Thanks to Joe for the tantalizing question.
The USN when developing the Super Hornet, decided against giving it a new aircraft designation because they believed that Congress was more likely to approve it if they "stressed" that it was an upgrade instead of an entirely new airplane (which it was).
Now we're facing the potential of another major upgrade of the Super Hornet to Ultra Hornet status and the question becomes...does the Ultra Hornet deserve a new designation?
My answer? Yes. F/A-36 sings to me. I know there is a X-36, but this is F/A so maybe it can work, and besides the "36" indicates its twice as good as the previous model (maybe not but I'm marketing here). Yeah. F/A-36 is how they should be pushing this thing!
The USN when developing the Super Hornet, decided against giving it a new aircraft designation because they believed that Congress was more likely to approve it if they "stressed" that it was an upgrade instead of an entirely new airplane (which it was).
Now we're facing the potential of another major upgrade of the Super Hornet to Ultra Hornet status and the question becomes...does the Ultra Hornet deserve a new designation?
My answer? Yes. F/A-36 sings to me. I know there is a X-36, but this is F/A so maybe it can work, and besides the "36" indicates its twice as good as the previous model (maybe not but I'm marketing here). Yeah. F/A-36 is how they should be pushing this thing!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDont do it...F-18 until it hits the Z letter...the last thing we want is the bean counters arround this planes like flies on shit...its the same Hornet since the 1980s...nothing to see here ,move along...just a naval YF-17 with new avionics... :)
ReplyDeleteWhat about F-38 ?
ReplyDeleteso how much is this like the block 52 of the F16, i know the 16 doesnt have the design changes as much as the 18 but the block 52 is much more capable aircraft if i am not mistaken than the original 16s, so is it a new one? we see evolutions in systems all the time, the 15 silent eagle and even with destroyers like the burkes they are planning more flight IIA and then III's (but i read those price tags are going up so some questioning it), so this is a general problem it seems about designation, and i think theres a difference between evolution of aircraft like the 18 and revolution which is a new one but many steps ahead that are clearly a brand new weapons system, i.e. F22, 35, etc.
ReplyDeleteus military designations are now more marketing than a military classification. if we were to go back to the pure military designations of the past then we might be stuck with a F-18Z, but the way designations go now we get nation designs mixed with our own ... F-15SK? South Korea? that doesn't belong as an airplane designation in the US military tree but its there.
Deletehaving said all that the super hornet is a substantially different airplane form the original and the ultra hornet will be a substantial improvement over the super hornet. thats why i recommend a new designation.
i agree sol and i do understand the 18 is a unique case but its interesting how the designations are marketing decisions and not about capability or design. I think in large part not only this but the things we see in acquisition is Eisenhowers warning against the military industrial complex coming to pass (although has been like that for a long time but now it seems to be out of control).
DeleteI'd say that it deserves a new series letter, but not a new design number.
ReplyDeleteA little off topic...this is so funny... from Why the F-35...
ReplyDelete"U.S. military test pilots say the JSF is similar to the Boeing F/A-18C in speed and maneuverability"....
Sure, and I'm 100% Canadian....
www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPVOwBiZMv8&feature=youtube_gdata_play
"Ultra Hornet"?? Only if you insist on renaming the F-15E/SA/SG's etc to "Ultra Eagles"
ReplyDeleteI prefer Super-Rhino, is not a Hornet, and not a simple Super Hornet any more
ReplyDeleteHow about we call it the F/A 18 Minotaur and argue that future chinese fighters are invalid because we have a minotaur.... merry christmas gents
ReplyDeleteSeems legit.
DeleteThe Super Hornet's correct designation should have been the F/A-24. It was put into development shortly after the YF-22 and YF-23 were. I think a new name designation would serve the Super Hornet well in congress and cause a lot more people to give it attention.
It has to do with marketing. The F18 is approved for FMS (Foreign Military Sales) and if they change the model number it has to go thru the approval process again as well as opening up calls for competition. It also triggers a full flight test evaluation as well as a new/separate line item on the congressional budget. That's why the F15 has stayed around since 1968 and the F18 since 1974 (that's when the drawings started). The more of a given model you can sell the lower the cost per unit (although the cost increases every year). So if you can sell to the FMS program you can make more money. Well, they can make more money!
ReplyDelete