50:

 

- Top speed. Conservative, mach 2. If "leaked" test info is correct, 2.35.

- Super cruise, nuff said.

- Range. And having super cruise T-50 will reach target much faster. (it is 1500+ km on supercruise and over 3500 km in total)

- Radar. The main radar N036 has more modules, 1522 vs around 1200 (?) in APG-81.

- Moar radars, fusion between them, nuff said.

- Maneuverability. Any questions there?

- Weapon bays able to carry 6 air to air missiles. 4 long range, 2 short. F-35 will be able to have same internal number in some years tho.

- External pylons number is the same. 0-0 there.

- Can F-35 use 4 long range anti ship missiles? Nuff said there as well.

 

Think i am about done, but i am sure more things can be thought of.

Pity the F-35 is above and beyond the T-50 in the strike roles, you know... the reason it was made and called JSF.

[NOLA]

The F-35 supercruises. Number of modules doesn't make a better radar. Manuverability is an open question, though I do expect the PAK to have an edge. On range, the F-35's flight profile isn't know. It holds a lot of gas though and the engine is pretty efficient.

 

F-35 can supercruise? You do realize that supercruise =/= going supersonic without burners, right? Because if that is your definition, that is laughable at best. :doh:

 

Tu-128 could go supersonic without use of afterburners.

EE Lightning could go supersonic without use of afterburners.

Su-35S can go supersonic without use of afterburners.

 

Maneuverability might be an open question, but i have yet to see anything impressive done by F-35. T-50 has already shown such things. And in weeks time, F-35 will be obliterated in that respect. Besides, there is no argument there, TVC + LEVCONS...

 

When it comes to flight profile it isn't know indeed, but everyone knows highest range comes at height, not at low altitude. Basically T-50 and F-35 won't be much different in flight profile i suspect, like it or not T-50 has better range.

 

I'll tell you what the F-35 has, its own discussion thread ;)

 

Agree, it should be moved either to T-50 or F-35 thread.

 

Pity the F-35 is above and beyond the T-50 in the strike roles, you know... the reason it was made and called JSF.

 

Again, how can F-35 carry 4 anti ship missiles? Bomb wise T-50 wont have problem carrying 4x500 kg either. (talking internal only)

 

Be specific, HOW exactly is JSF better than T-50 air to ground. The name doesn't show anything at all, data does.

 

Come on, i would expect better arguments that this. :)

[Golo]

F-35 can supercruise? You do realize that supercruise =/= going supersonic without burners, right? Because if that is your definition, that is laughable at best. :doh:

Interesting, can you enlighten me as to what is it ment by that exactly?