RSAF F-16D Fighting Falcon. Profile.
US Navy F-18E Super Hornet. Note the new in-takes. The F-18E and F-18F are dimensionally bigger than the F-18A/B/C/D by a significant amount. It is pretty much a new aircraft.
RSAF F-16D Fighting Falcon.
USAF Boeing F-15E Strike Eagle.
RSAF Boeing AH-64D Apache Longbow.
*A note on the photos I put up. Feel free to use them if you want. I put them up to share. If you want better quality images, do let me know. I have about two hundred images of the event. Drop me an email. I will send them to you.
3 comments:
Super Hornet... sigh. I think most aviation fans (and USN aviators) feel that the 18E was a step backwards in performance from the F-14D.
Haven't kept up with the 16 at all. Those ugly humps contain more sensors?
I used to think that way regarding the F-18. However, now, I am hesitant to make such comparisons. I have not seen the full performance specifications of both aircraft. The performance envelopes. The combat radius based on certain loads and profiles. Raw numbers may seem to bear out that the F-18E is inferior but I think the reality is probably otherwise.
Besides, the F-14 despite its beautiful form, is supposedly unreliable with low operational readiness due to its engines. And that has only been rectified after years. Even that, engine flame-outs may have restricted operating parameters. Again, I think I don't know enough and I don't have enough real data to make valid comparisons. I will hold my judgement on both though the initial F-18A/B/C/D appeared lacking until the advent of the F-18E/F.
Regarding fans, I don't know what to say about them. As for aviators, I haven't read anywhere of their dissatisfaction. I can't say anything either on that.
The dorsal spine does contain more sensors from what I have read. The hump is an extension, probably adding fuel. It is not unexpected. The A4 added a hump in its later incarnations as they added more capability.
Natural really. You know that.
Post a Comment