Pretty cool. But I just HAVE to point out that the F-18 is a derivative of the YF-17 which lost the fly-off to the F-16. So the Navy picked up Air Force cast offs. But even then, they did pretty good! F/A-18 is pretty tough aircraft.
You are correct Sir. ;-) I think it worked out the best for both services. I agree with the critics of today that are saying that the approach of the F-35 is not the best path.
It did work out best for all of us. Sef Def McNamara attempted "commonality" in the 60s and tried to push the F-111 on the Navy. There was no way to land it on a carrier with that huge nose. So the AF would up with an aircraft that was over-designed for runway landings and the Navy got a jet they couldn't use. The F-16/F-18 split was a better way to go about that idea and both aircraft have been very successful in their roles.
I still hold out hope for the F-35. It is really advanced technology; a leap forward not an incremental change. The cost, though, is going to kill it.
Pin it! 
6 comments
Login to comment →
Nickolas 9 years ago
Awesome!
Reply
ahnyerkeester 9 years ago
Pretty cool. But I just HAVE to point out that the F-18 is a derivative of the YF-17 which lost the fly-off to the F-16. So the Navy picked up Air Force cast offs. But even then, they did pretty good! F/A-18 is pretty tough aircraft.
Reply
Nickolas 9 years ago
Some pretty interesting trivia can be found on this site. http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/planes/q0145a.shtml">http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/planes/q0145a.shtml
Reply
ahnyerkeester 9 years ago
Great, brief article! Thanks for sharing that. So, while an over-simplification of the process, I'm still right. :)
Reply
Nickolas 9 years ago
You are correct Sir. ;-) I think it worked out the best for both services. I agree with the critics of today that are saying that the approach of the F-35 is not the best path.
Reply
ahnyerkeester 9 years ago
It did work out best for all of us. Sef Def McNamara attempted "commonality" in the 60s and tried to push the F-111 on the Navy. There was no way to land it on a carrier with that huge nose. So the AF would up with an aircraft that was over-designed for runway landings and the Navy got a jet they couldn't use. The F-16/F-18 split was a better way to go about that idea and both aircraft have been very successful in their roles.
I still hold out hope for the F-35. It is really advanced technology; a leap forward not an incremental change. The cost, though, is going to kill it.
Reply