US Navy receives first F / A-18 Super Hornet Block-3 carrier-based fighter

The U.S. Navy began to receive the first F / A-18 Super Hornet carrier-based fighters of the new Block-3 modification. It is reported that Boeing announced the delivery of the first two aircraft.

The US Navy received two F / A-18 Super Hornet Block-3 multipurpose carrier-based fighter aircraft for flight testing. One aircraft was handed over in the single-seat version "E", the second - in the double-seat "F". These aircraft will be tested for suitability from aircraft carriers, new fighter combat systems will be tested, pilots will familiarize themselves with new equipment. The "test" series should include 4 aircraft of both versions. All tests will take place at two naval bases: Patuxent River in Maryland and China Lake in California.

The assembly of the first F / A-18 Super Hornet Block-3 aircraft was announced at Boeing in early May this year.

As previously reported, the program for the creation and maintenance of Super Hornet fighters began in 1995, was designed for 25 years and was supposed to end in 2020, when the fifth generation F-18 fighters were to replace the F-35. However, the delay in the development of the latest fighter led to the fact that Boeing created a new version of the F-18 and in 2017 presented the F / A-18 XT (Advanced Super Hornet), received in the U.S. Navy called F / A-18E / F Super Hornet Block-3. The new modification differs from the previous version of the fighter (Block-2) by seven updates, of which two are secret and nothing is known about them.

The command of the U.S. Navy decided to upgrade the entire fleet of Super Hornet fighters to a new modification. In addition, on March 21, 2019, the U.S. Navy signed a new contract with Boeing for the construction of 78 new F / A-18 Super Hornet Block-3 fighters, the aircraft must arrive before 2022.

Recall that at the end of April this year it was reported that Boeing supplied the US Navy with the last F / A-18 Super Hornet Block-2 fighter.

Comments

[Dart2027]

Interesting - if they have such a wonderful F-35, then why are they ordering new F-18s?

[Zaurbek]

Do not have time to rivet F35.

[Thunderbolt]

Quote: Dart2027

Interesting - if they have such a wonderful F-35, then why are they ordering new F-18s?

Well here

the delay in the development of the latest fighter led to the fact that Boeing created a new version of the F-18 and in 2017 presented the F / A-18 XT (Advanced Super Hornet), received in the U.S. Navy called F / A-18E / F Super Hornet Block -3.

The plus is that they want to upgrade everything Super Hornet to the latest.

[Ratmir_Ryazan]

Do not have time to rivet F35.

So maybe it wasn’t necessary to be distracted by the creation of a new version of the F-18 and spend resources on it then everything would go faster with the F-35 ?! )))

In my opinion, the Americans are tricky and they need F-18 block 3 as a supplement, the F-35 is weak as a fighter, slow-moving, it doesn’t get away from missiles if it is detected and launched over it even from a great distance, but the F-18 is fast and maneuverable, he has chances, so they take reinsurance and those and those. And in order not to nudge the F-18 and not speak directly about its shortcomings, they came up with such a version that they say they do not have time to do the F-35))).

Where are you in such a hurry?

[zlinn]

their speed and maneuverability are almost the same

[Ratmir_Ryazan]

The cruising speed for the F-35 is 850 km / h, for the F-18 - 1060 km / h, the F-35 has a time limit for using supersonic speed.

I suspect that the story where the F-35 could not catch up with the Tu-160 is true.

But what the Americans themselves say about the F-35 -

expert Brian Clark of the Hudson Institute, a retired naval officer, said - unlike the F-22, supersonic sound for the F-35 is not a tactical move.

Well, now imagine an aerial battle of this low-speed boat, against the MiG-29/35 or Su-30/35.

MiGs and Sushki will quickly come close to the F-35, attack with missiles and move away from the missiles launched from the F-35 at speed, but the F-35 will not be able to do this and the Americans know about it, they use the F-35 only as a bomber, and he has a fighter function as an addition, but he will not be able to fully resist fighters.

Even the Americans do not dare to say this, so they speak a little veiledly -

The retired pilot said that "restrictions on the afterburner can be fatal in melee scenarios." According to him, there is already an unfavorable historical precedent for the United States to ignore close combat. During the Vietnam War, a bet was made on missiles and the idea of ​​a nasal gun was discarded, which caused a surge in deaths in battle. Naval aviation remembers this and therefore does not trust the restrictions on afterburner.

In fact, speed and manners are needed not for close combat, but for missile maneuver, now there is no need to get close to the enemy’s aircraft, but there is a need to get away from the missile launched by the enemy))).

In Iraq, the MiG-25 performed very well in air battles, despite the fact that they were outdated in many respects before the F-15/16/18, they managed to attack American planes, shoot down and escape from several missiles fired at them. This is what speed gives, and the new Russian aircraft are both speed and maneuverability and modern avionics and long-range air-to-air missiles that are not inferior in range to American missiles.

That's why they continue to create new versions of both the F-18 and F-15 and there is talk of resuming production of the F-22.

But they cannot say that F-35s are not a full-fledged fighter, as this may affect its sales to NATO partners.

[Zaurbek]

Maybe somewhere and in a hurry ..

[Cyril G ...]

You doubt it right ..... And the point is not that they do not have time to rivet F-35

[figwam]

Quote: Cyril G ...

And the point is not that they do not have time to rivet F-35

Quite right, 500 F-35s have already been made, but the fourth generation of the F-15 and F-18 has started to be released again, because the penguin did not work out as intended.

[Cyril G ...]

Something went wrong. (C.)
About that and actually ....

[Mouse]

Interesting - if they have such a wonderful F-35, then why are they ordering new F-18s?

Cheaper ... obviously the machine can't handle it ...

[knn54]

They have different tasks. It may be an interesting bunch.
Although the prospect, apparently, will remain only the F-35.

[Avior]

When the F-18 block 3 completes its resource, there will be improved versions of the F-35, as the Americans do with their permanent "block such and such".
they will change f-18

[Dart2027]

Quote: knn54

They have different tasks.

But shouldn't the F-35 modifications replace all aircraft?

[voyaka uh]

For 30 years. First they plan on each aircraft carrier
1/3 F-35C and 2/3 F-18, then 2/3 F-35C and 1/3 F-18. And then - only the F-35S

[Dart2027]

Quote: voyaka uh

For 30 years.

What is the question of why? The fact that they are modernizing the already done is understandable, but the fact that they order new ones looks strange.

[voyaka uh]

Each aircraft carrier must have at least the minimum allowable
(by standard) the number of aircraft. Old F-18 Hornets are gradually decreasing.
Replacement - F-35 is late (only the 3rd training squadron is being formed).
Therefore, supplement the total number of Super Hornets.

[Dart2027]

Quote: voyaka uh

Replacement - F-35 is late

But why not increase production of the 35s?

[voyaka uh]

Impossible. The assembly plant is almost at the limit of its
capacities: 15 per month. They promise to reach 18 per month.
Two other assembly plants - in Italy and Japan - are small.
And the order queue is 5-6 years in advance. Everything is planned.

[Dart2027]

Quote: voyaka uh

The assembly plant is almost at the limit of its
capacities

But in this case, it is logical to build another plant or attract an existing one, having carried out the necessary modernization. 30 years to replace it is somehow too much.

[voyaka uh]

I have not heard that this was planned.
New plant - new costs, cost will increase
production for each aircraft. A Lockheed Congress and Trump
already forced to drop the price to 80 million for the plane with a promise
drop to 75 million

[Liam]

It’s not only about the number of aircraft produced. This includes the training of pilots, technical personnel and the partial re-equipment of the logistics of the aircraft carriers themselves and ground bases for new aircraft.
These moments probably require more money and time than the production of the aircraft themselves

[Ratmir_Ryazan]

Impossible. The assembly plant is almost at the limit of its
capacities

And what prevents the increase in production capacity of the F-35 times such a need for it?

[APASUS]

Quote: voyaka uh

Impossible. The assembly plant is almost at the limit of its
capacities: 15 per month. They promise to reach 18 per month.
Two other assembly plants - in Italy and Japan - are small.
And the order queue is 5-6 years in advance. Everything is planned.

Something inaccuracy here. With plans to buy more than 3000 cars, the plant will work forever, which of you whistles?

[voyaka uh]

Count: 15-16 a month - about 200 a year (including Italy and Japan)
2000 in ten years.
4000 - for 20 years. Fine.

[APASUS]

Quote: voyaka uh

Count: 15-16 a month - about 200 a year (including Italy and Japan)
2000 in ten years.
4000 - for 20 years. Fine.

That is, the planes ordered now can be obtained in 8-10 years?

[voyaka uh]

After about 6 years.
Israel receives 4-6 per year.
Poland has ordered now - will receive the first in 2027

[APASUS]

Quote: voyaka uh

After about 6 years.

After 6 years, competitors will surely appear on the market and wait so long you don’t need to, and with TTX not everything is smooth

[voyaka uh]

Is not a fact. Neither Rafal, nor Typhoon, nor Gripen are able to quickly increase production, even if many orders appear (while there are almost no orders). They have almost a single assembly.
The Chinese are also skidding with the J-31 - their twin-engine half-copy of the F-35. Russia has launched production of the Su-35, but Western customers will not buy it.
F-15 has exhausted itself. F-18 is a bit weak ...

[Cyril G ...]

No, that's not why. They have a problem with pilots and not planes. In addition, recently the AUG began to glow in the sea with fewer squadrons on board than on a combat schedule.

[figwam]

Quote: voyaka uh

For 30 years.

After 30 years, already the F-35 will be old.

[voyaka uh]

Everything is becoming obsolete, what can I do?
In 2023 they will begin to produce the next Block F-35.
With a more powerful engine, 6 missiles in the internal compartment instead of 4.
Another bells and whistles of avionics.
Accordingly, the first Block will become obsolete.
How many upgrades did the F-16 take in 45 years?
Their darkness is still in the air.

[Victor67]

The most important thing is that our Su-33 after 30 years does not become old))) Everyone laughed at their purchases, but what do we have? Neither an airplane, nor a carrier, nor someone sane who will design an avik and an airplane for it, not a single shipyard for building an avik or another ship, is more than 50 thousand tons, yes, and not a single specialist and not a penny of money for such projects. We continue to banter on stupid Americans ...

[Ratmir_Ryazan]

Everyone laughed at their purchases, but what do we have?

And everything is being modernized and built in our country, starting with small arms and ending with new air defense systems and OTRK and arriving at the troops and the navy.

But the new aircraft carrier we will need in the last turn, after the construction of a series of destroyers and cruisers. Everything has its time.

There is already somewhere to build and in the Far East on "Zvezda" a dry dock under 500 meters - there they will build and maintain aircraft carriers for the Northern Fleet, and for the Northern Fleet they will do it at Sevmash.

The main deck is now the MiG-29K / KUB, in the future there will probably be a marine version of the MiG-35, maybe even the Su-57.

[Victor67]

As usual, on points:
Small arms, yes, I do not argue, although for some reason all specialists buy Glock, imported sniper weapons, are dressed in Crye Precision, yes, for the routine of their Kalashnikov, all the bars on it, optics and collimators, however, from there , from stupid USA)));
OTRK - yes, there are no questions, and we have no equal here;
Air defense in the fleet is absent as you imagine it, there is nothing new there, except for Soviet developments (tested - yes, but in fact - zero);
There are no series of destroyers, cruisers even in projects, aircraft carriers - all the more, you won’t be sure to stop this time (their construction);
Neither Zvezda nor Sevmash will build anything like this in the next 20-30 years for the reasons stated above, in the docks (dry or wet)))) the ships are not built, even if they are under 1 kilometer)));
The main deck ship 29 is simply ridiculous against the background of the new versions of the F-18 in the third block, especially against the background of the F-35, the carriers of our deck ships are completely absent from the word, assuming that a miracle happened and we have an aircraft carrier, tell me who it will go out into the ocean, who will ensure its safety, ten Grachenkov ???, no "naval" versions of the MiG-35 and Su-57 are planned due to their absence even in the usual version, the engine of the 57th was shifted "to the right" until 2025 years, and the 35th simply died due to the lack of orders as unnecessary ...
Something like this ...

[Ratmir_Ryazan]

Navy defense is absent as you imagine it

I imagine new corvettes pr.20380 and frigates pr.22350 with SAM Poliment-Redut.

No series of destroyers, cruisers, even in projects

And pr.22350M and pr.23560 is that? Until recently, they did not know anything about the projects of the helicopter carriers, and the other day, 2 things were laid right away.

35th just died

In 2018, the MiG-35 aircraft were handed over to test pilots of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation for state flight tests.

In an interview, the Director General of MiG RS Ilya Tarasenko admitted the possibility of developing a ship version of the MiG-35. The Radioelectronic Technologies Concern (KRET) has already adapted a new BINS-SP-35 deck landing system for the MiG-2.

Neither Zvezda nor Sevmash will build anything like this in the next 20-30 years, for the reasons stated above, in the docks (dry or wet)))) ships do not build

Build.

[Victor67]

Of all your optimism in real life, only corvettes 20380, ships of rank 2, and "Gorshkov", the rest are only in pictures and in fantasies, they have been talking about the "Leader" since 2009, if I am not mistaken, and they carry a meter model at exhibitions. And Tarasenko only admits the possibility of developing a deck version of the 35th, but who needs it? There is no carrier, and there is no project of this carrier, and there is no shipyard for the construction of this carrier, and there is no money, and most importantly, nobody needs it, and, thank God, they understand this up there, as well as how much it costs to build and a day of operation of a full-fledged aircraft carrier group, despite the fact that we have no tasks for it. By the way, without an AWACS aircraft it is better not to meddle in the ocean, and there is not even talk about it, although it needs to be done from scratch, we also do not have a platform suitable for the deck.

[Ratmir_Ryazan]

Of all your optimism in real life, only 20380 corvettes, ships of rank 2, and "Gorshkov", the rest so far only in pictures and in fantasies

In pictures and in fantasies ?! Are you at all in the subject or just whining your calling?

"Kasatonov" was built, passed the test and is preparing for transfer to the fleet, "Golovko" is preparing for mooring tests, "Isakov", "Amelko", "Chichagov" are under construction + laying of 2 more frigates with increased to 24 cells for "Caliber" is being prepared ...

And besides this, minesweepers and the BDK are being built, helicopter carriers are being laid, only 10 nuclear submarines are being built now.

They also spoke little with the same helicopter carriers, and when the time came they simply announced the laying of two at once under 2 tons of displacement.

We have everything, and what we don’t build and do, all our spending on the fleet remains in the economy of our country, we don’t give this money abroad, but we pay to our enterprises and our workers. They receive salaries, profits, pay taxes, buy goods, order materials and assemblies from suppliers, and it turns out that by building ships we not only increase the defense capability of our fleet, but also stimulate the development of the economy. And by the end of our budget, ships are cheaper.

A significant part of the money spent on the purchase and operation of ships is somehow returned to the budget.

Britain, too, has no AWACS aircraft on new aircraft carriers and nothing, no one raises panic, there are AWACS helicopters, there is space reconnaissance, not so long ago ours in the Arctic ostentatiously flew over the Seadragon American camp, thereby showing that we see them and all that they make. But excuse me that it is you who are not dedicated to all the latest achievements in this area of ​​Russia.

We have an aircraft carrier and planes for it, but it is inferior to the best American aircraft carriers, but not inferior to the British, or even less inferior to the Spanish and Japanese UDC, which will carry several F-35 aircraft. Our TAVKR can perform many tasks anywhere in the world ocean and significantly increase the capabilities of our ship grouping and this is a fact.

We don’t need to build a new aircraft carrier right now to prove our capabilities, now the fleet is saturated with ships of the near sea zone and the far, auxiliary ships, and shipbuilders and the fleet gain experience in the construction of ships and their operation.

Nobody is enough to make a cruiser and an aircraft carrier, if not enough ships have been built to defend the near sea zone.

In general, I see no reason to panic.

[Victor67]

Actually, the article was about the new Hornet, not minesweepers and auxiliary ships, but oh well, let it be your way, I will also be more optimistic, good luck!

[Cowbra]

So that's what it's called - to say in plain text that "Fat Penguin" is guano!

[Mountain shooter]

Boeing is being fed ...? After the passenger scandal, the losses are incalculable ... need to help out? Or is "Penguin" not as successful as you would like? Questions, questions ... maybe our Su-35s aren't that bad either?

[Alex777]

What demons are all minus - I don’t understand?

[Mountain shooter]

Quote: Alex777

What demons are all minus - I don’t understand?

The gang is on the site! without admins not to understand. For example, I don’t see who puts the cons ... Apparently, on the tablet a light version ...

[Alex777]

5 pieces. counted demons.

[Mountain shooter]

Quote: Alex777

5 pieces. counted demons.

Sound them to me in PM. And I will tell you what can be done with them

[Alex777]

I only quantified them.
The meaninglessness of the minuses surprised.

[Zaurbek]

And how to see who puts the cons?

[Mountain shooter]

Quote: Zaurbek

And how to see who puts the cons?

The description is. You put the type of cursor on a figure that shows the number of minuses, and a list should appear there ... But it doesn’t work for me.

[Zaurbek]

Something I have not seen. It shows how many + and - they put you, and who is not.

[Mountain shooter]

Quote: Zaurbek

Something I have not seen

It used to be. If the version on the computer was "full" ... There you could see the number of pros and cons, and if you poke into a figure - who is for or against, lists of those who ...

[Avior]

This does not work.
On the full, you can see how much for, how much against, but on the mobile you won’t look either.

[Piramidon]

Quote: Alex777

What demons are all minus - I don’t understand?

Do not pay attention to the wretched. These are regular minusers. We are a army, and there are not so many of them who have come here Svidomo. As always, this fraternity has an open voice - the gut is thin. Always only quietly and stealthily shit.

[Alex777]

I do not pay attention to my cons.
For what colleagues are minus - I can’t understand.
They don’t write their objections?
Sect of fans of the invisible F-35?

[Piramidon]

Quote: Alex777

I do not pay attention to my cons.
For what colleagues are minus - I can’t understand.
They don’t write their objections?
Sect of fans of the invisible F-35?

It’s not only about the F-35. There are those here who enjoy minus everyone in a row (except for members of their sect) and then observe the user's reaction. Simple "radishes" and nothing more. The more you pay attention to their perversions, the more they get high. You and I have just started a dialogue, and they have already managed to poke minuses to us. You won't get a single clever objection from them. The wrong level of mind.

[yfast]

Minus is almost half the plus. So consider.

[voyaka uh]

"Or is" Penguin "not as successful as you wanted?" ////
----
The F-18 has one advantage over the F-35 - cheap inter-flight maintenance.

[Cyril G ...]

The benefits are actually more there of course. Because the fleet is not happy with the Penguin

[Ratmir_Ryazan]

The F-18 has one advantage over the F-35 - cheap inter-flight maintenance.

There is another thing - speed and maneuverability, that is, what a fighter needs in order to fight, performing missile defense maneuvers, and not just rely on its low visibility.

The F-35 is more of a bomber and will be used to strike at ground targets, and F-18 will be used to cover it.

Otherwise, no one would bother and spend money on the new F-18 block 3, which is full of old versions which, with all this, are quite relevant and no one is threatening the US right now and in the near future.

It’s just that the USA cannot recognize that the F-35 as a fighter is a worthless plane.

[voyaka uh]

The F-35 replaces the F-16. They are about the same in aerial combat.
The F-35 is slightly more maneuverable, the F-16 is slightly faster.
Norwegian pilots who transferred from F-16 to F-35, wrote so.

[Ratmir_Ryazan]

The F-16 can also be called a fighter conditionally, it will not be able to fight on an equal footing with the same MiG-29, and there is nothing to say about the Su-30/35, provided, of course, if there are approximately the same range of air-to-air missiles, and not like in Yugoslavia. The MiG, due to its speed and maneuverability, will be able to evade a missile attack, but the F-16 will be much more difficult to do this and is possible only from a greater distance.

All the victories of the F-16 against MiGs were with a significant advantage of its weapons in terms of range. Now the range of air-to-air missiles for MiGs and Sushki is in no way inferior to American or NATO models.

Under equal conditions, the F-16 has little chance, and the F-35 is even less. Therefore, it is more often used as a bomber, destroying ground targets for which such aircraft are optimal. We use the Su-24/34 for this.

That's why for cases when it will be necessary to fight with fighters, and not just bomb another Syria or Iraq, the USA and create and purchase new versions of the F-15 and F-18 for the army.

Powerful ground-based radars, especially over-the-horizon ones, will exclude the possibility of a surprise strike by aircraft with or without stealth technology. These radars irradiate targets from above, reflecting radio waves from the ionosphere, and here "stealth" is powerless. Everyone will see everyone. You will have to fight in the open, and here speed and maneuverability will come first, since you will not only have to launch the rocket at the enemy, but do it from the closest possible distance so that he has no chance to get away from the rocket due to speed and manner and manage to maneuver himself and dodge the missile or possibly shoot it down with an anti-missile.

The United States, of course, still has the F-22, but their prices are so high that they stopped building them.

[Grazdanin]

Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan

F-16 as a fighter can be called conditionally

Here are just the F16 most massive 4th generation fighter, and instantly 29 the most downed 4th generation aircraft.

[voyaka uh]

F-35 pilots use 11 countries. F-16 - even more.
F-16 Americans use in "aggressor squadrons", imitating
Russian aircraft. The maneuverability of the F-16 is very good,
the F-35 is even better. Russian cars are faster.
NATO conduct international fighter exercises
these types and other European and American brands.
No one complained about the F-35. Every year they come to Israel
for the exercise "blue flag" combat pilots of NATO countries specially
to study the experience and tactics of using F-35.

[silverwolf88]

take Super Hornet Block-3 ... and as I understand it, they prepare TK for Block-4 ... checked by time and expediency ...

[Darkspy]

Nobody was going to change the F-18 Super Hornet to the F-35. Why did you get that? F-35 replaces F-18 Hornet

[Grazdanin]

They have not had enough aircraft for aircraft carriers since the removal of the F14 from service.

[Tom Johnson]

More "Growlers" on the way as well as some SM-6 1B launch platforms

[Grazdanin]

I like this plane. I think it is the best among the "teen" series F.