3 ms·

I am still shocked the Navy is ok with a single engine fighter.

by bigdubs 12y ago

dingaling 12y ago
They flew single-engined jets in the 1950s and early 1960s when engines were horrifically unreliable ( most notoriously the F3H Demon with the shocking J71 ). And that didn't deter then from doing it again later with the A-7, A-4 and F-8.
- philwelch 12y ago
  And then they learned from that lesson and today they operate the F/A-18, which, if you count all of its variants, is one of the most successful naval aircraft of all time despite having a very ambitious multi-role mission.
  - hackuser 12y ago
    > the F/A-18, which, if you count all of its variants, is one of the most successful naval aircraft of all time despite having a very ambitious multi-role mission. How is it "successful"? Has one ever been in a real fight? Almost all of our airplanes are untested (which is a good thing).
    - philwelch 12y ago
      Yes, several. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_F/A-18_Hornet#United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_F/A-18_Hornet... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_F/A-18E/F_Super_Hornet#Operational_history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_F/A-18E/F_Super_Hornet#O... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_EA-18G_Growler#Operational_history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_EA-18G_Growler#Operation...
      - hackuser 12y ago
        Thanks. Doesn't that seems like a tiny sample, and aren't those far inferior foes?
        acveilleux 12y ago
        It's as well tested in combat as any of the other fighters still flying. Pending a US-Russia or US-China war, that's all that's ever going to happen.
        philwelch 12y ago
        Not like anyone's anxious to pull the P-51 or Spitfire out of mothballs, certainly. While the Hornet doesn't have a huge combat record, it has a long flight record and a long record of carrier operations and has excelled at both with less maintenance burden than its predecessors.
        engi_nerd 12y ago
        I know many older maintainers who started out on the aircraft types that the F-18 replaced, and then worked on the F-18. They all say that the F-18 really was a game changer. Older aircraft had frustrating issues like panels from one aircraft not fitting onto another because those older aircraft were much more hand-made and manufactured to lower tolerances. F-18s leverage digital data buses much more, greatly reducing the messes of point-to-point wiring and patch panels that older aircraft types used, making the F-18 easier to maintain, modify, and expand.

I am still shocked the Navy is ok with a single engine fighter.

by bigdubs 12y ago

I am still shocked the Navy is ok with a single engine fighter.

They flew single-engined jets in the 1950s and early 1960s when engines were horrifically unreliable ( most notoriously the F3H Demon with the shocking J71 ). And that didn't deter then from doing it again later with the A-7, A-4 and F-8.

philwelch 12y ago
And then they learned from that lesson and today they operate the F/A-18, which, if you count all of its variants, is one of the most successful naval aircraft of all time despite having a very ambitious multi-role mission.
- hackuser 12y ago
  > the F/A-18, which, if you count all of its variants, is one of the most successful naval aircraft of all time despite having a very ambitious multi-role mission. How is it "successful"? Has one ever been in a real fight? Almost all of our airplanes are untested (which is a good thing).
  - philwelch 12y ago
    Yes, several. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_F/A-18_Hornet#United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_F/A-18_Hornet... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_F/A-18E/F_Super_Hornet#Operational_history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_F/A-18E/F_Super_Hornet#O... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_EA-18G_Growler#Operational_history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_EA-18G_Growler#Operation...
    - hackuser 12y ago
      Thanks. Doesn't that seems like a tiny sample, and aren't those far inferior foes?
      - acveilleux 12y ago
        It's as well tested in combat as any of the other fighters still flying. Pending a US-Russia or US-China war, that's all that's ever going to happen.
        philwelch 12y ago
        Not like anyone's anxious to pull the P-51 or Spitfire out of mothballs, certainly. While the Hornet doesn't have a huge combat record, it has a long flight record and a long record of carrier operations and has excelled at both with less maintenance burden than its predecessors.
        engi_nerd 12y ago
        I know many older maintainers who started out on the aircraft types that the F-18 replaced, and then worked on the F-18. They all say that the F-18 really was a game changer. Older aircraft had frustrating issues like panels from one aircraft not fitting onto another because those older aircraft were much more hand-made and manufactured to lower tolerances. F-18s leverage digital data buses much more, greatly reducing the messes of point-to-point wiring and patch panels that older aircraft types used, making the F-18 easier to maintain, modify, and expand.