Originally, the F/A-18C/D was called the Hornet and, because most pilots hated it (still do) they called it the bug. So now, with the advent of the "Super Hornet" we now have the "Super Bug"

The F/A-18's official name is the "Hornet" (i.e. a bug).

Ah, that makes sense!

most pilots hated it (still do)

Why?Sorry I keep asking questions like a 3-yr old :Big Grin:Cheers,- jahman.

Ah, that makes sense!Why?Sorry I keep asking questions like a 3-yr old :Big Grin:Cheers,- jahman.

Not enough power and poor range.

Not enough power and poor range.

That would do it!Cheers,- jahman.

and to make matter worse, the E/F and now G's have an even more horrible problem: the Navy told the designers they wanted more weapons capacity on the plane. So they added a bunch of hardpoints. However, in weapon drop tests, they found that sometimes the mid wing weapons would, when released, whack into the other two... creating serious issues with either the hardpoints losing their weapons or the points themselves being torn off. So what did they do? They tilted the hardpoints out by 4 degrees. Now, some of you may know what this will do but, for those who don't... it adds a tremendous amount of drag... which costs fuel and which makes it impossible for the SBug to be a really fantastic plane...So, Super Bug. (cause it's got the same bugs but now they're Super!!!)

I bought it as well, they really did a great job, they got all of the details right. The aircraft seems to be virtually bug free.I am very suprised how well they put this plane together.I will say from being a ex-crew chief in the USAF, I have to say they even have it so you can safe the seat. BRILLIANT!!!The lighting is fantastic and shooting the weapons in the sim was fun. It really brought me back to the good old days.Yes the HUD is colminated and even coated like the real one. I love how it changes in the light, just an excellent aircraft.Excellent job IRIS!!!

Edited January 16, 201214 yr by Jiggy Wid-it

So far two very low posters (19 and 1 post, respectively) praising the Mud Hen. Just saying...

and to make matter worse, the E/F and now G's have an even more horrible problem: the Navy told the designers they wanted more weapons capacity on the plane. So they added a bunch of hardpoints. However, in weapon drop tests, they found that sometimes the mid wing weapons would, when released, whack into the other two... creating serious issues with either the hardpoints losing their weapons or the points themselves being torn off. So what did they do? They tilted the hardpoints out by 4 degrees. Now, some of you may know what this will do but, for those who don't... it adds a tremendous amount of drag... which costs fuel and which makes it impossible for the SBug to be a really fantastic plane...

Clearly the Navy doesn't know what it's doing: They need to add more hardpoints (on top of the wing, perhaps?) with enough weight so the Superbug can no longer take-off. The advantages are:

1. Weapons/hardpoint drag problem: Solved!
2. Fuel range: No longer a problem!
3. Immunity from being shot-down by the enemy: Guaranteed!

In the meantime I understand the Mud Hen (should be two words, right?) is being phased out of service because the fuselage longerons around the cockpit are rusting through.Cheers,- jahman.

Edited January 16, 201214 yr by jahman

So far two very low posters (19 and 1 post, respectively) praising the Mud Hen. Just saying...

How about my endorsement? Does that count? I may have a low post count, but I do think my word carries a little weight. It's a great aircraft with excellent systems simulation and great FPS from a 3D designer who has a significant background in designing aircraft for FSX and has had some of the most successful aircraft packages to date. The video should be available sometime this week.

Clearly the Navy doesn't know what it's doing

No. Not at all.c:endsarcasm.exeThey replaced an aging fighter design with associated maintenance problems, produced a cost effective replacement (or stop gap, if you will). Originally the A-12 was supposed to replace the A-6 Intruder as well as the A-7 Corsair program, but it never made it to service. Further, the naval equivalent of the ATF never came to fruition. The Super Hornet was designed to fill that roll until a suitable replacement could be given. Now while the F/A-18E/F Super Hornets may not have the most speedy performance, they have met their original design goals within the constraints the Navy was put in.If you want to blame someone, blame congress or the American public for budget cuts.

And the design team who put the hardpoints too close together...

How strange. The name "Hornet" is a damn sight better than "bug".

And the design team who put the hardpoints too close together...

LMAO, you got your ruler out? Really Milviz,You have nothing better to do then troll a post about an IRIS product, cause they make a great F-15E?Just saying, cause that says a lot...

er... what?http://en.wikipedia...._%28Internet%29Where are the comments that I made that are as above?

FYI, I was talking about the F/A-18E/F/G and not the iris F-15E. (pretty sure that was clear...)

I was saying you are trolling this post. (pretty sure that is clear...)

I was saying you are trolling this post. (pretty sure that is clear...)

No, what is pretty clear is that he was talking about the design decisions on the REAL WORLD F-18 that lead to real world problems. In no way was he even close to negatively commenting on the simulated F-15 by IRIS and I only see one troll in this thread. (pretty sure that is clear...)