Help support TMP

"US Navy Wants More Hornets" Topic

12 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.

Back to the Ultramodern Warfare (2008-present) Message Board

659 hits since 14 Jun 2017
©1994-2018 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian14 Jun 2017 7:35 p.m. PST

The Navy intends to buy at least 80 more Boeing F/A-18E-F Super Hornets over the next five years to address its fighter shortfall, a change from its previous on-the-books plan to zero out the aircraft program beginning next year, service officials said in congressional testimony today…


rustymusket Supporting Member of TMP15 Jun 2017 4:17 a.m. PST

Good news for St. Louis MO. ( I think that is where they are built.)

ScoutJock15 Jun 2017 9:16 a.m. PST

What is even more interesting is we just agreed to sell $12 USDB in military technology including 36 F15s to Qatar.

So much for the boycott and holding their feet to the fire for supporting terrorism…


28mm Fanatik15 Jun 2017 9:54 a.m. PST

Capitalism and economics "trump" principles and politics most of the time. Selling arms to Saudi Arabia and other Gulf States supporting radical Islam (i.e. Salafism and Wahabbism) has been going on for decades in case you haven't noticed.

ScoutJock15 Jun 2017 2:42 p.m. PST

Yeah, not really surprised. The bar isn't vey high.

Weddier15 Jun 2017 7:29 p.m. PST

I am always reminded by these notices that the Navy didn't want the Hornet in the first place, they wanted more F14 Tomcats. Congress basically forced the Hornet on them, purportedly as a cost saving measure. Overruns mostly put paid to that concept. Now the Navy can't do without the airframe it tried to reject. Ironical? You be the judge!

zoneofcontrol15 Jun 2017 7:39 p.m. PST

I thought the Hornet was having oxygen problems. Why would they buy more until they worked out the problem restricting usage.

C Anders J Inactive Member16 Jun 2017 10:41 a.m. PST

The reason the Hornet was seen as a cost-saving measure is that it is a multi-role aircraft that allowed the Navy to reduce the number of aircraft in the carrier air wing by 1/3.

Lion in the Stars16 Jun 2017 2:03 p.m. PST

@ZOC: that was the F22, which uses an onboard oxygen concentrator instead of an oxygen bottle.

Personally, I suspect that the concentrator was discovering low-oxygen areas in the atmosphere. If there's only 14% oxygen in the air, you gotta concentrate it a lot more than you do when there's the normal 21%!

zoneofcontrol16 Jun 2017 3:18 p.m. PST

After posting my above comment, I saw a news article on TV. It said all versions of the Hornet have the same problem. Also included is the jet used as a trainer (T28 ??? not sure I remember the model correctly.)

They are having a problem coming up with a fix and are changing usage to adapt. They have come up with a manually engaged short-term fix but have to teach the pilots to recognize the on set of symptoms so they can turn on an emergency air supply. They have not been able to develop a means to have it turn itself on automatically.

Linked is an article on this that discusses the Hornet problems and refers to the F-22 as per Lion In The Stars.


Tgunner19 Jun 2017 5:26 a.m. PST

Apparently the Hornet still works as advertised. One downed a SU22 in Syria. It's the first US air-to-air kill in years.


USAFpilot19 Jun 2017 8:45 a.m. PST

The story I saw on the news was reported by a journalist who use to be a F-18 pilot. She reported that the Hornet pilots are more afraid of their own oxygen system than flying into combat. Aircraft weight has always been an issue with aerospace engineers; that is why they designed that system to replace carrying heavy gaseous or liquid oxygen bottles.

Great scene in the movie "The Right Stuff" on the often contentious relationship between pilots and engineers.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.