Ideally we should have bought the C model hornets instead of upgrading the older A model hornets in the 1990's. Then the A models would have been used for the basic low-risk missions, while the more advanced C models would be the front line aircraft.
If we did this the F/A-18C models would still have plenty of flight hours left right now and would have easily lasted us until the JSF arrived. We would then retire the F/A-18A's once the JSF entered service and the F/A-18C's would then perform the low-risk misisons with the JSF being the front line aircraft.
It's great to have 20:20 hindsight isn't it? We didn't know about the centre-barrel issues Australia and Canada completed a structural analysis in the late 90s, by which time 'classic' Hornet production had ended.
rjmaz1 said:
This leap frogging is definitely the ideal way of purchasing combat aircraft and is performed by most major countries like US, U.K, India etc.
Agreed; a two tiered force structure, although more expensive to operate, allows you to plan and spread your future defence spending more evenly.
rjmaz1 said:
You dont need a 120million dollar stealthy strike fighter to escort a refueling tanker. A 30 million dollar 20 year old aircraft can do this just as good, so the leap frogging is good.
Hey, why not use A-10s???
nfloorl:
But seriously, that $120m stealth fighter is $120m because of its advanced sensors, datalinking capability, integrated systems giving better pilot SA etc, so it will therefore be far more effective at protecting a refueling (sic) tanker.
JBodnar39 said:
From what I know about the F-18E/F, the only real advantage it has over the C model is the ability to land on a carrier with a larger load (which is irrelevant to Australia) an AESA radar (which could also be fitted to the C) and an operational radius that is increased by maybee 20% and that is due largely to the fact hat the E/F can carry larger exernal fuel tanks.
You're kidding right??? Yes, it has more range (+35% internal), payload (+32%) and bring back capability (+50%). But, it also has vastly more advanced integrated systems, the AESA radar (which cannot be fitted to a C model or even the first 125 built E/F models either), built-in low observables, and so much more room for future growth. No, it's not an F-35, but it sure as hell aint an F/A-18A+ either. Don't forget folks, our HUGged Hornets may have some systems which in some ways are better then late build C/Ds, but they're still A model engines and A model airframes, and therefore still carry those inadequacies.
The E/F is a half generation ahead of the late build teen series jets, and half a generation behind the F-35/F-22. In many ways, its systems will provide Australia with a much flatter learning curve into the F-35 when it does finally arrive.
Magoo
