viper v. hornet

Let's say the US/NATO offer Ukraine either old/surplus F-16s or F/A-18s, is there any reason to prefer one over the other?

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Viper has better logistics, and they would get ones with better airframe hours. The Hornets they could get would be old Navy birds with not too much life left.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Canada, Australia and Finland could also give Hornets if backfilled with F-35s but those are all very well used I'd think.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Canadian Hornets are crumbling and barely surviving on life support. I doubt anyone would want them for free.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Can't be the Canadian ones because they're in horrible condition.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Finnish hornets were recently fitted with mid-life package 2 and can shoot Jassm missiles and drop Jsows, Jdams. All the electronics are as modern as possible for the jet of that age. They still quite capable birds and do have the air-2-ground capabilities in very good conditions. Question just is that Finland will not give them away and giving Ukraine Jassm would be pretty big escalation.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          This. Plus training people, building what is needed etc for operating F-35 does not exactly happen overnight. Hence with 1,300 kilometers of land border with Russia and undergoing process of joining to NATO Finland will need its Hornets for next couple years. Anything less would be open invitation for Russia to start fucking around in Finnish airspace.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >JASSM entered service in 2009
          >DCS 'simulates' a 2008 Hornet and 2008 ANG Viper
          >Will never get JASSM because it's not "Historically accurate to the airframe"

          I hate these bullshit hair splitting decisions made. If it's conceivable that a 2008 era Legacy Hornet or Viper carried them and used them on deployments, we should get them in the sim.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            ED doesn't know what they are doing. They also gave the F-16 4 usable HARM stations because the ace combat kids screamed about it endlessly on the forum.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              No that's because its fucking USAF standard and ED went with some random guard unit. The modification for the F16 to lose its inboard HARM wiring is done on a squadron level. PACAF standards literally say the Viper must be able to fire 4 HARMs if its deployed there.

              Only fucking retards on plebbit tried to argue in favor of restricting that.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Only fucking retards on plebbit tried to argue in favor of restricting that.
                and sim-boomers. The scream about anything that 'isn't historically accurate.'

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Yeah, those fuckwits act like since this kind of shit didn't happen in GWOT then we can't have it in the sim. Boy howdy do I hate fucking COIN.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      There are a ton of legacy Hornets from Navy Reserves and the Marines, wouldn't be a bad fit. Later produced models also probably have a lot of life left in them from being replaced by the Superbug from 2000 onwards.

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Hornet can take off from improvised airfields. I imagine that by now most of Ukrainian airstrips look like swiss cheese now.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      i doubt it, airfields are relativly easy to repair especially with the accuracy of russian missiles. The real reason to use improvised airfields is dispersing your assets and making it harder for the enemy to target them

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I heard Ukraine will get gripen, not F-16s nor F-18s

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Could they be delivered in sufficient number? From where?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        currently sweden operates slighlty more then 70 as the biggest number in use so pretty unlikely compared to the thousands of f-16s that exist

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Let's see the numbers there, goober anon:
      >Gripen - 271 (80 currently operational)
      >F-16 - 4588 (3000 currently operational)
      Which one would the Ukrainians opt for? It is a hard decision.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They will not be getting Gripen no.

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Jesus, why does every single question on this board have to be phrased in terms of Ukraine?

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >old/surplus
    really depends which mark of these aircraft you're talking about

    all else being equal the F-18 would have more payload, manoeuvreability, and survivability, due to its second engine

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Is it that much more capable of rough field opperation vs. F16? Doesn't seem like a coincidence what forces operate it.

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Probably better with two engines.

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    f18 carrier enabling features are dead weight on land operation, indeed there was to be an f18 L but then it wasn't.
    hornet got to get some land operating operator because an fa18a is already an f and a, while an f16a not much but still more than the 100% pure fighter it was depicted to be. but also f16a was like less than half as expensive to purchase.
    the c verson of both aircraft quite level the difference. but f16 is still a more capable fighter and cheaper because of the carrier borne things of the other aircraft.
    for logistic fa18 being carrier borne is both easy to work on (plenty of panels) so less work hours, and don't get worn down by take off landing cycles becajse is dimensioned for harsh aircraft carrier operation. f16 has 1 engine wich you can eash digure out thst is precisely half of two engine.
    engine section. the f404 engine break the otherwise universal logic of half the engines half the costs.
    f404 cost much less than both the f16 engines it can use. it has less thrust but on thrust per bucks, it's still way much cheaper. the real saving are on engine maintenance, maintenance for 2 f404 cost less way less than 1 viper engine (for reasons).
    for fuel consumption expences, it's the opposite. f404 has higher specific fuel consumption, so it consume close to the same of a viper engine but with way less thrust, and there are 2 of them wich colbined are much heavier than one viper engine, so that there is the need of more heavy aircraft to carry them, and more fuel weight for move thebehole thing.
    so to say that basically f18 consume like twice the fuel of a f16 for doing the same thing.
    for cost saving if is more important to spare maintenance manpower hours or spare fuel depend on oil price now. compared to when with mandatory military service you had people working for free doing the basic jobs.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Pretty informative QRD, ESL-anon.

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The only countries trying to get rid of base model Hornets are Finland and Canada. Finnish Hornets are probably well maintained, but Canadian ones are death traps.

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They won't get any because it would require massive maintenance effort, so they'll have to take off from NATO fields which would just be an unnecessary escalation considering how us isn't even sending ukies abramses
    Not to mention that every mission would be like a suicide for pilots

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Isn't Straya getting rid of their Super Hornets once they get full set of 100 Lightnings? Whose getting those?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They've only committed to 72 - they have an option to go to 100, which they'll probably flog the life out of the supers like they did the classics or upgrade some of them to growlers and sell the rest.

      Personally don't think it makes sense to only run F35s - they need a different airframe which can perform a different role i.e. Run a couple squadrons of F-15EX as missile trucks for the F35s or get a dedicated bomber.

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    this is literally a logistics issue so f16
    f18 simply doesnt have nowhere near the logistics line in europe to support it

Your email address will not be published.