Someone's gotta take the NTR when (always) the boats fucked up.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Stupid questions about the Rhino (Super Hornet)
- Thread starter Boss_BlueAngels
- Start date
Someone's gotta take the NTR when (always) the boats fucked up.
How about you taking it once in awhile?
The E-2 can stay up longer than a 1+15!
Who said you had to be airborne? Some ships like to have a spare Link 16 terminal chocked and chained on deck.....
Hey Joe, I guess I'm asking. . . What was the life expectancy of the vanilla hornet? I know that OpTempo is tough right now, but aren't they prematurely fatiguing? (is that a word?) It seems like as soon as the Tomcat went away that the hornet became the Maintenance "Dog" on ship. Heck, in 05, we had Tomcat squadrons with better sortie completion rates than some Hornet squadrons. I think we need more 50 pound heads to work with composites a bit more.
2sr2worry
Naval Aviation=world's greatest team sport
The original Hornet was bought with an expectation of 6000 "full spectrum" flight hours, 2000 traps, a wing root Fatigue Life Expectancy (FLE) of 1.0 and a "notional" service life of 15 years. Now, after the center-barrel replacement (CBR+) mod and the SLAP/SLEP inspections we're trying to reach 10,000 (or maybe 11,000) flight hours, 2700 traps, wing root FLE of 1.0 and somewhere between a 27 year and 31 year service life.
For insights into CBR+, take a look at:
http://www.frcsw.navy.mil/frcsw/images/cbrweb.wmv
For insights into CBR+, take a look at:
http://www.frcsw.navy.mil/frcsw/images/cbrweb.wmv
Hornet FLE and life expectancy is a constantly moving target. Also the fact that Naval TACAIR is being tasked more than anyone ever expected. The Jets in my squadron, while fairly new, have been passed from one operational squadron to another for the duration of their life, and have accrued hour after hour, trap after trap, faster than predicted before the GWOT.
For a single maneuver to release a single weapon.... from what I've heard.
Same thing the wires did to WWII biplanes....drag, and lots of it when carrying all those space shuttle tanks!
Resurrected zombie thread:
I was just going through GAO reports, because thats what I do now that I have nothing to do with myself, and had some questions that were relevant to this thread.
1.) From a pilots perspective what are the key differences between what the JSF is supposed to offer and what a Block III Super Hornet can offer? Obviously JSF is less visible to radar, but are there others? What are they?
2.) Boeing claims that with a Block III Hornet, a Gen 4.75 fighter, they can close the gap between the JSF, and that the Navy is currently satisfied with the Super Hornet until 2024. Single Seat suggested that he disagrees with this statement. Why?
3.) GAO reports that JSF is largely over budget and even with increased costs the technologies required for JSF have still not reached maturity. One of the reports claims the JSF unit price is in the area of the high $90Mil. and very likely to continue to increase. US Navy fact file claims that E/F Hornets carry a unit cost of $57Mil. A Block III with Boeings proposed improvements would likely cost more but hard to believe that they could cost $23Mil per air craft more. With the considerable cost difference are the advantages of JSF, as addressed in 1 and 2 above, worth the additional funds required to procure the JSF?
4.) Does anyone know if Boeings proposal has been seriously considered and formally reported on? Any suggestions on where to go to find any such formal report?
I was just going through GAO reports, because thats what I do now that I have nothing to do with myself, and had some questions that were relevant to this thread.
1.) From a pilots perspective what are the key differences between what the JSF is supposed to offer and what a Block III Super Hornet can offer? Obviously JSF is less visible to radar, but are there others? What are they?
2.) Boeing claims that with a Block III Hornet, a Gen 4.75 fighter, they can close the gap between the JSF, and that the Navy is currently satisfied with the Super Hornet until 2024. Single Seat suggested that he disagrees with this statement. Why?
3.) GAO reports that JSF is largely over budget and even with increased costs the technologies required for JSF have still not reached maturity. One of the reports claims the JSF unit price is in the area of the high $90Mil. and very likely to continue to increase. US Navy fact file claims that E/F Hornets carry a unit cost of $57Mil. A Block III with Boeings proposed improvements would likely cost more but hard to believe that they could cost $23Mil per air craft more. With the considerable cost difference are the advantages of JSF, as addressed in 1 and 2 above, worth the additional funds required to procure the JSF?
4.) Does anyone know if Boeings proposal has been seriously considered and formally reported on? Any suggestions on where to go to find any such formal report?
2sr2worry
Naval Aviation=world's greatest team sport
Latest story on this topic. The hard sell is definitely going on. Bottom line is whether CNO is willing to go tell OSD and Congress the Navy needs $4B dollars that's not in the budget to buy 69 more Supers.
http://thehill.com/business--lobby/...re-super-hornet-fighting-jets-2009-02-02.html
http://thehill.com/business--lobby/...re-super-hornet-fighting-jets-2009-02-02.html
The Navy is "satisfied" with it because it meets the requirements for that program. The requirements for the program that the JSF was selected for are different. Keep in mind when evaluating Boeing's statements that they lost the contract to the LM entry. A decision by the Navy to abandon JSF and buy more super hornets (and no, they will not be making a unilateral decision like that) would thus be a good thing for Boeing.
You won't get a clear answer to this here.
Since those costs came from two different sources, you would have to evaluate them to see if they were done the same way (there are multiple ways to arrive at a cost/aircraft and you would want to ensure they were done the same way so that you were comparing apples to apples). Having said that, O&M is an enormous part of the overall program cost and you would need to see how those costs compared before you could decide if you were "saving" money or not. Try reading this if you are interested in some of the thought process behind the acquisition process.
Oh, and if you are looking for a completely unbiased yet still intelligent analysis of the merits of the Navy cancelling their participation in the JSF program in favor of buying more super hornets, you will not find it because... it does not exist.
JSF_Dreamer
Busted Head
whatever they decide to buy... I'll fly it.