If the F/A 18 Super Hornet Wins the MMRCA

[kingdurgaking]

Can i go further and ask u another question?? In many threads people have been talking about super hornet as a very good A2g plane, what do u think about its a2a capabilities?? where does it stand next to su-30 mki we got.

I know that we don't have a aesa radar (though i don't know a **** about what a pesa is even)but i hear su-30 is a very good plane. So can u please give ur opinion on this.

F18 will become french fries for MKI ... oops i think i made DBC loose her cool

 

[dbc]

Can i go further and ask u another question?? In many threads people have been talking about super hornet as a very good A2g plane, what do u think about its a2a capabilities?? where does it stand next to su-30 mki we got.

I know that we don't have a aesa radar (though i don't know a **** about what a pesa is even)but i hear su-30 is a very good plane. So can u please give ur opinion on this.

I hear the Su-30MKI is an exceptional air superiority fighter, from a aerodynamic design perspective it has a lot in common with the Hornet.

The Hornet isn't sluggish, I know folks like Sancho claim it is vulnerable in air combat because it has low thrust to weight ratio. But this is largely due to their own ignorance, reality is that the Hornet was first American fighter to achieve super cruise (clean).

It has set records for sortie rates, survivability and operational availability that remains unchallenged. The Hornet's ability to use its powerful AESA radar to electronically attack the MKI even before
the MKI has achieved missile range will likely put the MKI on the defensive very early in the engagement. Sure, the MKI has very capable Israeli jammers but the MKI will have to get a lot closer to use them even if it does the MKI jammer does not have the power to burn through the Hornets AESA. The ability to use the AESA radar for electronically attack was first introduced on the Hornet in 2006 with the exception of the F-16's APG-80 AESA none of the other MMRCA competitors have this capability today.

In my opinion the Hornet has some unique advantages over the Su-30MKI. The MKI probably has a few surprises of its own but I feel confident in the Hornet's ability to challenge the MKI.

 

[gubbi]

In my opinion the Hornet has some unique advantages over the Su-30MKI. The MKI probably has a few surprises of its own but I feel confident in the Hornet's ability to challenge the MKI.

How do you compare what is a multi-role (basically) strike platform with a dedicated air-superiority fighter? USAF fielded their F-16s and F-15s in exercises against the Su-30MKI as opposed to the F-18SH.

 

[kingdurgaking]

The Hornet's ability to use its powerful AESA radar to electronically attack the MKI even before
the MKI has achieved missile range will likely put the MKI on the defensive very early in the engagement.

Are you talking about the 18G? or E/F? G is no wonder is a wonder can create some magic against MKI but i doubt the abilities of E/F... what is your take on this?

 

[kingdurgaking]

How do you compare what is a multi-role (basically) strike platform with a dedicated air-superiority fighter? USAF fielded their F-16s and F-15s in exercises against the Su-30MKI as opposed to the F-18SH.

Is air superiority = swing role.. MKI was mentioned as swing role by a IAF veteran in an interview..

Can some explain what is the difference b/w

Swing - role, Mult-role and Omni-role?

 

[dbc]

Are you talking about the 18G? or E/F? G is no wonder is a wonder can create some magic against MKI but i doubt the abilities of E/F... what is your take on this?

The radar is the same on both E/F and G. I was referring to the standard E/F variant.

 

[sancho]

I hear the Su-30MKI is an exceptional air superiority fighter, from a aerodynamic design perspective it has a lot in common with the Hornet.

The Hornet isn't sluggish, I know folks like Sancho claim it is vulnerable in air combat because it has low thrust to weight ratio. But this is largely due to their own ignorance, reality is that the Hornet was first American fighter to achieve super cruise (clean).

It has set records for sortie rates, survivability and operational availability that remains unchallenged. The Hornet's ability to use its powerful AESA radar to electronically attack the MKI even before
the MKI has achieved missile range will likely put the MKI on the defensive very early in the engagement. Sure, the MKI has very capable Israeli jammers but the MKI will have to get a lot closer to use them even if it does the MKI jammer does not have the power to burn through the Hornets AESA. The ability to use the AESA radar for electronically attack was first introduced on the Hornet in 2006 with the exception of the F-16's APG-80 AESA none of the other MMRCA competitors have this capability today.

In my opinion the Hornet has some unique advantages over the Su-30MKI. The MKI probably has a few surprises of its own but I feel confident in the Hornet's ability to challenge the MKI.

Your post doesn't make any sense! You want to compare both from an aerodynamic design perspective, but then bring points like sortie and survivability rates, radar and missile range, or EWS. When you really compare in from that point of view, the MKI is clearly superior, just like several of the MMRCAs.
What makes the Super Hornet btw a good aircraft, are its techs and weapons only (AESA radar + Aim 120, JHMCS+Aim9 combos and of course the good EWS), otherwise it is mainly a platform to deliver bombs, thats why its often named bomb truck.
The MKI instead has good techs and weapons too, but has superior aerodynamic performance as well and that makes it to an air superiority fighter, similar to the US F15s.
And if you change the names of the fighters, you can say exactly the same about Pak Fa/F22 and F35. The first once are real fighters, the other one is a bomb truck again!

 

[dbc]

How do you compare what is a multi-role (basically) strike platform with a dedicated air-superiority fighter? USAF fielded their F-16s and F-15s in exercises against the Su-30MKI as opposed to the F-18SH.

Dedicated roles were necessitated due to technological limitations of the past. For instance, fleet defense interceptor required an aircraft with a powerful engine and radar the F-14 was designed for this role. The heavy radar and electronic equipment needed for long range heavy air-to-air missiles like (AIM-54 Phoenix) necessitated a larger air frame for additional fuel and greater endurance. With improvement in technology we are now able to reduce weight by increasing the use of composites. We are able to build more fuel efficient engines and make lighter more compact electronic gear. These improvements allowed the USN to replace two aircrafts F-14 and A-6 Intruder with one multi-role fighter the F/A-18.

Can the F/A-18 OR Su-30 MKI achieve air superiority over the battle space? Sure, together they'd be a formidable force. Can the LCA, Mig-21 or Rafale do the same? - no. The LCA and Mig-21 carries smaller pay loads while all three lack a capable radar.

The F/A-18 is the USN's first responder it must efficiently perform the duties of fighter escort ,interdiction,air defense,close air support, forward air control, reconnaissance and air superiority - hence the term multi role.

 

[dbc]

Your post doesn't make any sense! You want to compare both from an aerodynamic design perspective, but then bring points like sortie and survivability rates, radar and missile range, or EWS.

Like what? What are the survivability features on the MKI?
What is the sortie rate for the MKI? puh-lease enlighten us..

The multi-mission F/A-18E/F “Super Hornet” is an
evolutionary upgrade from the combat-proven night
strike fighter F/A-18 C/D. It is nearly 25% larger than
the C/D, yet more survivable with improvements like
reduced radar and infrared cross sections made possible
through design features and coatings, greater situational
awareness, and an advanced countermeasure suite.
Reduced vulnerability is achieved through an active
dry-bay fire suppression system, self-sealing fuel
tanks, explosion suppression foam in the wing fuel tanks,
and hydraulic reservoir level sensing.

In addition, the wing is made from Titanium the center piece of the fuselage is a one piece carbon composite structure... Kevlar protection for the fuel tank. Multiple redundant hydraulic systems backed by electrical actuation systems. A flight computer that intelligently adjusts deflections of available control surfaces to compensate for damage to one or more control surfaces. The Hornet can take a lot of damage and still RTB...

You wish to discuss aerodynamic features of the two bring it on..

Both feature high-lift devices such as mid-span deflecting leading edges. The F/A-18's leading edge is saw toothed to improve aileron effectiveness. The Su-30 MKI features a canard, close coupled and at level with the mid mounted wings, the canard deflection is limited to a small angle to improve pitch up response necessitated by the heavy radar. The MKI engines are widely spaced which can cause powerful yawing movement due to assymetric engine thrust. One reason why American and European designers like to keep both engines together as close as possible to the aircrafts longitudinal axis.

With few exceptions such as thrust vector and canard both share many design features.

When you really compare in from that point of view, the MKI is clearly superior, just like several of the MMRCAs.
What makes the Super Hornet btw a good aircraft, are its techs and weapons only (AESA radar + Aim 120, JHMCS+Aim9 combos and of course the good EWS), otherwise it is mainly a platform to deliver bombs, thats why its often named bomb truck.
The MKI instead has good techs and weapons too, but has superior aerodynamic performance as well and that makes it to an air superiority fighter, similar to the US F15s.
And if you change the names of the fighters, you can say exactly the same about Pak Fa/F22 and F35. The first once are real fighters, the other one is a bomb truck again!

...er get a clue.. I didn't say the MKI was inferior or lacks 'good techs and weapons' and yes the Hornet is a great earth mover unlike the pitch unstable, CG sensitive aircraft you love that no one wants to buy .

 

[Insane]

There is only one Impact of F/A 18 winning MRCA -

A STRONGER IAF

Do not not delay the deal .. Damn .. It's an eternal wait...

 

[kingdurgaking]

The radar is the same on both E/F and G. I was referring to the standard E/F variant.

So is AESA + weapons alone enough to defeat the planes?...

 

[prototype]

deleted...not required now

 

[ganimi kawa]

Like what? What are the survivability features on the MKI?
What is the sortie rate for the MKI? puh-lease enlighten us..



In addition, the wing is made from Titanium the center piece of the fuselage is a one piece carbon composite structure... Kevlar protection for the fuel tank. Multiple redundant hydraulic systems backed by electrical actuation systems. A flight computer that intelligently adjusts deflections of available control surfaces to compensate for damage to one or more control surfaces. The Hornet can take a lot of damage and still RTB...

You wish to discuss aerodynamic features of the two bring it on..

Both feature high-lift devices such as mid-span deflecting leading edges. The F/A-18's leading edge is saw toothed to improve aileron effectiveness. The Su-30 MKI features a canard, close coupled and at level with the mid mounted wings, the canard deflection is limited to a small angle to improve pitch up response necessitated by the heavy radar. The MKI engines are widely spaced which can cause powerful yawing movement due to assymetric engine thrust. One reason why American and European designers like to keep both engines together as close as possible to the aircrafts longitudinal axis.

With few exceptions such as thrust vector and canard both share many design features.



...er get a clue.. I didn't say the MKI was inferior or lacks 'good techs and weapons' and yes the Hornet is a great earth mover unlike the pitch unstable, CG sensitive aircraft you love that no one wants to buy .

An example of misusing the knowledge to cloud an issue! I think you have written this post just to annoy sancho (or perhaps sancho has annoyed you!)! If so, lol!

However, there are quite a few assertions which are blatantly wrong if you are convinced about their veracity. Please let me know if you believe everything you said in the above post and we can discuss further!

Right now I'll just post a nitpick!

American and European designers like to keep both engines together as close as possible to the aircrafts longitudinal axis.

There have been some remarkable exceptions to this, prominent example being the F 14 tomcat!


F14 tomcat

Also A-10 thunderbolt (though not an air superiority fighter)


A-10 thunderbolt

Su 30mki

 

[dbc]

An example of misusing the knowledge to cloud an issue! I think you have written this post just to annoy sancho (or perhaps sancho has annoyed you!)! If so, lol!

However, there are quite a few assertions which are blatantly wrong if you are convinced about their veracity. Please let me know if you believe everything you said in the above post and we can discuss further!

Right now I'll just post a nitpick!



There have been some remarkable exceptions to this, prominent example being the F 14 tomcat!


F14 tomcat

I had forgotten about the F-14 Tomcat, did you see the movie TOPGUN? In the movie, Maverick(Tom Cruise) lost his RIO Goose when the F-14 went into a powerful unrecoverable spin.

Kara Hultgreen, the first female naval carrier-based fighter pilot was killed when the F-14 she was flying experienced asymmetric thrust.

The F-14 NATOPS flight manual warned against excess yaw for this reason. Loss of an F-14 engine results in asymmetric thrust, which can exceed rudder authority, especially at low speeds.

After aborting the approach, Hultgreen selected full afterburner on the remaining engine, causing an even greater asymmetry.

Kara Hultgreen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks for helping me prove my point and unlike Sancho I don't make shiet up.

Please let me know if you believe everything you said in the above post and we can discuss further!

Please do...

 

[ganimi kawa]

I had forgotten about the F-14 Tomcat, did you see the movie TOPGUN? In the movie, Maverick(Tom Cruise) lost his RIO Goose when the F-14 went into a powerful unrecoverable spin.

Kara Hultgreen, the first female naval carrier-based fighter pilot was killed when the F-14 she was flying experienced asymmetric thrust.



Kara Hultgreen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks for helping me prove my point and unlike Sancho I don't make shiet up.



Please do...

No need to thank me, helping ladies is what gentlemen do!

As I said that was just a nitpick, not an arguement. Never said F14 was glitch free!

However am I to assume that you were thinking about F14 and like while commenting that Su 30 mki has similar assymetric thrust issue, since they share widely spaced engines?

If so what about the A10 thunderbolt , it also has similarly spaced engines and is arguably one of the toughest ones out there!

The aircraft is designed to fly with one engine, one tail, one elevator and half a wing torn off.

Now, talking specifically about Su 30mki.

Assertion---The MKI engines are widely spaced which can cause powerful yawing movement due to assymetric engine thrust.

So in case of an engine faliure the plane will inevitably fall. It's a significant handicap and this makes mki a bad design.

Reality---India has been operating them since last 12 years (K version). Currently, around 124 are in service.

In all these years there has been only one crash due to engine faliure. That too because the pilot bailed out due to fire alarm going off. Now, does this look like a plane with Assymetrical thrust issue?

People may say that perhaps there have been very few in flight engine faliures and that is why the safety record is so good.......

WRONG! According to this link

In fact, the fleet has been far from perfect in terms of serviceability. The initial lot of 18 Su-30Ks and ten MKIs had to be briefly grounded as a result of engine issues, that were subsequently put down to design problems. According to reports, the initial batches also experienced a high rate of engine failure.

So, Su 30 mki has RTB with single engine a number of times, contrary to your expectations.


Finally, another proof from this book....

Here is a scan of a pic in the book

The underside view tells an interesting story. The diameter & angle of the port engine nozzle indicate that the engine shut down due to in-flight failure.

This bird did make it back!




P.S.

and yes the Hornet is a great earth mover unlike the pitch unstable, CG sensitive aircraft you love

Can you provide any link to prove the bold part above, and why the mki sucks in A2G role?