Never Underestimate the F/A-18 Block III Although It’s Not a Stealth Fighter Jet

[@Military-TV]

F-14 Tomcat the Greatest Fighter Jets of All Time - kzbin.info/www/bejne/eX7Ln6yol62DY7M

[@ericernsberger5325]

Fighter yes. Attack no, but it was designed to be a front line, horizon to horizon shoot and forget about it aircraft.

[@Snugggg]

​@@ericernsberger5325 it was designed with A2G capability, it was just used as an interceptor when it entered service as that was the threat at the time. the A6 and A7 did air to ground at that time. Later when it got upgraded with LANTIRN it had the same precision bombing capability as the hornet but with vastly greater loiter time and payload. The Tomcat was faster, had longer range, further reach, steeper climb angle, carried more ordinance and wasn't tied to the tanker like the hornet was (is). It could also carry out air to ground missions without an escort.

[@therocinante3443]

@@ericernsberger5325 First of all, It's called the "F/A" Why do you think that is? Also when it was designed, it was the competitor to F-16 in the "Lightweight fighter program" which was designed to be a close in, fox 2 ONLY dogfighter, not a BVR fighter. You're completely wrong on both of your statements.

[@ericernsberger5325]

@@Snugggg I agree, but a hornet didn't have all those capabilities, I was an aviation electronics tech on the hornet. Now reliability, was what the tomcat in the 90s suffered from, but hands down they smoked the hornets at air superiority.

[@ericernsberger5325]

@@therocinante3443, what platform were you on, were you any, and or were you a pilot, I didn't downplay much to be wrong about, a multiple role Aircraft is never perfect at all jobs it can be tasked with, as per example, yes the tomcat in the 90s could have had better payload, but we dropped the bombs from MY SQUADRON....and my sister squadrons....I was an aviation electronics tech O level so I pulled boxes,xand troubleshoot the aircraft, the tomcat ran missions too, but they also took the best pics, and ran escort because that was a better fit...so YEH I do know what F/A stands for, but someone asked if B stands for bomber....I know the designations because I worked on them.

[@SJR_Media_Group]

Former Boeing here.... F/A-18 was designed with some stealth capabilities as compared to F-15. It's needle nose, flush canopy, angle of canopy front, hidden front blades on jet engines at air intakes, twin slanted vertical stabilizers, overall front and side profile, RAM coatings, shielded electronics and avionics, and more helps reduce radar signature of aircraft. However, external fuel tanks, bombs, and other fixtures make excellent reflectors of radar back to air or ground stations. Jets were pretty good for stealth until you hang things off external hard points. When I was at F/A-18 plant in St Louis, they had facilities to test full size aircraft and 'paint' jets with radar to see return signatures very accurately. While I had top security clearance, there were a few areas still off limits. One was the paint booth where processes and different products were applied. I strayed into one of those areas and was meet by security guards packing M4's and M16's. Was told off limits due to toxic fumes. I laughed walked away. Armed guards for paint fumes - yeah right... wink.

[@SJR_Media_Group]

@Shubhabrata banerjee Thank you... good points

[@AlexKarasev]

@Shubhabrata banerjee Gen 5 won't dominate anything. They're a stepping stone to Gen 6. Speed is the new stealth.

[@AlexKarasev]

@Shubhabrata banerjee no, I just watch Topgun: Maverick "it's not the plane, it's the pilot". Jokes aside, the amount of politics involved is probably comparable between those exercises and the film. What'll happen to careers of aviators who'd manage to humiliate, say, an F-35 in an exercise everyone is watching, and costs the program orders? They'll be ostensibly complimented, but then will fly a crop duster if not a desk. Because, "not a team player". Want to see real results? Give a few to Ukraine.

[@AlexKarasev]

@Shubhabrata banerjee It's a nice film. As long as one remembers it's just a film, it's a nice one to watch. Enjoy! Pilots / training / time - yes, of course. Russians flew in Vietnam on a limited basis - under Vietnamese names. The same would have to apply to US or UK crews (incl logistics and maintenance), just like with HIMARS. Re: Russian SAMs - indeed Israel has a history of defeating those. Back when they bombed an Iraqi nuclear reactor, the SAMs guarding it were off. For lunch or prayer, I forget. Similar with air to air - Russians had to send their pilots to Egypt way back when to show those MIGs could shoot down Israeli fighters. But on a serious note, a well-planned F-22 or F-35 mission can disrupt a kill chain of any SAM Israel's neighbors have even on their best day - and those guys don't have those good days often, I reckon. Now, if a pilot makes a mistake, or there's an intel leak, or weather conditions conspire to expose the jet, and the SAM guys aren't napping - you can have a F-117A on 27 March 1999 in Yugoslavia. Lt. Col. Đorđe Aničić didn't just shoot down one F-117A - he shot down the whole program.

[@lrac7751]

Watched the blue angels perform this afternoon. The F-35 and the P-51 flying in formation absolutely stole the the show, most epic thing I’ve ever seen

[@zach11241]

They’re calling it the Super Duper Hornet and NOT the Murder Hornet?!?!?? Come on now.

[@GM-fh5jp]

Murder Hornet is clearly the coolest and has the best T-shirt logo but is probably a bit too politically incorrect in this day and age. "OMG they are murderers" etc etc :/

[@vitor2650]

Murder Hornet is the best!

[@walterdayrit675]

Maybe they are reserving that name for a future possible stealth hornet?

[@amazonamazon4872]

Block III's are regarded as the "rhino" not block II's, as this presenter implied.

[@lukeslater2780]

They are waiting for the block IIII(4) at least I hope🤞

[@Big.Ron1]

I remember in 1978 when they brought 1 of 2 flying prototypes around to some Naval Air Stations to demonstrate its capabilities and flight envelope. It was cool to see. Also cool was the DC10 loaded with computers to monitor its systems. They came to our base one day and we got to check it out. And to think its grand kids are still the tip of the spear. Cool!

[@AA-xo9uw]

In 1978 that would have been Northrop's YF-17.

[@homijbhabha8860]

This jet will probably win the Indian Navy's carrier requirement for around 60 aircraft, the competition is between FA-18 and the Rafael M, From the articles I have read, this jet is as capable as the Rafael but where it shines is it's engine maintainability.

[@homijbhabha8860]

@@bigshooter3689 We took a neutral stance, and because of that our inflation is low since we get cheap Russian oil.

[@Radis001]

But using American weapon platforms comes with geopolitical strings attached. The Rafale-M is a more suitable proposition. It's a newer platform, very capable, and has some commonality of parts and training with the IAF Rafales. Also India does not need to ask France permission on how and when to use the Rafale.

[@donkey459]

@@Radis001 no the fa 18 is better

[@homijbhabha8860]

@@Radis001 There's no limitation imposed on Indian use of the aircraft.

[@justicethedoggo3648]

This aircraft is better for navy no doubt , its very battle tested . Block 3 of this aircraft can probably match refales .

[@oldfriend327]

Thank you so much for this video. The F-18 Hornet/Super Hornet are some of all-time favorite aircraft. If there is one military aircraft, I would choose to fly it would be the F-18. It is amazing how much this aircraft has evolved considering how it started out and lost as the Air Force Northrop YF-17 all the way back to 1974. The original Northrop employees in the mid 1970's, the McDonnell Douglas employees of the lates 70's through the 1990's, and of course the current Boeing employee must all be very proud of how successful and versatile this aircraft has become. My curiosities though for a while now are the allegations about the F-18's true, 1. Inadequate fuel and 2 Underpowered engines?

[@super1337bf3ordie]

regular hornet yes at high weights but super can hold alot of fuel and has more powerfull enignes

[@Davis2920022001]

👆 You'd both be fireballs B4 you even knew it in those Walmart Fighters.

[@jwagner1993]

Desperately trying to recover the F14D capabilities in to the fleet

[@East_Coast_Toasty_Boy]

As long as the Navy buys the new GE engines that make the F-18 faster.

[@marcmichaud1643]

If this is another successful program you'll either see more block 3s get purchased or older Block 2 get upgraded to block 3 configuration. Quite the capable Navy 👍

[@tkskagen]

So when it comes to Aircraft, does "F" mean Fighter, and "F/A" stand for Fighter/Attack, and then "F/B" stand for Fighter/Bomber?

[@futurecorpse7330]

Yes in the USA that is

[@sirethanthegreat4069]

You’re correct! Not to say that you are wrong on this part, but I don’t think there would be any aircraft designated as F/B, rather just F/A because these jets can’t carry a payload of a bomber, like the B52.

[@dreamhunter2973]

Exactly....

[@futurecorpse7330]

@@sirethanthegreat4069 su34 but that’s Russia, or Northrop Grumman proposed a fb23 that never went anywhere however idk if the fb23 would’ve had pylons

[@davidchait6010]

@@sirethanthegreat4069 F-111?

[@danielmarcinkus4506]

seems like yesterday I was doing T&E on the newest Block II's. Now to really date myself.... I upgraded a bunch of lot 19, 20, and 21 legacys to block I super capability. Amazing how quickly the changes come. Miss those pigs.

[@burtonbinger5158]

with "paint" the clock effect is real we all learned from the movies a little paint can produce nothing to see, thanks harry

[@Rob_F8F]

Love the F/A-18, but this is one of the sloppiest, most disorganized videos ever. It conflate the legacy Hornet with the Super Hornet with the "Super Duper" Hornet and then digresses into an early history of the Super Hornet. Where are you going?

[@michaelgautreaux3168]

GR8 vid. Daddy Mac built their version of the F-8 then up it into a new version of the F-4. Considering where the "Bug" came from initially, I'm good....lol. Seriously, it's a GR8 plane 👍👍

[@dodoDodo-of6pu]

Boeing came close to replacing Canada's CF-18 Hornet fleet. Canada was looking to buy 88 new fighter jets and Boeing was close to winning the bid. However, they shot themselves in the foor when they attack Canada's C-series aircraft sales. Boeing lost billions because they were fearful the C-series would hurt their 737 sales. All they did was lose the bid to replace Canada's fighters, tankers and ended up making the C-series more dangerous to their 737 sales

[@hrvojegrgic5111]

Conformal fuel tanks for Block III were rejected by the Navy, I guess because of problems with CATOBAR landing because of added weight. But they will be available for use from runways and for export customers like Australia and Kuwait.

[@dreamhunter2973]

Really?....Are you sure?

[@JohnDoe-ml8ru]

Because they are stupid. They destroy the aerodynamics of the aircraft. It's not like you can just drop the tanks mid-flight and engage an enemy, no, you're stuck with them and the huge amount of drag they cause.

[@brothergrimaldus3836]

@@JohnDoe-ml8ru They don't destroy the aerodynamics… that's why they're conformal. They cause 95% less drag than standard drop tanks out on the wing which opens up another stores spot for armament. They're evaluating, still, their usage and viability for CATOBAR and high G maneuvers.

[@hrvojegrgic5111]

@@JohnDoe-ml8ru I guess they make sense for Growlers and maybe some training flights.

[@verdebusterAP]

I believe it was a cost issue. The CFT add 2000lbs empty weight which adversely affects the F-18's bring back capability mitigating that would have required the USN to buy GEs enhanced performance engine (EPE), increasing the F414-GE-400's power output from 22,000 to 26,400 lbf The cost of add the EPE to just off set the CFT was not worth it

[@AA-xo9uw]

CFTs for Navy Super Bugs have been canceled. They will only be available as an option for foreign sales if any ever materialize before production ends in a couple of years.

[@East_Coast_Toasty_Boy]

Good to hear. They don't look like a good idea as far as drag and weight.

[@ericernsberger5325]

F- fighter, air to air designator, A- attack, air to ground designator, allowing a good missle and good bomber payload, or combination. The F/A-18 is also one of the few true "all weather aircraft) 14+ years AT(O) on Hornets.

[@michaeldelaney7271]

Yes, but there was no such designation in the U.S. Military system when the Navy (and/or McDonnell-Douglas?) made up "F/A." Of course it wasn't as ridiculous as when LBJ misread the name of the RS-71 (the next a/c following the RS-70/XB-70) as SR-71. S indicated ANTI-SUBMARINE WARFARE, and at the time, there was no designation with R following S. So, in theory, the U.S. had a Mach 3.5 ASW aircraft that flew at 70,000 ft. That goof made a lot of work for the guys who had to change all the Tech Order pages labeled RS-71. This had to be done because nobody was brave enough to contradict LBJ. He often liked to say, "there are two kinds of animals in the White House, elephants and pissants and I'm the only elephant."

[@East_Coast_Toasty_Boy]

​​@@michaeldelaney7271 The Emporer has no clothes. LOL

[@rcstl8815]

@@michaeldelaney7271John Kennedy misnomered the SR. It should have been R(econnaissance) S. The Generals just sighed and changed all the paperwork... lol

[@michaeldelaney7271]

Sorry, but it was LBJ that announced the "SR-71" around summer of '64. I was stationed at McClellan AFB at the time and we all had a good laugh about the Mach 3+ "Anti-Submarine" aircraft. We even dug out the regs to confirm our belief that an S as a first letter indicated an ASW airplane. Besides, the number used, 71, follows that used for the RS-70 version of the B-70 Valkyrie. Also, the Blackbird was primarily a Reconnaissance with a (negligible) Strike capability. I had classmates from Tech School who had to dump the correct paperwork and switch everything to the LBJ version.@@rcstl8815

[@tkskagen]

For me, "Chuck Yeager" made the F-18 more popular than any other aircraft. I still love the F-16, but there is something about the "simplicity" of the F-18's design...

[@walterdayrit675]

Why don't they add thrust vectoring nozzles to improve the agility of the F/A-18?

[@izanagisburden9465]

Adds too much weight to already low thrust to weight ratio

[@AA-xo9uw]

Not an easy task and would be wasted effort and money on a platform that will soon be ceasing production.

[@williemcdowell6319]

I look forward to the super dupper dupper 4 stack super sting hornet the 3rd

[@East_Coast_Toasty_Boy]

🤣🤣

[@martincalero7390]

Nice upgrade, but still, the Charlie Hornet is the top predator up there.

[@williambinkley8879]

One of your best episodes

[@lewiszhou4056]

Wait, if we go by how the Stallion helicopters are nicknamed, if Block II is Superhornet, then Block III would be Kinghornet.

[@kentrangprofessor3963]

I dup thee the Hyper-Hornet :)! The Cockpit’s HUD need to have minimum bullet resistance material reenforcing the screen to protect the pilot from shrapnels !

[@ratsac]

Good vid! Do you do the voiceovers yourself? Or is that text-to-speech software?

[@oubrioko]

1:00 The *F/A-18 Hornet* replaced the F-4 Phantom and the *_A-7 Corsair II._* (The U.S. Navy A-4 had _already_ been replaced by the A-7).

[@karl7567]

Guy talking: really quiet My subwoofer: WHUMP WHUMP BOOM WHUMP WHUMP BOOM WHUMP BOOM

[@craig4867]

F-15 Eagle was purposely designed like an Indian Arrowhead to make it extremely fast! Mach 2.5+incredible! 104 kills 0 losses in air to air combat!

[@amyphillips3691]

I. Had a chance to Ride In One about 17 year ago but was too busy. , Damn. I. Wish. I. Had. Took. That. Ride. !

[@soumyajitsingha9614]

Indian Navy is almost on its way to have this awesome piece of engineering marvel onboard INS Vikrant our neweset made in India aircraft carrier also dont forget F 18 is agile enough to even carry out STOBAR ops

[@Thelegend-op2bj]

Super Hornet Block III has 3rd Gen AESA Radar using Gallium Nitride (last gen is Gallium Arsenide) more powerful and smaller form factor.

[@SuNnYaAsH]

What about growler? Is block three come in growler configuration or not

[@tomdarco2223]

Right On Great video

[@davidlefranc6240]

I think this updated version equals a rafale would be nice to see him in international competitions !

[@leneanderthalien]

I think not so: sinze the debut was the Rafale designed for evolutions up to Gen 5, seem not possible with the F18, but the F18 is still a very capable aircraft and relatively low cost (for a twin jet engined fighter) because was produced in very large number

[@davidlefranc6240]

@@leneanderthalien Well the rafale gen5 doen't exist right now that was my point its on par with a rafale.

[@death_parade]

Look forward to which one of the two Indian Navy selects as its stopgap carrier fighter.

[@hazlinabdulhamid7461]

Malaysia is watching...✌️😊✌️🇲🇾

[@sammcbride2464]

Why no mention of the new GE414-400 EPE engines? Dry thrust is now 140 kN vs. 116 kN for block 2. This makes it the second highest dry thrust of all NATO planes behind the F-22. Even higher than the F-15.

[@Bellthorian]

The Navy elected against the new engines.

[@East_Coast_Toasty_Boy]

​​@@Bellthorian I heard they said no to the external fuel tanks, not the new engines.

[@Zetler]

Need a new engine imho. The interceptor role is more important now than ever and the Navy is missing the F14 capabilities.

[@izanagisburden9465]

Man people are gonna say whatever to bring back f14s won't they

[@flameout12345]

it should get a vectoring control with vertical take off

[@okisoba]

I'm still willing to bet an F-14D upgrade would have been cheaper and more capable than the transformation of the F-18C to the now Block III F-18.

[@AA-xo9uw]

The legacy Hornet and the Super Bug are entirely different aircraft.

[@Anderixx]

Hornet Super Hornet Super Duper Hornet That´s America xD

[@death_parade]

Meanwhile in Indian military industrial complex:- Netra (AEW&CS) Netra (Police Quadcopter UAV) Netra (Network for Space Tracking and Analysis, Indian version of US Space Fence) Netra (NETwork TRaffic Analysis - AI driven mass internet surveillance software similar to the stuff NSA uses) Sindhu Netra (Ocean Surveillance Satellite) . It doesn't end here. Indian weapon naming sense is just weird. Examples:- . Failed missile program: Trishul (cool name). Successor program that was successful: VL-SRSAM (garbage generic jargon). . Lame 2D radar named: Baharini (cool name) Awesome 4D AESA GaN monster named: High Power Radar (WTF! Like naming your pet "DOG") . Lemon ship launched liquid fuelled ballistic missile of dinosaur era: Dhanush (Cool name) AWESOME Satellite murderer: PDV Mk II (???) . Light helicopter: Dhruv Awesome high-tech missile tracking and launching ship (testbed for new radar and missile tech): Also Dhruv

[@amazonamazon4872]

F/a-18A-D blkI = hornet F/a-18E/F blkII = super hornet F/a-18E/F blkIII = rhino

[@worldwanderer91]

Supreme Hornet Superior Hornet

[@kdrapertrucker]

Not to mention the infrared search and track.

[@paulzink2492]

It's not all about stealth as air force wants u to think. Huge numbers of very agile fighters in the air. Can take out the most stealthy fighter. It's the the right plane.

[@hawkertyphoon4537]

am a HUGE lover of the legacy Hornet... Thanks for bringing this update. the IR tracker - is it mounted in the Tip of the Droptank?!! (5:15 mention) (6:23 picture on carrier) Why not mount it "a la Tomcat" below the chin? Huh? What? What when you are in a knife fight - you cannot drop the Tank?!

[@gistsc]

The F/A-18 legacy aircraft was primarily a replacement for the Navy’s A-7Es the A-4s and F-4s were all but gone by that point.

[@AA-xo9uw]

Navy sundowned the Skyhawk in 2003. A-7 was sundowned in 1998.

[@gistsc]

@@AA-xo9uw Yes, but the A-4s were very few in only the aggressor roll. The A-7s were the current light attack aircraft in the fleet having replaced the A-4 in that roll. The F-18 replaced the A-7 ringing in the new multi roll mission. Trust me, I have been in the 18 community my entire life. I can show you pictures of the first 18s at Lemoore NAS with A-7s all around them waiting for their turn to be replaced. All the squadrons having flown the 18 legacy were A-7 squadrons prior to the transition to the 18s.

[@terrycarter1137]

question: why not add the GE engine with supercruise ability, internal weapons bay, stealth coating on the canopy, and body, like the F15X?

[@troyingram7023]

Fighters with better performance will not outrun missels. What they need are better avionics. Weapons systems and antiradar that can interface with all the other systems around. The F 18 is a smooth jet.

[@East_Coast_Toasty_Boy]

The F-14 could outrun missiles.

[@ericdoerges3418]

Thanks for being straight. Eric

[@mansurazeez2229]

Truly badass naval strike fighter! Why don't they call the Block III "Ultra Hornet"?

[@GM-fh5jp]

Next up is the Block 4 variant "Gangsta Hornet"

[@vitor2650]

Or…Hyper Hornet or, Uber Hornet?

[@death_parade]

@@GM-fh5jp Judging by what is happening in US these days, they might end up calling it "Rainbow Hornet".

[@GM-fh5jp]

@@death_parade Yup...it's an equal opportunity killer ;)

[@dansnow7374]

In the narration it’s said VFA 115 was the first fleet squadron, this is true, then why use a photograph of a VFA 95 jet and superimpose a “Eagles” patch over it. Just seams a bit odd. Also legacy F/A 18 A-D are not considered “block I” builds. The original 80 or so E-Fs are block I and are not being rebuilt as they cannot accept the AESA radar.

[@forrestgump5959]

I think what the US shows is already much more advanced than what Russia+China have - and still, I think, the US has tons and tons and tons of much differnt war-machines in secrecy the world never has seen of at all. #1 never underestimate your enemy is here fully applicable. The US had nuclear bombs before the others even knew something like this could exist.

[@kdrapertrucker]

Oh, what you are shown is nothing compared to what the U.S. actually has. In the early 1990s the head of U.S. Naval air branch said we had ships right out of Star wars.

[@thomaszhang3101]

You know, the J-15 had been using single piece touch screen and IRST for a very long time, and the newest J-15T has AESA radar that’s much larger than that of the F/A-18 block III and have internal fuel tank large enough to negate the use of external or conformal fuel tanks.

[@death_parade]

LOL. These comments never get old. Usually its Americans who are novice to technology that come up with this nonsense because they fail to understand the nature and reason for the technological lead the US has. At the same time they fail to realize the more impressive parts of US military technology because they appear to the untrained eye as "mundane stuff". And its not just technology that these people are novices in, but also military stuff in general. The kind of armchairs that talk tactics and not logistics.

[@nightwing9670]

McDonnel Douglas F-18 came from the Northrop yf-17 from the f-16/17 competition

[@East_Coast_Toasty_Boy]

I thought Micky D made the F-17.

[@siddharthadatta]

Indian Navy is close to buying these beauties

[@paulzink2492]

The right fighter.

[@owenschulz9504]

8 minute long video for 45 seconds worth of content

[@jasons44]

Number one I would never call it super duper ever again just block three would do fine

[@katherineberger6329]

Super Hornet = Revenge of Sea Eagle.

[@PurpleDreki]

Super-duper Hornet....Really?

[@justinpaoli]

They kept using the , now abandoned, silent hornet image with recessed fuel tanks.

[@CentralStateMower]

The Navy is getting the F/A-18 Block III Super Hornet and the USAF is getting the F-15EX. Now the USAF needs to capitalize on the F-16 Block 70/72 Viper upgrades paid for by the Royal Bahraini Air Force. F-35's have their place but, we can't afford thousands of them...

[@WildsDreams45]

This plane platform is almost 40 years old right? Wouldn't it be better to invest in more modern jets?

[@fredandersen9873]

It's Sthuper-Dooperrr!

[@PAnGLiMaBAniJaWi99]

our airforce... ROYAL MALAYSIAN AiRFORCE... really love's hornet legacy...

[@wr6392]

4:00 I didn't think the conformal tanks were going to happen

[@ninjaskeleton6140]

I wonder what those tanks do to the agility of the jet? I imagine it can’t be good.

[@AA-xo9uw]

@@ninjaskeleton6140 They actually improve the L/D ratio but they are incompatible with operating aboard a CVN.

[@AA-xo9uw]

They aren't at least on USN Block III Super Bugs. The Navy issued a stop work order on CFTs back in January of 2021. Prospective foreign customers will have the option of buying CFT equipped Super Bugs.

[@wr6392]

@@AA-xo9uw exactly what I thought I'd heard. Foreign buyers will have the option.

[@jimmay1988]

It was the old legacy F/A-18C Hornet that took the 1st Gulf War air-to-air kill, not the Super Hornet. Ipad screens are a bad idea for pilots. Try pushing iPad buttons in a fast weaving and turning car with gloves on, WHILE DRIVING.

[@East_Coast_Toasty_Boy]

They do it with the old displays. 🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️

[@East_Coast_Toasty_Boy]

Also, they have fingerless gloves.

[@Amvienttz]

Hopefully this means there's a chance older block E/F models can be declassified so...DCS anyone??

[@vitor2650]

Will there be a Super Hornet Growler? Super Growler?

[@blech71]

Our Growlers are already built on the frame of the super…. They will get all the upgrades that make them BLK-III… that’s if ofc they don’t decide to send them to reserves or other branches as that has been on the table lately.

[@herosjourney8725]

the "super hornet growler" is already a thing as the growler is a electronic warfare variant of the super hornet.

[@kellywilson8440]

I was in the very first f-18 squadron on the east coast 1984/1988 VFA-131 Wildcats , Our squadron was also the first carrier based Hornets and the first ones to see combat in Libya operation el-dorado canyon in 1986 . Had both the battle E & S Airlants first and finest out of NAS Cecil Field fla .

[@AA-xo9uw]

Not quite. VMFA-314 - the first to operate the legacy Hornet in the fleet - embarked aboard Coral Sea with CVW-13 for El Dorado Canyon as well.

[@kellywilson8440]

@@AA-xo9uw Roger that brother , I was thinking on the east coast at Cecil field , Thanks for your service !

[@nymetro20]

The A-10 needs this treatment as well.

[@WildsDreams45]

Didn't the A-10 come out in the seventies? That was forty years ago.

[@Thelegend-op2bj]

Not even mentioning the new Aesa Radar as the biggest update from previous version eh?

[@niweshlekhak9646]

F-18 Super Hornet always had an AESA radar. Even legacy hornet have been upgraded by Canada and Spain to house AESA radar.

[@orgeebaharvin6284]

Isn't this the International Roadmap that was a proposal for the Indian Airforce a few years ago?

[@USMC_LAterZ]

Is there a reason why the Super Hornets cannot have the same engine that's inside the F15EX?

[@TheGreatMarathaArmy]

F18 block 3 will be Indian navy's next Carrier based fighter jet.....

[@soumyajitsingha9614]

what about the chin mounted EOTS similar to F 35 being promoted by boeing and also spotted many times

[@thetopsecretpentagonsclass6350]

Thats an option for country, if they want this aircraft by their requirements.

[@burtonbinger5158]

it is not strange that our f-14 with these fixes would have been quite the jet

[@jimsvideos7201]

"Optional" external tanks 😂

[@rashidyunus2740]

F18 upgrade power level lll 😱😱

[@sarthakasingh2179]

Still it comes without MWAS and IRST sensor!

[@michaeldelaney7271]

The so called F/A-18 is a Northrop Aircraft design (as the F-17) which the Navy wanted to buy. The McDonnell-Douglas "influenced" Members of Congress would not allow Northrop to build it. The McD supported Congressmen were very loyal to their company. So, McDonnell-Douglas took over the program and Northrop was "allowed" to be the Principal Sub-Contractor (or some such thing) on its own design. McDonnell-Douglas made a number of "improvements" to the design that almost ruined the aircraft during testing, but eventually (with Northrop help) managed to build a pretty decent FIGHTER. "F/A" is a name made up by the Navy to impress Congress, as in "ooh look, it's a Fighter AND an Attack aircraft." Virtually all earlier Fighters also had the capability to attack ground targets. The USN wanted to make it look like they had saved money by buying one aircraft type instead of two. Of course two dedicated aircraft designs would have done a better job at each of their missions, but who cares really. Not the Navy. Then Boeing, during the great "let's have all the aerospace companies merge" mania in the U.S. Government, bought McDonnell-Douglas (and North American) and took over the F/A-18. Boeing seems to have done a fair job developing the aircraft. Bottom line, it's still a good FIGHTER.

[@AA-xo9uw]

Big differences between the Cobra and the Hornet which go unnoticed by neophytes.

[@michaeldelaney7271]

@@AA-xo9uw True. And, there have almost always been big differences between Prototypes and Production aircraft. I used to work in the department next door to Flight Test at Northrop. While McD was "improving" the F-17 Prototype they provided endless entertainment to the Engineers who had actually designed the aircraft. McDonnell had certain "trademark" design touches they wanted to incorporate into the look of the aircraft. These signature features caused "minor" problems like an inability to take off and over-stressing the wings. Our test guys were constantly telling the latest horror stories from Edwards AFB as the "improved" aircraft was going through testing. Another fun fact: McDonnell-Douglas contractually agreed that (since they "owned" Congress) they would be Prime on all Carrier Versions of the aircraft and Northrop would be Principal Sub-Contractor. For any aircraft that would be land based, Northrop would be Prime Contractor and McD would be the Principal Sub. Northrop designed the F-18L (Land Based) which had a weight reduction of 1,500 lbs. This would have been a considerable improvement over the "F/A-18." True to their Scorpion nature (old fable), McD sold the "F/A" to such Aircraft Carrier operators as Canada, Australia, Finland, Malaysia, Kuwait and Switzerland! Northrop had to sue to try and enforce the contract and won a settlement of $50 Million and the agreement to be the Principal Sub-Contractor for the aircraft (building the aft 2/3). I'm sure Members of Congress helped persuade Northrop to accept the settlement, partly by dangling the contracts for the Stealth B-2 and Stealthy ATA as a carrot. Of course the B-2 contract was later slashed from 132 a/c (and expected to be more) to 20 + the refurbished Prototype. And, Northrop didn't receive the Advanced Tactical Aircraft contract. Those "great stealth experts" McD were awarded the contract and then failed to deliver, went wildly over budget and had the contract cancelled. Well, at least Northrop was awarded the "B-21" (which should be called B-3) contract. The USAF expects to receive 100-200 B-21's. How long until the quantity is slashed to a token number, say 20? Who can say. Only the Congress knows.

[@michaeldelaney7271]

This "neophyte" drafted components of the F/A-18 ... at Northrop.@@AA-xo9uw

[@robandcheryls]

F18 Block 3 “Murder Hornet”, you’re welcome. 🇨🇦 Veteran

[@donalddowning4108]

The Hornet was to replace the A-7 Corsair in the attack role.

[@unfurling3129]

And A-6

[@brianwaffle]

Wow, so the author ignored the YF-17 from Northrop.

[@East_Coast_Toasty_Boy]

It was Micky D, wasn't it???

[@AntiBtsArmy18]

Vietnam: imma end this man's whole career

[@DamplyDoo]

Advanced super hornet? 4.5 gen? Conformal tanks, and a stealth weapons pod? What happened to the pod

[@WakeMarine]

No new more powerful engines?

[@jaberalsakka148]

Why not "Asian giant hornet"

[@มดแดง-ฃ3ข]

ฉันก็เสนอให้เขาลงทุนกับเครื่องบินยุคที่ 4.9รุ่นปรับปรุง superยุคที่ 5 มีความสงสัยเรื่องเทคโนโลยีล่องหน มันจะเก่ามากเมื่อ 20 ปีก่อนดูการออกแบบเป็นทรงกลม oเปรียบถ้าต่อสู้ระยะประชิด

[@corsair6]

Yikes, many errors in this F/A-18 was apart of the Lightweight Fighter Program, which helped off-set the high costs of the air superiority programs (F14 & F-15), and provided a low-cost supplementary solution, giving a 'high-low mix' of aircraft and capabilities. USN's front-line fighter was the F-14 from 1974-2004. F/A-18A-D was introduced in 1984 replacing the F-4 on CV-41-class air wings and the A-7 within the rest of the fleet. The Legacy Hornet was an attack platform, not a fighter; it was capable of anti-air but, its primary mission was attack/strike. USN retired them in 2019, USMC continues to use. With the failed replacement of the A-6 and the technological evolution of strike avionics, the F/A-18E-F was developed and began to supplant the F-14 in certain air wings in 1999, with full-replacement in 2005. Block-III will claw back additional capability lost with the retirement of the A-6 and F-14, while advancing its sensors suite.

[@AA-xo9uw]

YF-17 was part of the Lightweight Fighter Program. It would eventually become the legacy F/A-18.

[@williampaz2092]

I don’t understand why they were not given variable thrust.

[@amazonamazon4872]

Engine spacing, variable thrust would hinder more than help

[@diksh777]

Indian Navy also planning to buy 56 of these FA 18 super hornet fighters for our first indigenous build aircraft carrier IAC-1 "VIKRANT".

[@bobfeller604]

The original F-18 was supposed to be a superior replacement to previous fighters and in fact it was a dud. Thus the need for the Super Hornet. But that's what happens when Congress builds an airplane instead of the engineers.

[@jollygoodyo]

Basically it's make it larger and throw in n ipad. Block 3 gaizzz!

[@Cessna152ful]

Don’t underestimate the eo system being built into it as well

[@k.h.1587]

Block II is where it got larger. Block III is not a size increase

[@GameplayTubeYT]

They add those bulk on the top just like the f16 of Israel

[@ozono333]

Growler?

[@airprok8328]

The legacy has the ability to super cruise at mach 1.04. Anybody else know that?

[@jorgeestrada5713]

But, what is the top speed of the block III?

[@East_Coast_Toasty_Boy]

With the new engines, it should break the mach 2 barrier.

[@MoskusMoskiferus1611]

Stealth are boring, but it does good in defence

[@randybaumery5090]

If Tom Cruise is in the cockpit, you are in trouble!!

[@xnavyro]

I wonder if it’s a wise choice to keep producing these non-stealth variants when adversaries are expending their resources to output more stealthy planes? Maybe we need to push a two engine F-35 variant with thrust vectoring capability?

[@vitor2650]

Isn’t the F-22 a two-engine variant of the F-35 with thrust vectoring capability?🤔

[@herosjourney8725]

@@vitor2650 no, the f-22 sensors are designed for long range combat engagements while the f-35 sensors are for multirole capabilities such as detecting land threats. The design of the two aircrafts match their specific purpose as well.

[@sdoo-ou2ni]

that already exists is called the F-22

[@k.h.1587]

That many changes to an aircraft would hardly be classified as a "variant". Might as well be the f38

[@sdoo-ou2ni]

@@k.h.1587 you live in the world where the f-35b exist please go look it up

[@terryteoh4517]

Greatest America ❤️🗽🗽🗽❤️ Eliminate Russia & CCP !! Safe the world & mankind !! God Bless Ukraine 🇺🇦 !! Fully support Taiwan 🇹🇼 Forever 🗽🗽 !!