The McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet - Case Study Example

The Hornet F/A-18 Hornet Introduction The McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet is a multi role, all weather, and two seat carrier borne aircraft. The F/A-18 was introduced to take the naval aviation torch from the F-14 Tomcat. The aircraft is capable of air-air and air-ground and air-sea attacks. The Hornet has boasts an impressive combat record; with the aircraft playing an important and crucial role in deactivating the aerial defense systems of the Iraqi military in the Persian Gulf War. It has undoubtedly established itself as one of the best maritime fighter aircrafts. This carrier borne aircraft is a combination of advanced aeronautics, electronics, and is the pinnacle of maritime multirole fighter aircraft; which is why I have chosen the F/A-18 Hornet. Motivation The F/A-18 Hornet was developed by McDonald Douglas in order to fulfill the US Navy’s requirement of an advanced carrier borne multirole fighter. The ageing fleet of the US carrier aircraft consisted of the F-14 Tomcat, A-4 Skyhawk, A-7 Corsair and the F-4 Phantom II; these aircrafts were unable to adapt to the fast paced developing world of maritime warfare.2 This was evident from the casualties that were suffered in the Vietnam War at the hands of the MiG-17 and MiG-21 fighters. Furthermore, an aircraft with longer range, higher payload and better avionics was needed to complement and replace the ageing F-14 Tomcat.1 This is where the F/A-18 Hornet was introduced. Historical The development of the F/A-18 was brought about as a result of pressure from the congress to attain carrier aircrafts to supplement the F-14 Tomcat. The US Navy initiated the experimental Naval Fighter-Attack (VFAX) program to seek the desperately required aircraft. However, in August 1973 the congress urged the Navy to pursue a low cost alternative to the F-14.2 The United States Navy consulted with the Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corporation and McDonnell Douglas for proposals. Both proposed aircrafts that were as expensive as the F-14. Alongside these developments, the air force was filtering companies to design aircrafts for their Light Weight Fighter (LWF) program. The Air Force for its LWF program decided upon two companies; the Northop and General Dynamics. Both companies lead on to manufacture YF-17 and YF-16 respectively. The US Congress and Senate and House of Representatives of Armed Forces Committees insisted that the Navy chose the YF-16 from the Air Forces LWF program; just as the Air Force had done. However, the Navy was keener towards designing and manufacturing of their own aircraft, which would be tailored for their own naval purposes. The US Navy was able to point areas in which the YF-16 would not have performed as expected and required by the naval pilots. The landing strip for the Air Force and Naval aircrafts differed greatly. The Air Force aircrafts were designed according to a steady, stable lengthy runaway. On the other hand, the naval aircrafts had to be flown and landed from carrier aircrafts. The landing strip of a carrier aircraft is much smaller than a land runaway, furthermore, the effect of the waves on the carrier aircraft and subsequently the runaway should also be considered. In addition to the implicational dissimilarities, the US Navy analysts and experts felt that the YF-16 electronics were not compatible with aircraft carriers. They also believed that the rear end of the YF-16 would crash into the carrier deck while landing. The Navy found that the YF-17 was better suited to naval aviation. In May 2nd 1975, the US Navy went against the wishes of the Congress and ordered McDonnell Douglas to design a carrier friendly version of the YF-17.3 The Congress was unable to act out on this disrespect since the command for the US Navy to make use of the Air Force’s YF-16 was in a report rather than a law. The designing and manufacturing continued and the Deputy Secretary of Defense William Cements named the new aircraft F-18 Hornet. Alongside the F-18, the Navy was also designing an aircraft that would be used to eliminate ground targets unlike the F-18. The A-18 was initially designed to feature color map displays and carry air-to-ground arsenal rather than air-to-air weapons. The F-18, on the other hand, would have black and white map displays and support air-to-air arsenal only. As the design process continued both planes came to support color map displays and have air-to-air plus air-to-ground weapons. The two aircrafts were similar in all aspects, and in 1979 the two names were combined together to form the F/A-18. The F/A-18 made its maiden flight in 18th November 1978 and entered active duty in 7th January 1983.1 The Hornet flew their first combat mission from the USS Coral Sea in 1986. The first major contribution by the F/A-18 was in the Persian Gulf War of 1991.3 The aircraft was tasked to perform an air-to-ground mission, and successfully destroyed two Iraqi MiG-21’s in air-to-air combat. Since then, The F/A-18 Hornet has firmly cemented its place into the Naval aviation books as one of the most successful aircraft designed. Technical Data and Sketches Thrust (2 engines in total) Dry Thrust: 11,000 lbf (48.9 kN) each Afterburner Thrust: 17,750 lbf (79.2kN) each Length 56 ft (17.1 m) Height 15 ft 4in (4.7 m) Wingspan 40 ft (12.3 m) Service Ceiling 50, 000 ft (15, 240 m) Max. take Off Weight 51.900 lb (23,500 kg) Loaded Weight 36,970 lb (16,770 kg) Empty Weight 23,000 lb (10,400 kg) Range 1,250 miles (2,000 km) Wing loading 93 lb/ft2 (454 kg/m2) Wing Area 400 ft2 (12.3m) Maximum Speed Mach 1.8 (1,915 km/h) Table 1: Technical Data The F/A-18 Hornet has a total of 9 hard points. The location of the hard points is: 2× wingtips missile launch rail 4× under-wing 3× under-fuselage with a capacity of 13,700 lb (6,215 kg) external fuel and ordnance Figure 1: Front, side and top sketch of the F/A-18 Hornet Calculations Figure 2: Figure showing the four forces involved in level and constant speed flight According to Newton’s second law the net force of a F/A-18 Hornet is equal to the product of mass times acceleration (). The weight of the aircraft would be given by the product of the mass of the aircraft times the acceleration. The acceleration in both cases would be assumed to be 9.81m/s2.The net force of the hornet can be equated to the weight of the aircraft producing the following equation; 10429.062 kg Through equating the net force with the weight of the aircraft, the mass was calculated to be 10429.062 kg. In order to calculate the lift produced during flight of a F/A-18 Hornet several factors are to be considered. The aircraft would be assumed to be at constant speed and at level flight and a total of four forces would act on the aircraft as shown in figure 2. This would entail that; 1. Flift=W 2. Fthrust=Fdrag If we go on to calculate the lift produced, we assume that the net forces acting in the y-axis are zero; In the same manner the drag forces acting on the plane would be known with knowledge of the thrust produced by the aircraft. The dry thrust produced by the twin engine of the F/A-18 is; In order to calculate the drag produced we suppose that summation of forces in the x-axis is equal to zero; Through equating and summing the forces in the x and y-axis equal to zero we are able to calculate the lift and drag produced by the aircraft when flown at level flight at constant speed. Conclusion The F/A-18 Hornet has established itself as one of the central aircrafts the Navy developed for its aviation wing. The hornet boasts a rich combat history and has successfully served its duration for the US Navy. The F/A-18 is still currently in service in the Australian, Singaporean, Canadian and Finnish air forces. The aircraft is now slowly being replaced by a bigger better version called the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet. The Super Hornet would replace the Hornet physically, but the F/A-18 Hornet has left a legacy in the minds and hearts of the naval aviation pilots. Works Cited 1.Coremans, Danny and Nico Deboeck. Boeing F/a-18 A/b/c/d Hornet. Daco Publications, 2004. 2.Gertler, Jeremiah. "Navy F/A-18E/F and EA-18G Aircraft ." 2009. 3.Jenkins, Dennis R. F/A-18 Hornet: A Navy Success Story. McGraw-Hill Education, 2002. Read More