Unlocking the Secrets of the Super Hornet: Why the F-18 Is Way Stealthier Than You Thought 

몸체가 커진다. 무장이 제한된다. 날개가 작아진다.The body of the aircraft grows. Aircraft armament is limited. The wing of the aircraft becomes smaller

소총이 총신이 작아진다. 몸통이 커진다. 권총이 장전된 탄알이 줄어든다. The rifle has a smaller barrel. torso grows The amount of bullets the pistol is loaded with is reduced.

예((((examples))))f-35b

착륙....이륙....빅 머니...

Need a console link

I won't be surprised once the U.S military sells the F-18 to other countries, if those foreign pilots start to beat 5th gen fighters during friendly war games.

The F/A-18 E/F is designated 5th gen by boing and the United States Navy

@@jtrx753 you are wrong.

But still is no Tomcat, carry less fuel, same burn rate, slower, less reach, smaller radar. The Tomcat would have been a Monster!!!! The worst decision ever done by the DOD!!!!

It has certainly earned it's place in the Navy....The F14 will always be remembered....

And the slanted vertical stabilizers

@@michealnyers184 Yes that too.

@@michealnyers184 the vert stabs weren't built for stealth. having smaller cross section is just a cherry on top but it was actually mainly for effective low speed rudder use as the long nose and the leading edges would've impacted the rudders on high aoa maneuvers if they were straight like the f15 or a single big tail like the viper

@@yurackjung9321 yea ik, I just wanted to point out that it helps for stealth

Everything square is bad for stealth. Simple geometry.

wrong

Which is damning with faint praise, considering that the SU-57 was built from the ground up and paraded as a stealth aircraft, whereas the F/A-18E/F are just modified versions of a formerly non-stealthy aircraft. When your supposed "stealth" aircraft has the same RCS as a low-observable craft from the previous generation you know something's gone horribly wrong with the design.

@@thecommentator3732 the su-57 is stealth just not as much as it should be

It’s considered “low observational” so yes it does have stealth tech. But it’s not considered “stealth” because it’s not stealthy enough. There are different legitimate classifications of stealth

Russia uses A2AD which is defense, not offense. Their war theater is close in and controlled with ISR. Intelligence Surveillance and Recon. A 57 is super maneuverable and is designed to close on enemy via data link in their ISR network. ISR is working well with drones and artillery in Ukraine. Basically Atlantacism and expeditionary offensive war is over. The pentagram hasn't gotten the memo.

It is a side effect rather than an intentional design choice

I was always under the impression that the canted stabilizers is were incorporated for a lower RCS and not just a side effect. But I could be mistaken. Do you have any source for where you got that info?

@@cityskylines11 That, and the following are equivalent to a "Source: Trust me bro" since I only remember seeing this info back during the time the History Channel made ACTUAL History, so take it with salt The design decision came to make a highly maneuverable aircraft with very good stability, the YF-17 traces some of its physical design back to Northrop's older F-5 Tiger II, the design ended up utilizing, originally, Twin Vertical stabilizers canted at 45°, however after wind tunnel testing, it was reduced to 20° for stability purposes. That was one of the reasons for the USN to choose the YF-17 as their lightweight fighter, rather than the YF-16(F-16), along with the lower wing sweep, already sturdier Landing Gear, Twin engines, Lower vertical space, etc. It was later confirmed that Canted Stabilizers reduce RCS with the formula from a Soviet Scientist(I may have gotten his Occupation wrong, correct me if so) and the future implementation on the F-117 only supported that notion Since then, all Fighters built with Stealth had Canted Stabilizers, now coated in and made with RAM materiel

Yup that’s one of the main upgrades on the proposed Boeing F-15SE silent eagle!! It was a modified strike eagle with a conformal fuel tanks & a conformal weapons bay with an extra four missles in addition to its normal hard points and angled vertical stabilizers like the f/a-18!! It was made from the first strike eagle off the line so Boeing wasn’t wasting any time upgrading its line and unveiled in March 2009 as a low cost alternative to countries who couldn’t afford the F-35 lightning but going up against the f-35 is exactly what did it in because instead of adopting an upgraded 4.5++ gen fighter countries just wanted to go for the gen 5 instead no matter the cost!!

Would be cool if they did a run of the f16xl modernized, cause that thing was hell of an improvement over f16a. Now with computers I'm sure there is even more to take advantage of

Hold up. If they were to make this new F16, why would it be called the Block 90 instead of the Block 80?

The F16 is soon gonna have a fleet of AI flown Vipers. No need to worry about stealth.

Don’t believe everything you see

@@Jump-n-smash or everything you hear from youtube commenters 🙂

Technically the front-most part is a fan blade, the compressors are behind that and in the engine housing like the turbine section is

And the entire engine assembly is also known as a "turbine" You could refer to it all as turbomachinery, the fan, the compressor and the turbine. The first turbomachinery technology was probably the water wheel. But: All turbomachinery transfers energy to and from a fluid to rotational work. A fan is work-to-fluid A compressor is work-to-fluid A turbine is fluid-to-work Turbofans, like in the 18, go Fan, Compressor, Turbine.

fan blades bring in smooth air into the compressor fans if that explains it

Can’t imagine it matters much. Those sensors are likely cryo-cooled. When the floor is negative 153 C a few 10s of degrees +/- 0 should be well within bounds of the sensor’s dynamic range. Also, it’s cold as shit at 60,000 ft anyhow, way below freezing, way colder than it’d ever get around sea level. So, that’s all to say, they probably have that issue covered.

The Aim-9X Sidewinder uses the entire visible light spectrum to detect and track it's targets, not just IR, so I assume that IRIS-T missiles use a similar design philosophy, this is one of the reasons that the Aim-9X is so good at "ignoring" decoy flares etc, because it's not just looking at heat, it's also looking at UV and visible light sources and comparing them. *EDIT: I missread "IRST" as "IRIS-T", but still, what I said also applies.

In weather below the freezing level, you're looking through a LOT of liquid water over the course of a mile or more. That absorbs IR radiation really well. Above the freezing level, not so much, but that wasn't the question. Ever notice how cool it feels when a cloud passes overhead? That's the loss of IR. There will be no appreciable visible light coming through all that weather. So, considering that, do your answers remain the same? I never carried the AIM-9X and never used IRST (I flew the F-14A), but it affected other variants of the AIM-9 dramatically. Even going to idle in an A-4F would prevent tone on an AIM-9L at a mile with clear line of sight. Those are cooled seekers as well. So. The question is not "is it tactically smart to come in below the freezing level". The question is, "what do you think the impact would be on the systems". I have my theories, but I'm 30 years out of the game.

@@kayakutah There would be no appreciable difference. I believe that your comment stems from a misunderstanding of the IR illumination that IRST systems use. When you feel colder when a cloud passes overhead, it's because you're no longer being illuminated by the sun, which, yes, theoretically lowers your heat signature, but that's because your body temperature is only under 100 fahrenheit. With the exhaust plume of an aircraft though, which is hot enough to melt aluminum, the added light from the sun is just noise - the exhaust is so hot compared to its surroundings that whether the air is below freezing or even above boiling doesn't really matter. The IRST systems for tracking vehicles are looking for temperatures from sources like these. That's the same reason why the M1 Abrams tank cools its very hot exhaust gases actively in order to lower its heat signature.

@@felixu95 " When you feel colder when a cloud passes overhead, it's because you're no longer being illuminated by the sun, which, yes, theoretically lowers your heat signature," No. It doesn't lower YOUR heat signature, it lowers the heat - IR - signature of the source, in this case, the sun (or is that what you meant?). I guarantee that with an AIM-9L, a cloud will attenuate the IR given off by a jet exhaust. I've seen it in action. And the Lima is cooled as well. IR radiation is absorbed by liquid water. If you get enough of it between your seeker head and the target, it doesn't matter how hot the target is, as the vast majority of the radiation is absorbed - by liquid water. I imagine any IRST has a similar limitation.

the Achilles heel is the canted pylons. They create so much drag that a double bubble configuration has similar range to a single centerline tank

For the hornet, it doesn't actually. So the Hornet can track stealth jets like J20 and SU-57 without giving away it's location.

I think I heard the Navy scrapped the CFTs? Not 100% sure but I hope they didn't...

The Navy has decided against the addition of CFTs on the Block III. The primary reason for not going ahead with the CFTs I saw cited by the Navy was the increased logistical headache of attaching such tanks on top of the airplane in the cramped confines of a Carrier. They determined the additional struggles of mounting, dismounting, and maintaining CFTs on top of the air frame in such conditions were not worth the extra range, especially when mid-air refueling assets and traditional drop tanks were available. Also of note is that those tanks are very long, and do not really stack well together or compactly, which raised the issue of storing them on carriers.

@@lastcrusader101 They figure that the MQ-25 Stingray being available as a carrier based stealthy air tanker should be a big help.

NAVAIR killed the CFTs back in January 2021.

yea but the navy stop intergrate cft into their new block 3

@@womenslayer6942 hmm, interesting, how come? I haven’t seen this mentioned previously.

@@MaxwellAerialPhotography I think they had a few issues with it. I’m irritated they quit on it at the slightest inconvenience. Those tanks would have been extremely useful

​@@MaxwellAerialPhotography they paused the development of cft at the begining of 2021 cause the problem related to cost, schedule and performance. However Boeing did offer cfts for block 3 export, there are potential customers at the time such as finland, canada and india but as u can see non of them pick the hornet instead goes for F35 and Rafale. Its sure an interesting concept but reality often dissaponted.

@@womenslayer6942 I think corrosion in a saltwater environment might be the reason.

IFR Probe fairing is usually removed in the RAG squadrons during Air to Air refueling training. If something goes wrong the hose does not beat the shit out of the door.

they want to give 41 to ukraine its becoming a possibility

I’m pretty sure they have a mod for it, you just need the base F/A-18C

The Gripen also uses the same engine, and is probably more similar by virtue of being a non-stealthy airframe.

It’s already done. The navy is set to receive about 70ish block 3s while upgrading their 550 some block 2s to the block 3. You can search on RU-vid our Navy getting their first couple block 3s…. It’s considered a 4.5 gen fighter attack aircraft. That’s what I’ve heard by multiple sources anyway

@@airprok8328 did they stop calling it the advanced super hornet? Maybe that's why i haven't heard anything

​@@DamplyDoo Advanced Hornet was when it was in the design phase. Now that it has entered production, it is called the Block 2 (since Block 1 and 2 already existed). Note that while the Block 3 incorporates most of the technology showcased in the Advanced Hornet some stuff is missing to reduce cost.

@@thenovicegamer007 like the weapon pod? Thanks for having so much info on this

@@DamplyDoo No problem. Happy to help.

Yes it is. It will be stopped from 2025 I believe.

With the exception of range.

So a MIG-15 can beat an F-35 in a BVR fight?

@@thecommentator3732 If it can sneak up from behind I don't see why not. That's a big if though.

@@Ken_Koonz you cant sneak from behind either since the F-35 has a 360 hmds bore

@@thecommentator3732 A what now?

@@Ken_Koonz do you live in a cave or what? search up an HMDS Bore off sight

Air Forces that operate Hornets and Super Hornets have been ordering F-35s. The Super Hornet was created because the US Navy needed a newer aircraft until they could get a stealth fighter that naval aviation was confident in operating off an aircraft carrier.

Because the RCS size of the F-35 is smaller than the Rhino? Use common sense bud

Because the F-35 is still inherently superior to the Hornet in all the parameters that matter, including stealth and detection capabilities. The Super Hornet is best described as a "low observables" aircraft that has some stealth features, but not full-aspect stealth. Also, the capabilities described for the Super Hornet are all things the F-35 can do innately without the use of external pods and add-ons.

I believe the GoC wanted to buy the Super Hornet for the RCAF but due to the Boeing action on Bombardier a few years ago, they went with the F35A instead!

A bunch of the internet seems to be on a baffle'em with bulls€♤♧ mission re: weapons, war, china...

No

@@thecommentator3732 if you say so.

It has anything but to do with engines, F-18 right now is shooting down missiles and drones over Red Sea with its sensors and radar.

Not even close tbh, theres no russian aircraft before F-18E to have such an air intakes

Boeing was the one that introduced and manufactured the Fa-18 Super Hornet after McDonnell Douglas went defunct after its Md-11 failure and was forced to merge with Boeing in 1997 which Boeing slowly became McDonnell Douglas under a different name as seen in the 737 Max disaster

@@CloakerV8 Did you totally miss my point ?? LoL

no man, you always gotta let one witness survive to tell the tale

Well not really