Military Review

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

67
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.
67 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Dart2027
    Dart2027 20 June 2020 14: 21 New
    -9
    Interesting - if they have such a wonderful F-35, then why are they ordering new F-18s?
    1. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 20 June 2020 14: 25 New
      0
      Do not have time to rivet F35.
      1. Thunderbolt
        Thunderbolt 20 June 2020 14: 36 New
        +1
        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.
      2. Ratmir_Ryazan
        Ratmir_Ryazan 20 June 2020 21: 26 New
        0
        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?
        1. zlinn
          zlinn 20 June 2020 21: 57 New
          0
          their speed and maneuverability are almost the same
          1. Ratmir_Ryazan
            Ratmir_Ryazan 21 June 2020 11: 10 New
            0
            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 ways before the F-15/16/18 they managed to attack American planes, shoot down and evade several missiles fired at them. That's what speed gives, and new Russian planes are speed and maneuverability and modern avionics and long-range air-to-air missiles not inferior to American missiles in range.

            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.
        2. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 21 June 2020 08: 43 New
          -1
          Maybe somewhere and in a hurry ..
    2. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 20 June 2020 14: 36 New
      +3
      You doubt it right ..... And the point is not that they do not have time to rivet F-35
      1. figwam
        figwam 20 June 2020 19: 03 New
        +2
        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.
        1. Cyril G ...
          Cyril G ... 20 June 2020 20: 46 New
          -1
          Something went wrong. (C.)
          About that and actually ....
    3. Mouse
      Mouse 20 June 2020 14: 38 New
      -2
      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 ...
    4. knn54
      knn54 20 June 2020 14: 53 New
      -1
      They have different tasks. It may be an interesting bunch.
      Although the prospect, apparently, will remain only the F-35.
      1. Avior
        Avior 20 June 2020 15: 01 New
        +6
        When the F-18 block 3 finalize their resource, there will be improved versions of the F-35, as is the case with the Americans with their permanent “block such-and-such”.
        they will change f-18
      2. Dart2027
        Dart2027 20 June 2020 16: 17 New
        +2
        Quote: knn54
        They have different tasks.

        But shouldn't the F-35 modifications replace all aircraft?
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 20 June 2020 17: 03 New
          +8
          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
          1. Dart2027
            Dart2027 20 June 2020 17: 39 New
            -1
            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.
            1. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 20 June 2020 17: 47 New
              +4
              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.
              1. Dart2027
                Dart2027 20 June 2020 18: 27 New
                0
                Quote: voyaka uh
                Replacement - F-35 is late

                But why not increase production of the 35s?
                1. voyaka uh
                  voyaka uh 20 June 2020 18: 31 New
                  +8
                  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.
                  1. Dart2027
                    Dart2027 20 June 2020 19: 12 New
                    -2
                    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.
                    1. voyaka uh
                      voyaka uh 20 June 2020 19: 18 New
                      +4
                      I have not heard that this was planned. recourse
                      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
                      1. Liam
                        Liam 20 June 2020 23: 44 New
                        +3
                        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
                  2. Ratmir_Ryazan
                    Ratmir_Ryazan 20 June 2020 21: 29 New
                    0
                    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?
                  3. APASUS
                    APASUS 20 June 2020 22: 20 New
                    0
                    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?
                    1. voyaka uh
                      voyaka uh 20 June 2020 23: 17 New
                      +2
                      Count: 15-16 a month - about 200 a year (including Italy and Japan)
                      2000 in ten years.
                      4000 - for 20 years. Fine.
                      1. APASUS
                        APASUS 21 June 2020 10: 08 New
                        0
                        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?
                      2. voyaka uh
                        voyaka uh 21 June 2020 10: 15 New
                        +1
                        After about 6 years.
                        Israel receives 4-6 per year.
                        Poland has ordered now - will receive the first in 2027
                      3. APASUS
                        APASUS 21 June 2020 10: 17 New
                        +2
                        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
                      4. voyaka uh
                        voyaka uh 21 June 2020 10: 25 New
                        +1
                        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 ...
        2. Cyril G ...
          Cyril G ... 20 June 2020 20: 48 New
          +1
          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.
    5. figwam
      figwam 20 June 2020 18: 35 New
      -1
      Quote: voyaka uh
      For 30 years.

      After 30 years, already the F-35 will be old.
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 20 June 2020 18: 41 New
        +7
        Everything is becoming obsolete, what can I do? fellow
        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.
      2. Victor67
        Victor67 20 June 2020 19: 08 New
        +8
        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 ...
        1. Ratmir_Ryazan
          Ratmir_Ryazan 20 June 2020 21: 42 New
          -5
          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 a building where it is and in the Far East, on Zvezda, a dry dock at 500 meters is where aircraft carriers for the Northern Fleet will be built and maintained, and for the Northern Fleet they will be done in 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.
          1. Victor67
            Victor67 20 June 2020 22: 43 New
            +2
            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 of the 29th is simply ridiculous against the background of new versions of the F-18 in the third block, especially against the background of the F-35, the carriers of our decks are completely absent from the word, if we assume that a miracle happened and we had an aircraft carrier, tell me who he will go to the ocean, who will ensure his safety, ten Grachenkov ???, no "marine" versions of the MiG-35 and Su-57 are planned due to the lack of them even in the usual version, the 57th engine was shifted to the right until 2025 years, and the 35th simply died due to the lack of orders as unnecessary ...
            Something like this ...
            1. Ratmir_Ryazan
              Ratmir_Ryazan 21 June 2020 00: 08 New
              -3
              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.
              1. Victor67
                Victor67 21 June 2020 09: 45 New
                +2
                Of all your optimism in real life, there are only 20380 corvettes, ships of the 2nd rank, and Gorshkov, the rest is still only in pictures and fantasies, they have been talking about the Leader since 2009, if I am not mistaken, and they have taken a meter model to exhibitions. But Tarasenko only admits the possibility of developing a deck version of the 35th, only who needs it? There is no carrier, and there is no project for 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, there we understand above, as well as how much the building costs and day of operation of a full-fledged aircraft carrier group, despite the fact that we have no tasks for it. By the way, it’s better not to go into the ocean without an AWACS plane, and even talk about it, although you need to do it from scratch, we also don’t have any platform suitable for the deck.
                1. Ratmir_Ryazan
                  Ratmir_Ryazan 21 June 2020 10: 53 New
                  -2
                  Of all your optimism in real life, there are only 20380 corvettes, ships of the 2nd rank, and "Gorshkov", the rest is still only in pictures and fantasies


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

                  “Kasatonov” is built, it has been tested and is preparing to transfer to the fleet, “Golovko” is preparing for mooring tests, “Isakov”, “Amelko”, “Chichagov” are being built + 2 more frigates are being laid down with 24 cells increased for “Caliber” .

                  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.
                2. Victor67
                  Victor67 21 June 2020 11: 45 New
                  -1
                  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
    Cowbra 20 June 2020 18: 16 New
    -10
    So this is called - to say in plain text that "Fat Penguin" - guano!
  • Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 20 June 2020 14: 42 New
    -4
    laughing Boeing feed ...? After the passenger scandal, the losses are incalculable ... need to bail out? Or is it still “Penguin” is not as successful as I wanted? Questions, questions ... maybe our Su-35s are not so "sloppy"? laughing
    1. Alex777
      Alex777 20 June 2020 15: 12 New
      +2
      What demons are all minus - I don’t understand? request
      1. Mountain shooter
        Mountain shooter 20 June 2020 15: 19 New
        +1
        Quote: Alex777
        What demons are all minus - I don’t understand?

        The gang is on the site! laughing without admins not to understand. For example, I don’t see who puts the cons ... Apparently, on the tablet a light version ...
        1. Alex777
          Alex777 20 June 2020 15: 22 New
          0
          5 pieces. counted demons. bully
          1. Mountain shooter
            Mountain shooter 20 June 2020 15: 25 New
            -2
            Quote: Alex777
            5 pieces. counted demons.

            Sound them to me in PM. And I will tell you what can be done with them am
            1. Alex777
              Alex777 20 June 2020 15: 27 New
              0
              I only quantified them.
              The meaninglessness of the minuses surprised. hi
        2. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 20 June 2020 15: 34 New
          +4
          And how to see who puts the cons?
          1. Mountain shooter
            Mountain shooter 20 June 2020 16: 20 New
            0
            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.
            1. Zaurbek
              Zaurbek 20 June 2020 16: 39 New
              +2
              Something I have not seen. It shows how many + and - they put you, and who is not.
              1. Mountain shooter
                Mountain shooter 20 June 2020 16: 41 New
                -4
                Quote: Zaurbek
                Something I have not seen

                It used to be. If the version on the computer is “full” ... There you can see the number of pros and cons, and if you poke in the numbers - who are for or against, popped up lists of those who ...
                1. Avior
                  Avior 20 June 2020 19: 02 New
                  +4
                  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.
      2. Piramidon
        Piramidon 20 June 2020 16: 39 New
        -4
        Quote: Alex777
        What demons are all minus - I don’t understand? request

        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.
        1. Alex777
          Alex777 20 June 2020 16: 45 New
          +3
          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? bully
          1. Piramidon
            Piramidon 20 June 2020 17: 00 New
            -1
            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? bully

            Yes, this does not only apply to the F-35. There are those here who are pleased to minus all 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. We have just begun a dialogue, and they have already managed to stick us cons. You won’t get a single clever objection from them. Not that level of mind.
          2. yfast
            yfast 21 June 2020 14: 02 New
            +1
            Minus is almost half the plus. So consider.
    2. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 20 June 2020 17: 05 New
      +9
      "Or is it still" Penguin "is not as successful as I wanted?" ////
      ----
      The F-18 has one advantage over the F-35 - cheap inter-flight maintenance.
      1. Cyril G ...
        Cyril G ... 20 June 2020 20: 51 New
        +1
        The benefits are actually more there of course. Because the fleet is not happy with the Penguin
      2. Ratmir_Ryazan
        Ratmir_Ryazan 20 June 2020 21: 48 New
        0
        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.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 20 June 2020 23: 29 New
          +2
          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.
          1. Ratmir_Ryazan
            Ratmir_Ryazan 20 June 2020 23: 55 New
            -3
            The F-16 can also be called a fighter conditionally, it will not be able to fight the same MiG-29 on equal terms, but there is nothing to say about the Su-30/35, provided of course if there are approximately the same air-to-air missiles in range, and not like in Yugoslavia. Due to speed and maneuverability, the MiG 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 the MiGs were with a significant advantage of its armament in range. Now the nomenclature of air-to-air missiles for MiGs and Dryers is practically not inferior to the American or NATO models in anything.

            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 delivering an unexpected strike by airplanes with or without stealth technology. These radars irradiate targets from above, reflecting the radio waves from the ionosphere and here the "stealth" is powerless. Everyone will see everyone. You’ll have to fight openly and here speed and maneuverability will come first, since it will be necessary not only to launch a rocket at the enemy, but to do it as close as possible so that he has no chance to get away from the rocket due to speed and manner and manage to maneuver himself and evade a missile, or possibly bring it down with a missile defense.

            The United States, of course, still has the F-22, but their prices are so high that they stopped building them.
            1. Grazdanin
              Grazdanin 21 June 2020 00: 05 New
              0
              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.
            2. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 21 June 2020 00: 08 New
              +1
              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
              to the exercises "blue flag" combat pilots of NATO countries specifically
              to study the experience and tactics of using F-35.
  • silberwolf88
    silberwolf88 20 June 2020 15: 15 New
    +2
    take Super Hornet Block-3 ... and as I understand it, they prepare TK for Block-4 ... checked by time and expediency ...
  • Darkspy
    Darkspy 20 June 2020 17: 43 New
    +4
    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
    1. Grazdanin
      Grazdanin 21 June 2020 00: 08 New
      0
      They have not had enough aircraft for aircraft carriers since the removal of the F14 from service.
  • Tom Johnson
    Tom Johnson 22 June 2020 01: 39 New
    +2
    More "Growlers" on the way as well as some SM-6 1B launch platforms
    1. Grazdanin
      Grazdanin 24 June 2020 01: 31 New
      0
      I like this plane. I think it is the best among the "teen" series F.