Super Hornet: How it replaced the Legacy Hornet and F-14 Tomcat and why the Navy still needs them.

[@PilotPhotog]

Play Conflict of Nations for FREE on PC, iOS or Android: 💥con.onelink.me/kZW6/SuperHornet Receive a Unique Starter Pack, available only for the next 30 days!

[@charlesferdinand422]

I don't care how much spam Conflict of Nations tries to shove down my throat or if they sponsor every single video in every channel in YT, I'm still NEVER watching their stupid fucking videogames. And Raid's Law states that any app/product that spends as much time and money in marketing as Raid: Shadow Legends does is either utter garbage, filled with predatory microtransactions or both.

[@lmj06]

the fact something evolved from a snake, to a bug, to a rhino shows just how much its envronment has changed

[@rickosetiadi4097]

And also growler

[@jojr5145]

Finally, a video that acknowledges that the super hornet also essentially replaced the legacy hornet, not just the tomcat. The f-35c replaced a few legacy hornets, but a fraction of what the rhinos have.

[@Spaced92]

Well yeah but it was effectively just an Avionics upgrade + new engine, even if it was significant I feel like people don't generally touch on that because these were upgrades that were only possible on the F/A-18 (the proposed new Tomcat would've stripped out everything that made it a Tomcat to achieve the same level of upgrade capability). It's only in the late 2000's or early 2010's that the Super Hornet diverged greatly from the Hornet in terms of avionics.

[@smeary10]

@@Spaced92 the Classic Hornet replaced the A-6 Intruder and F-14A Tomcat. The Super Hornet replaced the F-14D Tomcat and the Classic Hornet.

[@mikek9297]

It didn't really replace the Tomcat tho. It left a capability vacuum in long range interception that the russians and chinese are exploiting with their long range hypersonic missiles. Tomcat should have been upgraded as well as the Phoenix system.

[@callsignmaui6565]

​@@mikek9297 It absolutely did replace the Delta model Tomcat. Let's be honest, the Phoenix was very out of date by the time the Super Hornet achieved initial operational capability, and while a replacement or an upgrade to it would have certainly filled that gap in capability and perhaps given the Tomcat a longer service life, it didn't HAVE that option. There was no longer-range option that had gone through development, trials, and adoption. They could have added compatibility with the AIM-120, but they didn't see a reason to. Why spend all that money upgrading said airframes and acquiring new model Tomcats in the numbers necessary to actually fill that prescribed role across the board, when they could take the budget from the Tomcat, and put it towards acquiring more Super Hornets and working on giving those platforms more capability when it comes to the Air-to-Air mission? The Tomcat didn't have the tools (weaponry) necessary to fulfil the role of Fleet Air Defense at the end of it's lifecycle. Whether that is because the navy neglected it or mismanaged programs like the YAIM-152 program is irrelevant. They didn't have a replacement and they knew better technologies like the AIM-120D and the at the time, proposed AIM-260 idea were around the corner, alongside radars that would give both next generation fighters, and current-gen Super Hornets and Vipers the capability to use said weapons. The Russian Kinzhal hypersonic missile has an estimated range of 1,243 miles, possibly more possibly less. The Tomcat has an operation range of 1,841 mi. The new Block III Super Hornet has a range of around 2,060 miles. If you can develop a Super Hornet with Longer Legs than a Tomcat, and give it long range missiles alongside a better radar so that it can employ said missiles, then there really isn't much point in investing money in maintaining/upgrading Tomcats. tl;dr when the Super Hornet was adopted, the Tomcat had long since fallen out of currency in regards with it's Fleet Air Defense mission and thus, the D model Tomcat was essentially a larger, more overpriced legacy Hornet in regards to what missions it was actually fulfilling.

[@colinhobbs7265]

@@mikek9297 Hypersonics are over-rated crap, the real danger from China is their ballistic anti-ship missile tech and that is something no fighter/interceptor can do anything about.

[@542falcon]

I'm a Marine and was an ordie on the harrier in the 90s. The F16 is my favorite aircraft. But the 18 is one heck of a plane as well. What great vision and knowledge to create 2 fighters to compete against each other for a contract that ended up making 2 of the longest serving and best fighters in the world!

[@sirxavior1583]

It's ironic because the Super Hornet is an enlarged version of the legacy F-18 and the legacy F-18 is an enlarged and navalized version of the Northrop YF-17 that lost out to the F-16 in the lightweight fighter competition. Then the YF-17 is based on the cheap but effective F-5 Freedom Fighter, Perhaps the Super Hornet has reached the end of how much you can tweak the original design.

[@ruthnoya8424]

Good knowledge you have, thanks for sharing.

[@TheKenji2221]

@@ruthnoya8424 It was litteraly said in the video

[@stoyantodorov2133]

And the YF-17 is the enlarged, naval, higher tech child of the F-5.

[@ruthnoya8424]

@@TheKenji2221 Yeah, I commented before the video was almost over, where that info was. Seems like that info should've been at the beginning since that's covering its origins.

[@Cujo5]

Wonder what would happen if you added stealth paint and vector nozzling to the Super Hornet?

[@JessSimpson1313]

It's wild to me that the F-18s they flew in the new TopGun movie are enhanced versions of the "Mig-28"s they fought against in the first TopGun movie. Mig-28 (F-5 painted black) -> YF-17 -> F-18 -> F-18E/F

[@Sierra0331]

Oh my god. I never realized how much I needed a Variable sweep wing F-22 until now.🥵

[@ivanstrydom8417]

I love the F/A 18 Supper Hornet , as well as the F 15, the Euro Fighter Typhoon as well as the F22. Such superb machines.

[@420JackG]

A navalized Typhoon... now that could really be something.

[@thepilotman5378]

The Hornet isn't as good at Fleet defense, but is a much better plane. It's miles easier to maintain, has much better fuel efficiency, and is a formidable dogfighter with HOB. It has outstanding performance in strike missions. It's a very cool craft as well. Doesn't have the looks as a tomcat, but better in almost every way

[@TheWizardGamez]

With the aim-120D the sheer distance that that these missiles can be released into the air at is just crazy. That’s a capability the F-14 never had

[@appa609]

@@TheWizardGamez The AIM-54A's have somewhat more range than the 120D's and the tomcat had been using them since the early 70's. Iran killed about 100 MiGs with them. This is the one way the tomcat was way ahead of its time.

[@mikewaterfield3599]

debatable easier to maintain yes more fuel efficient, categorically inaccurate power to weight, lacking strike capability, is more flexible dog fighting capability, is reasonable sensory package, is limited Jack of trades master of none, the fleet was better off with role specialists.

[@Justanotherconsumer]

The maintenance and readiness thing is nontrivial. Hangar queens don’t protect the fleet.

[@mikewaterfield3599]

@@Justanotherconsumer no they don't, however we never had a problem keeping plenty of birds on the line ready to roll. Just because we had to turn harder never stopped us. With older birds that were ridden harder we still kept up.

[@Primus54]

Surprised no mention of the integration of the Super Hornet into the Blue Angels in 2020.

[@captaineagles3580]

They moved to it bc they plan on only having c hornets in a small marine unit in CA and those were gonna get phased out too

[@Balafoutre]

Literally, hitting the jackpot!!! Adaptable, affordable, upgradable...the so called "loser" over the F16 vs legacy F18 competition. Just an amazing aircraft!!!

[@mardiffv.8775]

The F18 lost the F16 vs F18 competition, because the F16 had the same engine as the F15. Saving cost for the Air Force. But it's twin engine design of the F18 made it ideal for carrier operations. With 2 engines, when 1 engine is broken, the other engine can bring the plane home.

[@Balafoutre]

@@mardiffv.8775 it's called redundancy...

[@underlookedsuspect286]

Nice Video with only a few small inaccuracies, but love all the VFA-2 footage. You actually got a few shots of me in there, Didn't realize some of that footage I took made it on KZbin.

[@GPN007a]

Off topic but the super Hornet is as long as the fictional RX-78-2 Gundam robot is tall. Seeing the Hornet helped me visualize what a mech would look like in real life.

[@Menaceblue3]

LoL then you realize mobile suit sizes peaked circa chars counterattack and later became miniaturized by F91 and victory

[@fishnchips5826]

Thats kinda true i just measured it, i have both in 1/144th scale. The RX-78’ horn is a few mm taller than the super hornet, but i kinda doubt it since my super hornet model is made by dragon model kit which not a very accurate brand 😂

[@danielcervantes7826]

I LOVE the hornet, something about being an absolute workhorse of an aircraft just appeals to me in ways that pure air superiority fighters, usually in the spotlight just doesn't.

[@titan133760]

In today's warfare, multirole fighter aircraft are the norm

[@hershman1956]

I saw the original YF-17 video at the International Air Tattoo in 1976. I am happy at how it has matured.

[@aaronbarnes8938]

It is also built at the plant in St.Louis Missouri as I just toured the plant their for the Super Hornet and Eagle along with some 777 work they do their

[@pontiacGXPfan]

The Legacy has been a staple of carriers since 1983 and has been in most every significant action involving the Navy for the past 30-some-odd year. Maybe a handful of airframes in the Navy and Marines does that apply to

[@scottmoore9553]

Lots of comments about the YF-17 losing out to the F-16. It was apples and oranges in the competition. The Air Force wanted a single engine defensive fighter and the F-16 was a better fit. The Super Hornet started on paper as the P-530 Cobra. It became the YF-17 for the Air Force competition. It was already designed but couldn't fit all the Air Force parameters. The Navy needed a new more agile fighter with the aging Tomcat and Mc Donnel Douglas got together with Northrop and the Legacy Hornet was developed. McDonnel Douglas had better ties with the Navy inside track and they became the primary contractor with Northrop becoming the prime subcontractor. Interesting turn of events at this point. Since WW2, Navy aircraft could not land after a mission with unused bomb loads still attached to the wing hardpoints. Unused ordinance was dropped in the ocean before landing back on the carrier. The Super Hornet was developed with extra hardpoints and the ability to land back on the carrier with some hardpoints still loaded. It has 11 weapons stations and was just beefier in every way. The Super Hornet redefined the term multirole/multitask aircraft. It is a fighter, ground attack aircraft, light bomber, refueler and electronic jammer. Sadly it's a Gen 4 fighter and technology has surpassed it's development. The F35 is a Gen 5 but it is not even close to the multirole aircraft the Super Hornet has become. The Navy is already planning on a Gen 6 fighter. The Super Hornet is in the twilight of it's lifetime. Production will cease in 2025 and is already at a very slow rate of building them. I love the Super Hornet and will be sad when I retire at the end of the line. I have been a part of the program since the first production unit in 1997. Jack Northrop designed a beautiful platform that has been a huge success throughout the decades.

[@robert506007]

Frankly if they are not going to replace the S-3 on board the Carrier they should have a program to provide the Supers with a basic sub hunting ability. In short sonabouy launching pods and onboard analysis for said buoys along with air dropped torps. It would look crappy but they can't dependes on P-8's (excellant though they are) to cover the carrier from sub attacks.

[@davidpemberton7538]

Helicopters also do sub detection and sub attack. Not just S3. And the Sub attached to each carrier task group does the same thing.

[@Anderson_Hwang]

They removed the S-3's sub hunting capability since early 2000s.

[@anydaynow01]

@@davidpemberton7538 Yeah the attack boat attached to a carrier strike group is worth its weight in gold. Surprisingly enough it's the old diesel boats countries use that are the biggest threat when they are running silent on electric power.

[@blech71]

Biggest feature; SUPPLY CHAIN! it’s the one model that all others aspire to model/execute.

[@sammcbride2464]

Nice video. I like the F-18. I just wish the block III included all the proposed upgrades. I think it could achieve supercruise with my calculations

[@bigman23DOTS]

The super hornets have been awesome for Australian defence just one issue as I see it noise every thing else is super!

[@rjvanzanten1]

It never really replaced the F-14, the Tomcats role and what it used to bring to the fleet is just not covered anymore

[@airprok8328]

The tomcat, although very deadly wen working properly was way to expensive to operate at a rate the block111’s will even operate and the f14’s were just dangerous aircraft’s. I’ve heard it right from the horses mouths! It literally would just lose control and crash out of nowhere and the cost to maintain was through the roof. The tomcat is not coming back and people need to move on and get over it. The tomcat is a video game jet now and has been for years. Just not practical at all.

[@dewarkhodern9990]

​@@airprok8328 Keep in mind that Grumman was going to create the Super Tomcat F14 to remedy all the problems , but asshole Dick Cheney stopped that especially due to the fact that he literally had a grudge Grumman

[@michaelkenwell9146]

@@dewarkhodern9990 EXACTLY a combination of high operating/maintenance costs and Cheney's political grudge against Grumman combined to kill the Tomcat despite it outperforming the Legacy Hornet in every way, except ease of maintenance, which was the point of contention Cheney used to push out the F-14.

[@einundsiebenziger5488]

@@airprok8328 deadly when* working / way too* expensive / dangerous aircraft* (plural same as singular). Otherwise completely agreed.

[@bretthoffman2128]

It will Still NEVER BE As COOL As the F-14

[@bretthoffman2128]

@ZenixΛVI Not EVEN Close IMO, the hornet Looks Diminutive, The F-14 Tomcat Just Looks COOL, Like it’s Raring To Go Just Sitting there

[@bretthoffman2128]

@ZenixΛVI I guess the hornet has it’s Good points, however from my understanding the F-14 Tomcat has better range and just as much or more ability

[@anydaynow01]

An F-14 and strike F-14 (like the F-15 and Strike Eagle) would have been the best choice with an unlimited budget, but with maintenance in mind, as well as the lack of threats requiring the insane capabilities of the F-14, the F/A-18 fit the role for a much smaller price tag. Don't get me wrong I love the F-14 for all it's abilities, but it was like bringing a very expensive high maintenance gun to a knife fight. The money is better spent on the next gen carrier fighters (and no the single engine F-35 isn't it, the F-23 would have been a much choice).

[@DriveCarToBar]

The SuperHornet: When you want to replace two aircraft with one but the new one can't actually accomplish the missions of the other two that it replaced.

[@alpacaofthemountain8760]

Well now the Navy has the F-35C. The f-18 is a better pair with the Panther than the Tomcat due to the fact that having two high-cost planes would probably be too much

[@kdrapertrucker]

It took the Tomcat's place, but it certainly didn't replace the Tomcat. The navy lost a lot of capability when Cheney ordered the super Tomcat 21 cancelled.

[@diegoespr]

Spanish Air Force, as other allied NATO countries, are now retiring their veteran F18s, some from the mid 80s and some of others purchased as second hand US Navy Hornets in the 90s. SUCH GREAT PLANES!!! Now its time for dual teams of F35As and Eurofigther Thyphoons in Spanish Air Force and F35Bs in the Spanish Armada with smaller STOVL carrier. SALUDOS 🇪🇦🤝🇺🇲

[@petertekippe5391]

The super hornet has NOT replaced the Tomcat. The hornet doesn’t have the same capabilities as the cat. The US Navy no longer has a Mach 2 + interceptor. They don’t believe they need a high speed interceptor anymore which is what they thought for guns in air to air combat back in the 50’s. We all know how that went… it was a massive mistake and many good pilots paid for that mistake with their lives.

[@runningfortherestofus7812]

Great video. Accurate and well done.

[@RARDingo]

Great presentation. Accurate & informative.

[@appa609]

I swear Boeing doesn't have any genuine ability to innovate. They're too entrenched in the airliner mindset of "the same thing but 3% better". If they were there instead of McDonnell Douglas in the late 60's we would be flying F-4Q Super-Duper phantoms today or some shit.

[@gotanon9659]

There an ongoing joke inside boeing that McDonnell douglas brought boeing using boeing own money....

[@unfazedmc5734]

no offense but I hope you realize the irony of your statement

[@Lawrence330]

MD is generally considered to be the less innovative of the two, and the Phantom was an MD design, not originally a Boeing design. Plenty of industry analysts will suggest that the enormous percentage of MD execs in the BDS management are part of the stagnation as well, creation a culture opposed to innovation and R&D, reactive rather than proactive. I'm sure there are many sides to this story, however.

[@hypersonichobo4263]

I've heard said that a dogfight between a viper and a super hornet is the equivalent of a knife fight in a telephone booth

[@jackedpreacher6570]

Fell in love with the F-18 back in 2011 when I played the BF3 campaing mission. Very sexy jet 👍🏻

[@elnach3240]

The Tomcat 21 would have been a way better choice. The RINO is a subsonic jet when it carries any ordinance.

[@michaelkenwell9146]

No doubt, the operating and maintenance costs would have been higher for sure, but the raw performance would have also been a lot better.

[@titan133760]

But keep in mind, rarely have fighter jets gone supersonic in recent years

[@elnach3240]

We've been fighting sheep herders hiding in caves with RPG's for the past 20 years.

[@godthunder4732]

You should make a video on the MiG-29 someday soon.

[@brandondugger2754]

F-18F Superhornet : the Strike Eagle of the Navy !

[@Eirik36]

You’ll always have rhino detractors, but I’ve heard just as many former tomcat crews who loved the rhino as those who didn’t compared to the tomcat. The rhino and the tomcat both have problems, and imo the only truly good tomcat was the D model (many tomcat aircrew also agree). Both have a good combat record, even if you believe what the Iranians say (funny that the most staunch Iranian detractors will give them a pass when it comes to their tomcat combat record because it makes the tomcat look better). So it really doesn’t matter

[@300zxsailor]

Man I learned something new today. I served 10 years on a carrier and never heard them call rhinos. I had to go Google it and low and behold F/A-18E/F super hornet "rhino". Cool

[@Gothmog2266]

jack of all trades, master of none.

[@Wargasm54]

Still miss the Tomcat though. Super badass looking.

[@Dirtyharry70585]

Ward Carroll YT has the perspective why the TomCat upgrades were cancelled. And if were done, would have been cheaper and a better fighter.

[@michaelmappin4425]

The thumbnail graphic is incorrect. The Super Hornet wing stations are canted 4 degrees and produce a tremendous amount of aerodynamic drag.

[@chrissartain4430]

Great Coverage !!

[@PilotPhotog]

Thank you, Chris!

[@therocinante3443]

Conflict of nations - CON. I mean it's right there in the name

[@new_comment]

The super hornet is everything in the wheelhouse, no question P. S. The Tomcat doesn't age, it appreciates.

[@anydaynow01]

Yep speaking with the SH pilots they say the first thing they look at after they launch is their fuel gauge. The YF-23 met a lot of their needs but politics didn't let that happen so, F-35 single engine clown show. The F-14 or better yet strike F-14 would have been the best option but the maintenance costs were pretty crazy, I remember walking through the hanger deck and let's just say the F-14 mechanics were busy more often than the F/A-18 maintenance folks.

[@southernbear736]

@@anydaynow01 Crazy...its almost like all those airframes had existed from the 1970s and was being compared to at the time, freshly built aircraft.

[@KernowekTim]

The All American 'Bull Shark' of the fighter arena. Robust, super capable, adaptable, remarkably agile and super aggressive. Perfectly suited to a brutal predatory marine existence, yet capable of operating 'in-country' without pause to re-acclimatise. American muscle. Great war-plane. I love 'em.

[@guymarcgagne7630]

Good overview

[@PilotPhotog]

Thank you!

[@matsv201]

Its Worth saying that JAS39 Gripen E/F have a very simular upgrade to the Super Hornet F18E/F with a airfram that look very simular, but are slightly larger. But also heavily modernized.

[@einundsiebenziger5488]

... with an* airframe* that looks* very similar but is* slightly larger ...

[@mbogucki1]

Appreciate the Metric conversions on the vid. Cheers.

[@swghavoc]

My favorite war plane.

[@CDNShuffle]

a navy f22 with swept wings would have made me such a happy man

[@fuzzyhair321]

Reading comments and seeing its good at a dogfight. When was the last dogfight, i agree planes should have cannons to engage in close quarters but modern planes its all about getting ontop of your opponent. If they can't see you cant shoot back

[@12what34the]

Might be appreciated for the 90s kids/millennials watching, this video made me realize the relation between the starter Pokémon progression and the F-5, F/A-18 A-B-C-D (legacy), and F/A-18 E-F-G (Rhino). I guess third times the charm as they say.

[@AB-ez4rm]

An interesting thing to know about the Hornet is it lost out to the F-16 when the Air Force was looking for a smaller fighter/attack craft. Who'd have thunk it that the YF-17 would eventually become the Super Hornet?

[@Lawrence330]

Navy and Air Force typically have different needs. Navy aircraft tend to be more robust as catapult-assisted launches and carrier landings are incredibly demanding. An aircraft carrier also has limited room for maintenance, so designs that can be taken apart and reassembled within their own footprint are preferable to airframes requiring larger work areas. Finally, with some exceptions, the Navy tends to prefer twin-engined aircraft and the F-16 has only one. IIRC, the Navy considered the F-15 at the time, but by the time it had been ruggedized for sea duty, it was too heavy and expensive to replace the F-14.

[@johnhermann7498]

"Jack of all trades, master of none..."

[@Joe-King]

The full phrase is “a jack of all trades is a master of none, but oftentimes better than a master of one.”

[@studiogamma2486]

@@Joe-King agreed

[@rodneywillissr9489]

It is simple, it was politics. The F/A-18 was an upgrade for the A-7, but the Super Bug did not replace the F-14, it is barely able to do 1/2 of the missions that the Tomcat could.

[@SilverFox-qr1ci]

I wish they hadn't named the EA-18G the Growler. I thought a growler was one of those old welcome mats that girls used to wear in the 70"s.

[@kutter_ttl6786]

I hear Growler, I think a large jug of beer.

[@NeutronSplitter]

I petition to rename the Super Hornet to Murder Hornet.

[@inorite4553]

American Murder Hornet

[@rcollins1202]

Tom Clancy demonstrated a major flaw in the F-14/Phoenix air defense system in his book Red Storm Rising.

[@JeffreyWilliams-dr7qe]

A6 and Ea6 and A5 and F4S. Sceptical over here.

[@fredtedstedman]

Gotta love 'em !!😍😍👍👍 Wales UK

[@someinternetguy955]

Great aircraft! Will be around a long time. Could use more rangle, and is a bit slow.

[@TheUsmc0802]

There’s one reason the Super Hornet actually made it thought to production. Congress is dumb. Congress thought we were getting an upgrade on the legacy Hornet. Not a 100 percent new weapon system. The F14D was cut short of its production goals and we lost a HIUUUHGE asset. The Legacy Hornet could’ve received HOTUS Amrams etc and we would’ve been better off. Rhino lacks, legs, payload, and ability to intercept Quickly. The Rhino only wins as a dog fighter where the legacy was/is actually better anyway. Nice video though!!!!

[@FeralRabbit]

The Hornet lineage is one of marginal at best. From day one it didn't full fill expectations. Be it range, payload, etc... But it was easier to maintain they say. Imagine if Cheney didn't have something to gain by killing Grumman and Tomcat 21s were on decks now.

[@deanstevenson1649]

"enhancement that cannot be OVERSTATED, why does everyone mess that up?"

[@DuyNghia7]

the CFT and EWP were canted btw

[@glennhalila8279]

I just shared this with my Dad, who in my opinion was General Electric's Top Gun while he was there full time from 1965-1998 and part time from 1998-2018. He retired from General Electric with 45 Patents mostly dealing Compressor Fan Blades, Thrust and Special Alloy applications. He worked on the C5-A the he worked on the TF-34 (For the A-10 Warthog) and TF-39. He also worked on other Engines The CFM56 with the French and the GE-90. My Uncle Worked on the Turbine for The F-18 Hornet. My Father was at many Test facilities and dealt with Generals and decision makers from US Military and NATO Branches. He talked to many Pilots who said that General Electric Engines were better because they could fly the plane without holding back. They didn't have to fly the Engine so to speak. My Dad and brother were working at General Electric when the Raptor contract was awarded to Pratt and Whitney. My brother lost his job and he was there for 9 1/2 years. Had he been there for 10 he would not have been let go. My Dad told me that the GE Engine was better and more advanced and it was 10 years ahead in Technology than anyone's! He was a combination of mad,disgusted and disappointed! I remember having to drive a U-Haul Truck from Cincinnati Ohio to Indianapolis Indiana. My brother got a Job at Allison Motors in Indianapolis. He's not there anymore he's an Engineer at another Company in Indiana

[@stevenwalker4181]

F/A-18 E/F was a political decision. The F-14 could go farther, fly faster, and the D, that was undergoing OPEVAL when the decision was made, had a great sensor suite with RDR E/O and IRST subsystems. The T/W of the B snd D models was impressive. The arguments presented at the time to the F-14 and A-6 communities that the F/A-18EF was a superior ACFT on paper had little basis in reality. What the F/A 18 did bring was ease of maintenance and ease of flyability and a multi-role capability, albeit with the Lantrin pod, the F-14 demonstrated it too had an impressive A/G capability. But the F/A18’s FBW system was impressive. It had great avionics and a good RDR. But it was slow snd still lacked range.

[@SideSwipeGTA]

This decision to go with the Super Hornet was completely political since the Super Tomcat 21 would have had superior capabilities with roughly the same price tag as the Super Hornet. Dick Cheney had it out against Grumman and had a lot of connections to McDonnell Douglas.

[@MrBahjatt]

Back in the 1990s the Super Hornet was seen as 'the future' and essentially a bigger, meaner F/A-18C/D that would take the reign from the bigger, but over the hill F-14, given that its mission profile was obsolete. The reality of it was the 'Hornet/Super Hornet' design were the 'economy conscience' choice whereas the F-14 was a vice in comparison. One cannot help but watch JAG and think 'man today's pilots don't know what they are missing' since the Super Hornet seems to be a one-size-fits-all unlike back in the day.

[@rayjames6096]

I keep hearing nonsense that the US has to dump munitions on the F-35 when returning to its carrier from an ally that also has the B variant ...the F-35 has a 5000lb bring back capability and the US doesn't dump munitions.

[@aandc2005]

Sometime down the road Lockheed Martin should make a similar jet but stealth and use the same engine that's in the F35 which is the world's most powerful single engine fighter.. full burner gives it 45,000 lbs of thrust... Imagined two of those in a multi role stealth carrier based aircraft like the super hornet....👍😀🇺🇲

[@gotanon9659]

Depends on who wins the navy F/A-XX 6th gen fighter competion.

[@hypersonichobo4263]

We have that. It's called the F-35C

[@vilhelmwikman5546]

Where is this link for the offer. I can’t find it in the description

[@soumyajitsingha9614]

Honestly the F 18 advance superhornet with the conformal fuel tank looks even better than the Tomcat

[@Dart2001]

Is the legacy f 18 upgrade to the super hornet similar to the f15e upgrade to the f15ex?

[@TomcatE303]

Basically it did never replaced capabilities of the F-14D. Legacy Hornet it did.

[@t_sixtyfivex_wing8787]

It s not oly replaced the F-14 but include A6 intruder and S3 viking. The Navy compromised by reduce the Fleet Air defense capability from AGM 54 Phenix on the Tomcat to Super hornet and AIM 120 AMRAAM.

[@airprok8328]

I love the hornet, my favorite jet of all time

[@wagrhodes13]

Leading Edge ROOT extensions LERX Because it is extending the leading Edge of the wing ROOT.

[@josezuniga4968]

If this is a reworked f5e, warthunder players gonna lose their minds on this one

[@henryojeda2890]

Any variant of the F-18 would break the game lmao

[@jaek__]

the Hornet would rape everything in war thunder atm

[@zandvoort8616]

To think this came out of the YF-17!

[@aceofaces1944]

Whenever I get into an argument with raptor fanboys I always say I’ll take a plane that doubles as a tanker, jammer, bomber, fighter, ship killer, and recon craft than a one trick pony that still can’t even do STOL. The raptor is the most feared fighter in the world yes and I love it but the hornet is the most feared plane in the world. It is everywhere on carriers at naval air stations and marine air bases. It does everything, takes on any role you can think of and does so better than most other fighters. The hornet truly has many ways of stinging Americas enemies and is in a league of its own.

[@HuntingCatIsBack]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the F-5 itself a derivative of the T-38?

[@wwiggans]

Sometimes there IS a prize for second place, who knew?

[@lordtartarsauceb8348]

What the navy needs is the supertomcat 21 haha.

[@gordonsmith5589]

The F-14 is a better plane, but this one is more cost effective.

[@surq0784]

I don't care what the debate is, money NEVER prevented DoD from retiring other aircraft in the past. I love the tomcat more than any other fighter aircraft and upgrades could've brought new life, just like it did the hornet. Yeah, I'm biased because the tomcat held such special place in my heart, but the Navy made a number of idiotic purchase that were met with controversy, but still went ahead. The only reason the super hornet won, was because it had more foreign buyers and it made more economical sense. I'm bitter about the decision but it is, what it is, and there's no changing what was done.

[@YourTurnCutie]

But it isn’t

[@dct124]

Could've just kept the damn F-14

[@elnach3240]

Tomcat 21 Prototype

[@carlkinder8201]

The F18 series also kills fewer pilots & RIOs in accidents. The Hornet / Super Hornet is better for peacetime, but the Tomcat would be better for actual WW3.

[@airprok8328]

That’s not true. You need to think of maintenance and cost, plus a super hornet with the right pilot will out dog fight anything in the 4.5 generation attack aircraft. Much lighter, almost as fast, great after burner and able to Carry more weapons. The F 14 is awesome, but it’s not the 80’s anymore

[@carlkinder8201]

@@airprok8328 I think you either misread or didn't comprehend or didn't understand what I said? I was AGREEING with the overall message of the video about the hornet / super hornet being better in terms of maintenance/versatility/affordability and I ADDED a point about the hornet / super hornet having FEWER incidents and fatalities per flight hour vs the Tomcat (hornet averaged about 4-5 class A incidents per 100000 flight hours, and tomcat was closer to 8-9 I think). The Tomcat however was better at long range supersonic intercept which would have come in handy if WW3 had broken out and carrier groups were being attacked by mass Soviet bomber formations. This isn't as much of a concern in modern peacetime with the collapse/breakup of the soviet union.

[@Spaced92]

@@carlkinder8201 I agree with what you are saying besides the idea of WW3 being against the Soviets, the F/A-18 is more suited against China, their bombers are more of the standoff category so long-range intercept wouldn't be likely to get there before they got their salvo off anyway. Whereas you can carry up to twice as many F/A-18s as a Tomcat (because you can replace dedicated bomber capability) increasing the versatility and range of missions that can be performed. I do not believe cost is the main reason the F/A-18 is still in use, specialised aircraft like the A-10 or Tomcat have been replaced by multi-role aircraft for practical reasons as well, god knows why the US actually still operate A-10s beyond political reasons.

[@carlkinder8201]

@@Spaced92 coldwar soviet bombers were setup for standoff attack too. The supersonic tu22m carried the kh22 anti-ship missile which had a claimed range of about 300 miles at mach 4ish. Part of the tomcat's mission would have been finding incoming bomber formations with their powerful radars (and help from e2 hawkeyes), and then intercepting them with volleys of aim54 before they could get within range of the carrier task force (in a ww3 scenario). China right now is using old hand me down subsonic badger bombers from the soviet goodwill, but that will likely change in a decade or 2... they do have the super duper long range df21 anti ship missile, which neither the f18 nor the f14 would be effective at intercepting - it's up to Navy's high altitude sams at that point. Modernized aim120s approach the advertised range of the phoenix (and have much higher pk), but if the phoenix had received similar upgrades/support as the amraam, then it might have a 150 mile range by now. But again - it's a huge waste of money when it's not necessary. The f18 / f35 / aim120 work fine for the post cold war / pre rise of the PLA Navy environment.

[@stevebean1234]

@@Spaced92 "god knows why the US actually still operate A-10s beyond political reasons" cause they're cool, cheap, and because they're not wasting as much valuable space chilling on an airbase like they would be if they were on a carrier. are they practically useless? pretty much. just a lot harder to kill a program under those circumstances and honestly the joint services probably has bigger fish to fry so it probably isn't worth their time trying. much larger money pits and operational gaps elsewhere in DOD

[@steve-wu7jp]

Can you cover the Bell Valor which won the army contract?

[@ilijajovcevski4419]

The best peacetime fighter jet of all times!

[@XLA-zg1nn]

Love the High Alpha

[@robwyyi]

F-14 was never replaced by f18. The F-14 was purposed built for aim 54. Super hornet was never intended and not adapted to use aim 54. Instead superhornets fire the lesser medium range aim 120. What did replace the 14s are surface to air missiles. The hundred mile defensive radius for carrier groups are accomplished no by surface to air missiles.

[@hughseagraves7036]

7:58 wow

[@davehope9144]

I’m no pilot but when Canada decided to retire it’s Hornets for the F35 for northern reconnaissance I was thinking I’d rather have two engines under me rather than the single engine of a F35 if an engine flames out in the high north, just say’n

[@DriveCarToBar]

A flame out is a problem you can recover from and limp home. An engine with combat damage in a Hornet is basically two damaged engines because of how close they sit. You lose one, you tend to lose both.

[@Justanotherconsumer]

The Joy of LEX?

[@Kevin-qj7fp]

Imagine if they hybridized the f14 f22 f35 design into a single fighter plane. A plane with the f22 and f35 design with the f14 wings with the double jet f22 and the f35 verticle take off ability Forgot to include FA-XX design as welll as the ngad program

[@Kevin-qj7fp]

We already got a few good designs each in their respected feild of expertise Cant we fuse all these into a single one already that would be cool and awesome

[@300zxsailor]

​@@Kevin-qj7fpmostly because it would be a maintenance nightmare with all the moving parts and the swing wing design would make effective stealth extremely difficult to make and maintain. But I agree it would be a sweet plane

[@proscreens2137]

The F14 beats the Hornet in many ways. But reliability isn't one of them. When you need to get planes in the air then the F14 is no the right choice.

[@southernbear736]

Ah yes, the Super Hornet, Dick Cheney's monument for his unbridled hatred of Grumman Ironworks and making a plane that tries to do everything but excels at nothing. Never the less it still took them till 2006 to kill off the old bird which last had freshly built airframes in the 1980s

[@MrKentaroMotoPI]

... and a radar cross section the size of a barn. It can't penetrate denied airspace and therefore must use inefficient standoff weapons.

[@xivkya6882]

With the emergence of China and whatnot, the F18 just isn't very capable of fleet defense. Poor range, and poor speed just don't let it compete with potential standoff munitions and lacking in performance compared to the competing aircraft in the theater. Yes it's a good ground attack platform, yes it's a good multirole aircraft, but the navy has specific needs and these needs can't be fulfilled by the hornet or f35 alone. Even with conformal fuel tanks the range increase comes at the cost of already awful speed. The F18 just isn't suited for a fleet defense role, a role many like to think is dead, but is far more important than ever.

[@Justanotherconsumer]

That the F-35C and F/A-XX are basically the same role as the F/A-18 should be an indication that the Navy isn’t that concerned with dedicated air superiority fighters. Like the dedicated interceptor, their time may have come and gone.

[@gotanon9659]

The F-18 is way more suited in the fleet defense role than the F-14.

[@maxsin1972]

@@gotanon9659 F18 is slow, short range and cheap plane, F14B with amraams would have been a superior fleet defender, not to mention supertomcat 21

[@izanagisburden9465]

@@maxsin1972 my guy F18 got radar and mission computer only second to the mighty eagle... plus it is even getting AIM260... what can a tom cat do against 2 of F/a18s

[@maxsin1972]

@@izanagisburden9465 my dear, Super Tomcat 21 would have been superior by far in every aspect, even the F14B upgraded with the last Technology would have been superior. Or perhaps do you think only F18 and F15 are able to carry new missiles with new radar?

[@joshbechaistron791]

Wasn't the hornet originally approved on the basis of technical data that was fudged by the manufacturer and the dod?