The US Navy announced the cancellation of the latest carrier-based fighter F / A-18C Hornet

52
The US Navy has decided to finalize the last carrier-based fighter aircraft F / A-18C Hornet. 1 February of this year, the American fleet will hold a farewell ceremony with the latest aircraft of this model, reports "Warspot " with a link to the portal navaltoday.com.

The US Navy announced the cancellation of the latest carrier-based fighter F / A-18C Hornet

F / A-18C Squadron Blue Blasters




F / A-18C The Hornet, an American carrier-based fighter-bomber and attack aircraft developed in the 1970s, was the main aircraft of the US Navy until the end of the 90s of the last century, when the US Navy began to receive a deeply modernized version of the F / A-18, better known as Super Hornet. The new "Super Hornets" began to gradually force out obsolete aircraft, and so far only one active 34 Squadron Blue Blasters (Strike Fighter Squadron 34) has been left in the US Navy, which has exploited the old Hornets. Now it is decided to re-equip them and modernized aircraft.

Replacing the latest F / A-18C Hornet in the US Navy with the F / A-18 Super Hornet, does not mean that the aircraft is finally debited. Simple "Hornets" are removed from existing units, but left to serve in the reserve units of the American fleet. In addition, the US Marine Corps, which is also armed with the F / A-18C Hornet, is not going to refuse them at all, and even ordered a deep modernization, during which the aircraft will receive radar with AFAR.
  • navaltoday.com
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

52 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -13
    31 January 2019 16: 30
    Now only F-35 is everywhere. Whether it is an equivalent replacement, time will tell.
    1. +23
      31 January 2019 16: 45
      And where is the F35, if we are talking about replacing the F18 Hornet with a more modern F18 Super Hornet? Have you read the article?
      1. -6
        31 January 2019 16: 47
        Quote: BerBer
        And where is the F35, if we are talking about replacing the F18 Hornet with a more modern F18 Super Hornet? Have you read the article?

        Dear, I always read articles thoughtfully. And I'm talking about the future. I am sure that in a couple of years the Super Hornets will replace the F-35 deck-mounted. Personally, I have no doubt.
        1. +10
          31 January 2019 17: 49
          Quote: NEXUS
          Personally, I have no doubt.

          Bad that no
          F \ A-18 EF to be replaced on deck in the F \ A-XX program. And with the F-35C they (Super Hornets) will serve until their replacement with the F \ A-XX in 2030-2040
        2. +11
          31 January 2019 18: 44
          You are wrong. Super Hornets, and even more so a modification of the "Growler", fresh development - very modern. They are on a par with our Su-35S and are no less formidable fighters, so these aircraft will be in service for a long time.
          1. +1
            31 January 2019 23: 28
            Quote: Voyager
            They are on par with our Su-35S and are no less formidable fighters, so these aircraft will be in service for a long time.

            You are mistaken, the American analogue of the Su-35 is the F-15, and the hornets are initially weaker than the dryers.
            1. +1
              1 February 2019 02: 47
              Quote: KaPToC
              and "hornets" are initially weaker than dryers.

              In terms of maneuverability, yes, not an advanced car at all. But in terms of the ability to integrate into modern control systems, to work both independently and in a group, the versatility of tasks - not very many can compete. Even at the release, we counted a fight against a simple -18c: he crushed everyone in the DVB, and in the BVB they `` poured '' him with a decent advantage.
              1. 0
                1 February 2019 20: 48
                Quote: Pete Mitchell
                By maneuverability, yes, not an advanced machine at all.

                That's right - in their performance characteristics, hornets are very mediocre.
                Quote: Pete Mitchell
                Even at the release, we counted a fight against a simple -18c: he crushed everyone in the DVB, and in the BVB they `` poured '' him with a decent advantage.

                These are just your fantasies.
                1. 0
                  2 February 2019 11: 14
                  Quote: KaPToC
                  .

                  My fantasies, dear, are based on what I was taught, and clever people and experience of the subsequent service were engaged in it. Carefully read the source and less listen to advertising, any.
        3. +6
          31 January 2019 20: 31
          Quote: NEXUS
          I am sure that in a couple of years the Super Hornets will replace the F-35 deck-mounted.

          I’m sure not. The US Navy is generally much more conservative than the Air Force, so they will take F-35s very soon, and for a long time they will operate it with Super Hornet in parallel
          1. +4
            31 January 2019 21: 28
            Right. Replacement will be gradual. 15 years stretch.
            They screwed up and a beautiful jet drone that successfully passed
            all tests on an aircraft carrier, and are going to abandon the tanker drone.
            With respect to carrier-based aviation, the Navy is indeed very conservative.
            1. +1
              31 January 2019 21: 49
              Quote: NEXUS
              Now only F-35 is everywhere. Whether it is an equivalent replacement, time will tell.

              aerobatics .masters of flight, do not know about the aggressive intentions of the Russian unit.And then they tomorrow self-shot and did not go to work))))
    2. -4
      1 February 2019 07: 14
      98% of the U.S. Air Force combat aircraft are ancient rusty trash, the youngest is already over 40 years old, are armed with another 70-year-old B-52 which still fly on wood !! And the f-35, in addition to laughter, does not cause anything, even the SU-27SM surpasses it several times in combat capabilities!
  2. -4
    31 January 2019 16: 42
    By the way, according to Wikipedia, even a passive VFD in the Su-35 detects identical targets about 20-25% further than the AFAR in the F-22. I am completely silent about the AFAR Su-57 radar - it’s 1.5 times longer than that of the Su-35, and the F-22nd station is almost 2 times bigger
    1. +20
      31 January 2019 17: 01
      It remains only to believe Wikipedia)
      1. 0
        31 January 2019 17: 33
        Yes, most likely when on Wikipedia infa about the advantage of Russian weapons is always a lie, and when Americans praise it is true)
        1. +5
          31 January 2019 17: 57
          In any version of the truth there is not, or rather, each has its own.
    2. +2
      31 January 2019 17: 07
      As far as I understand, the power of airborne radars for AUG strike aircraft is not so priority.
      1. -1
        31 January 2019 17: 33
        Yes, I'm not in the framework of the AUG, but in general ...
        1. 0
          31 January 2019 18: 01
          In general, these are countries like Finnish and Switzerland. I don’t understand why they need combat aircraft at all.
    3. +7
      31 January 2019 20: 24
      By the way, according to Wikipedia
      According to Wikipedia, we should live at least 3 times better than in the USA! Given 2 times less population! 3 times a large area! 5 times large reserves of all resources! And, 10 times more smart people! (figures are approximately approximately indicative)!
      1. +3
        31 January 2019 23: 33
        Quote: GibSoN
        Given 2 times less population! 3 times a large area!

        Well, if you look at the territories - then the Russians are indeed richer.
      2. -3
        1 February 2019 07: 17
        And we live 5 times better, and there are 90% more smart people! therefore, backward Americans fly into space with us and not vice versa!
      3. 0
        1 February 2019 10: 41
        Blah blah blah. Sophistry
    4. +7
      31 January 2019 20: 39
      Quote: Aretov.S.
      By the way, according to Wikipedia, even a passive VFD in Su-35 detects identical targets about 20-25% further than AFAR in F-22.

      Never mind. The real range of Su-35 radars is much smaller (400 km - in the mode of a very narrow and powerful beam, 10 at 10 hail approximately and in the best conditions - these are the norms, it’s all right so far) and AFAR F-22 is a mystery, because its data secret and never hit the press. (meaning - real data, not fake)
      1. +2
        31 January 2019 20: 59
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk (Andrei)

        And what about the MiG 31 BM radar? What do you say?
      2. +1
        31 January 2019 23: 10
        of those that write in the English sources, after updating Lot 5 at F-22 km .... New MRPs were installed.
        and 400 km mig-31 or su-35 is a statistical method due to the accumulation during multiple scanning of a narrow sector - 10 * 10 degrees.
        1. 0
          1 February 2019 10: 42
          Quote: Avior
          of those who write in English sources - after updating Lot 5 at F-22 450 km

          So what. The Su-35 - up to 540km write
      3. -2
        1 February 2019 07: 20
        f-22 and f-35 target detection range = 110 km, and air-to-air missile range = 60 km during the day in fine weather! The detection range of the SU-35S with the ACS system Postscript = 1000 km from the missile launchers to UAVs and aircraft, and the range of hypersonic missiles is air-air = 400 km.
    5. 0
      31 January 2019 23: 07
      poorly read Wikipedia.
    6. -1
      31 January 2019 23: 24
      looked. you made a lot of fun.
      Su-35 information is given with reference to some Chinese forum.
  3. +3
    31 January 2019 16: 43
    Replacing the latest F / A-18C Hornet in the U.S. Navy with the F / A-18 Super Hornet.

    That's just the point that not on F-35.
  4. +1
    31 January 2019 17: 00
    So today in the news they wrote:
    As for the catapults, earlier in the press there were reports that their power was insufficient to disperse the F / A-18 Hornet attack aircraft with full load. But this is the main deck aircraft of the US Navy.

    Will the catapults also be replaced?
    1. +1
      31 January 2019 17: 09
      Well type EM in development. Already a bunch of yards
      1. +1
        31 January 2019 17: 45
        I saw with my own eyes an F-18 on the deck of a "Ford".
        1. 0
          31 January 2019 17: 50
          Cool) photo did?
          1. +2
            1 February 2019 19: 26
            Made from afar, close photography was not allowed. This is Norfolk, mid-July 2017. The next day the ship went to sea and there they took off.



            1. 0
              1 February 2019 20: 37
              Hefty infection!
  5. -2
    31 January 2019 17: 12
    In addition, the US Marine Corps, which is also armed with the F / A-18C Hornet, is not going to abandon them at all

    Correct, if I am mistaken, but I remember that the vast majority of carrier-based carrier-based aviation of the United States Navy refers specifically to the Marine Corps, oddly enough what
    1. +5
      31 January 2019 18: 07
      Quote: Wiruz
      Correct, if I am mistaken, but I remember that the vast majority of carrier-based carrier-based aviation of the United States Navy refers specifically to the Marine Corps, oddly enough

      You are mistaken. KMP Hornets are all coast-based; naval aviation on aircraft carriers. The KMP has carrier-based AV8 aircraft, which will be replaced by the F35B. This is in addition to helicopters and tiltrotor.
      1. 0
        31 January 2019 18: 28
        But it was not always so)
    2. +6
      31 January 2019 20: 40
      Quote: Wiruz
      but I remember that the vast majority of carrier-based carrier-based aircraft of the United States Navy refers specifically to the Marine Corps

      No, these are four different people :)))
  6. -23
    31 January 2019 17: 59
    For our Sushek and Migov, no matter what they fly there, one can be sure that all this rubbish of what is called the US Air Force will successfully stray.
    1. +13
      31 January 2019 18: 10
      For our Sushek and Migov, no matter what they fly there, one can be sure that all this rubbish of what is called the US Air Force will successfully stray.

  7. +1
    31 January 2019 18: 26
    Quote: NEXUS
    Now only F-35 is everywhere. Whether it is an equivalent replacement, time will tell.


    No brainer no. F35A / B is terribly expensive and terribly expensive in the service staff.
    This is not a replacement for the old man f18 or superhornet. This is another concept for the design and combat use of aircraft.
  8. +4
    31 January 2019 18: 45
    "Super Hornet" and "Lightning-2" are slightly different things, the first one is not just a fighter-attack aircraft, it is a platform, which, earlier on the decks, was the A-6. And the F-35 is an aircraft designed for a different range of tasks. The comparison is not entirely correct.
    1. 0
      31 January 2019 21: 37
      A well-aimed remark. But the units do not catch the difference .... There is Aon. Schob is so subtle to notice, it must be Austro-Russian-Russian.














      So who are you. Mr. Sorge hi
  9. +2
    31 January 2019 18: 58
    In my opinion, the 18th most beautiful of the Amer aircraft.
  10. +1
    31 January 2019 19: 23
    Good aircraft for its time and class. I would argue about the best, but it's really not bad. Subsequent worse
  11. +2
    31 January 2019 20: 10
    The USA removed the KA-6D tankers and the A3-based tankers from the deck. To compensate for this, Super Hornets were adopted, which have a larger radius and weight of the target load.
    Ordinary Hornets had to carry a lot of suspended tanks and more often had to be refueled in the air. For an aircraft carrier, the most important task is to lift as many weapons into the air as possible and deliver them to the maximum range.
  12. 0
    31 January 2019 23: 58
    The US Marine Corps, which also has the F / A-18C Hornet in service, is not going to abandon them at all

    There are a lot of antiques in the KPM of the USA, conservative views of the command and wariness for everything new ...
  13. exo
    -1
    1 February 2019 12: 24
    A solid plane. Not with such charisma as the F-14 Tomcat, but beautiful in its own way.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"