Immanuel
New Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2011
- Messages
- 3,605
- Likes
- 7,574
Even the old F-18 Hornet has 40% of the surface area covered with grapite epoxy composite materials which is about 9.9% of the weight, this amount increased significantly in the SH. While I do agree that Rafale, EF, Gripen have more percent of the aircraft in composites. It shouldn't be that hard to have even more composites on the SH during MLU. Current oldest SH's which will begin undergoing SLEP to 10000hr are also expected to recieve newer materials since now Boeing knows exactly how the airframe wears over 6000hrs of gruelling operations over a fleet of more than 500 hrs.F18 hornet first flight was in 1978. The super hornet first flight was in 1995. But, the design and airframe was of 1970s itself. The airframe is metallic. The plane is a contemporary of F16 and F15 in terms of design generation.
It is better to use Su30 MKI than F18SH. The F18 is anyways incapable of taking flight from a STOBAR carrier of India. There is no point using it as IAF plane when we have Su30MKI which is made in India
The SH is a massive evolution over the Hornet, there are significant design differences. The airframe is 25% larger, range is over 35% more, useful load is significantly higher. They are quite different aircraft.
As for ability to take off from STOBAR, well Boeing has recieved the RFP and they have done many simulations of take offs and landing on STOBAR, they seem to be confident to able to do it. Only trials will tell. For the IN between Rafale and SH, SH is a better fit since wings can fold, the aircraft is proven to be cheaper to operate than any other TE aircraft and comes ready with proven sensors and weapons.