John Fedup
The Bunker Group
I guess the Typhoon has beat out the Superhornet.
Kuwait to sign Eurofighter deal with Italy next week - UPI.com
Kuwait to sign Eurofighter deal with Italy next week - UPI.com
F-18 Advanced Hornet
- Thread starter Guynumber7
- Start date
Joe Black
Active Member
Thought I read somewhere they'd buy both. Just waiting for the FMS approval from the US side for the SHornets.
I read that the reason they have gone with the Typhoons is because they have got tired of waiting for the US approvals system to act. They say that it takes far to long.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Boeing has renewed its effort to promote the advanced Superhornet to Congress and the USN. The latest ASH concept concentrates more on basic features rather than stealth enhancement (conformation fuel tank, new glass cockpit, etc.). Continued delays with the F-35C and the need to extend SH service life may make upgrades and addtional new ASHs an easier sell.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/a...advanced-super-hornet-push-as-us-navy-425221/
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/a...advanced-super-hornet-push-as-us-navy-425221/
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
I believe the conformal fuel tanks are pretty much a ready to go item so Australia could go it alone but USN upgrades would reduce the cost of these tanks. The other enhancements would be doubtful without USN help or other countries actually orderIng ASHs.
need a definition of what "glass cockpit" is being discussed here
a glass cockpit can mean one of 2 things
1) completely digital cockpit - ie FBW and digital gauges
2) uprated laminated cockpit (iridium or gold) so as to act as a reflector/absorber to radar signals. ie as part of signal/signature management
a glass cockpit can mean one of 2 things
1) completely digital cockpit - ie FBW and digital gauges
2) uprated laminated cockpit (iridium or gold) so as to act as a reflector/absorber to radar signals. ie as part of signal/signature management
John Newman
The Bunker Group
Reading the article it appears that Boeings new proposed ASH MkII has been scaled back, not as ambitious as the original proposal.
If there was something to come out of it (and I'm more referring to components of the ASH proposal), the conformal tanks look like a good idea, and probably more especially for the Growlers at least.
Time will tell, but if I was Boeing, I don't think I'd be holding my breath!
John Newman
The Bunker Group
You think so?
Personally I think it's more about Boeing being a bit more 'realistic' now about the ASH, it appeared to me, from the configuration they were originally proposing, they were trying to promote the ASH as an 'alternative' to the F-35 (yes funny ha ha too!).
Roll on a couple of years and the ASH is still a proposal, so I think by making the mods a bit more 'realistic' then there is a greater chance that someone (don't know who?), might pick it up.
Again, I don't think ASH (or ASH Mk II) will ever see the light of day, but certainly components of the ASH might certainly have a chance, such as the conformal tanks.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Boeing may have realized there are easier opportunities in promoting ASH components to the existing fleets of SH/Growlers, especially the USN as their jets have seen heavy use and will need life- extensions. Incorporating ASH components at the same time might make sense. Actual ASH sales could happen if these improvements enhance the SH to a reasonable extent at a decent cost but some kind of F-35 additional delay would need to happen as well.
At this point the only foreign ASH sale possibility is Canada. As no replacement is likely until post 2020, the F-35 has lots of time to sort itself out and junior will have to buy his rejection as it will the best solution and it should be cost neutral. I will enjoy his pain!:rolling
well, there's only two current users of Shornet/Growler. its more about future sales opportunities against dithering Hornet/F-16 users
Well Canada clearly might acquire something hornet as they run hornets, ruled out F-35's. But I would assume someone would have to order something before the decision could be made? Might they put in an interim order of SH to buy time?
But countries like Spain, who would probably love to acquire 70 odd F-35's maybe even some B's, but have a budget that will not support that. They look like they will make a few upgrades to their existing hornet fleet (they just got new 70 helmets), perhaps they could find some money for a ~24 plane purchase, just to get them through so they don't have to have a simulated airforce with capability gap. Allowing them to delay a F-35 purchase until they can get the funds together for a full replacement, operating a mixed fleet of hornets and SH much like Australia.
Finland isn't a sure bet for the F-35. If the SH could be coupled with a generous support system within Finland it would make it at least shortlist worthy. I imagine Canada might be the sort of customer that would develop/manufacture the weapons pod if they selected the super hornet, as its probably something they could do ingeniously.
They were originally targeting Brazil and Denmark too.
So a super hornet particularly with longer range tanks its going to make it a whole lot more compelling. When the F-35 is in service with the USN, having a plane that can better match the F-35 range would be a worthy upgrade. Anything that improves the existing SH fleet in terms of range or buddy refueling is going to have a huge ongoing improvement for the USN. I can see why thats the part they are jumping all over.
I would imagine given that Australia has a significant number of SH, conformal fuel tanks would probably get a look in, particularly if the retrofit cost was minimal and it was inservice with the USN.
becomes attractive as we can carry the acquisition under existing Shornet/Growler FMS, whereas even existing Hornet users would have to trigger a more modified FMS contract
Last edited:
I imagine there are a lot of people thinking that they don't want to complicate the market more than it already is in regard to the F-35.I doubt the US is going to spend much of its own coin developing stuff that is going to blur capability on a platform that has a limited life for them. I doubt its worth it for regular hornets (will it even fit?)
I think for Australia though, the CFT would be a winner. Giving the F-35 and SH near equal range will be useful, as you can then operate them together more effectively longer range (land based) missions.
I assume its also compatible with the buddy refuelling? And five drop tanks?
Last edited by a moderator:
John Newman
The Bunker Group
Yes the CFT would appear to be a winner, especially if the USN also decides to include CFT in future enhancements to their Super Hornet and Growler fleets.
I have wondered, if and when the 'fourth' squadron of F-35A's is decided upon (hopefully) and the 'F's are retired, would it be worth (if it was possible and could also be afforded too), to at least hang onto the 12 so called 'pre wired' F's?
Could be a source for both attrition airframes for the Growler fleet and also kept in service in a 'buddy' tanking role too.
Yes the RAAF is eventually not going to be short of tankers, 5 KC-30A's in service now, two more in the pipe and the extra two suggested in the DWP to bring the fleet to nine.
If the Growlers were ever to be deployed somewhere one day, where it's a bit 'hot', having some buddy tanker equipped Super Hornets to accompany them into the thick of things mightn't be a bad idea!!
I don't imagine anyone is not going to be open to a deal where we keep them. But I would think eventually the costs of supporting them will make it not that desirable to keep around. However if there is a specific capability that they offer that we still want. There is plenty of time to keep them around.
The F-35 should end up cheaper to operate than the F-18 and F-18 SH. Arguably it will be more capable, (even in the EW space) than anything currently flying, at least by the time we are ready for a 4th squadron.
SH will be around for a while. I imagine possibly until any 4th squadron is IOC. Its one heck of an expensive way to operate refuelling from land based fields. Obviously with a carrier, you don't have much of a choice. I think by the time the 4th squadron is looked at the SH will be looking very old and dated. Around 2030?
According to the DWP the SH fleet will be retired around 2030 and the Growler fleet around 2035. The DWP makes mention of either a 4th F-35 squadron or an unmanned aerial vehicle though I don't think we should rule out the possibility of jumping in on the F/A-XX program that should have aircraft rolling out around that same time frame.
All said at the moment it's best guess with the RAAF not looking at it, judging by the DWP they will assess possible options post 2020's to determine if they want manned or unmanned, what's existing or whats in the pipe line etc etc.
All said at the moment it's best guess with the RAAF not looking at it, judging by the DWP they will assess possible options post 2020's to determine if they want manned or unmanned, what's existing or whats in the pipe line etc etc.
John Newman
The Bunker Group
Don't disagree at all.
My point about hanging onto the 12 pre-wired F's didn't mean that they would all be kept flying and operational (I remember that 5 or so of the F-111G's were 'parked' as soon as they arrived from the US too).
If the 'yet to enter service' Growler capability (which may well eventually be replaced by the F-35A's EW capabilities, with or without the NGJ pods too), is kept in service for the 'long' term, say into the 2040's, etc, then it might be worth at least keeping them as attrition replacements here in Oz, rather than being parked in the US somewhere.
As for some of them being kept 'operational' in the buddy tanking role, well yes that is very debateable, especially as I noted that we are going from having 5 KC-30A's to soon having 7 and eventually 9.
But still, if in some 'far away' land where it might be a rather hot environment, then maybe F's operating alongside, and supporting, Growler's in the buddy tanking role isn't such a bad idea.
Just my opinion of course too!!!
I wonder if USN will want our RAAF F/A-18F's, especially the prewired ones, when we are done with them. The USN is concerned re a fighter gap in future, and and some non carrier used SH that have been well maintained may be a very helpful supplement to their fleet by then (2030). 2030 is only 14 years away, and aircraft are not being rendered obsolete as rapidly as they were in past.
Not sure when the USN plan to retire their Growlers.