AirRyan Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 I'm wondering if Super Hornets are technically cleared to use triple ejector racks such as in for say example three AGM-65 Mavericks or three GBU-12's? Thanks in advance! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Joe Hegedus Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 I'm wondering if Super Hornets are technically cleared to use triple ejector racks such as in for say example three AGM-65 Mavericks or three GBU-12's? Thanks in advance! No. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
AirRyan Posted November 20, 2007 Author Share Posted November 20, 2007 No. But they will then use MER's for two Mavericks or GBU-12's, correct? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Reddog Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 But they will then use MER's for two Mavericks or GBU-12's, correct? No. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Big Crazy Dave Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 TERs cannot be used because the pylons are too close together - a slight design flaw, after all it was supposed to be bigger than the classic F-18. (note that they also had to angle the pylons to ensure clean drops even without using them!) MERs are often carried, and although most pix show simple dumb bombs loaded. there should be plenty of google offerings for other bits of iron Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Reddog Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 MERs are only for small practice bombs and flares on the bug/super bug. No one uses MER's for "heavies" anymore, like they use to do in A-6's and A-7's. Reddog Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Big Crazy Dave Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 something was bugging me about my post.....! ...of course Reddog is correct in that the SH actually has twin pylon adapters rather than the trraditional MER of olden days! and even these are less likey than simply loading single stuff on each pylon. (checking my meagre refs. seems like there have been two variations on the design) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Reddog Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 Bugs and super bugs still use MER's (now IMERs) for the small 25 lb and below practice bombs. The two place adapter is called a VER or CVER, they are used for larger ordnance and not the small practice bombs. Reddog Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Red_Baron_13 Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 No. Actually, this is not true. If you look at the width difference between a TER and a CVER, the bombs on the TER are actually closer together. The reasons either model of Hornet do not carry 500lb and up class stores on a TER or MER is they hang down to far to meet the collapsed landing gear trap requirement on the bottom station. Both the A-7 and A-6 had higher set wings than the Hornet, so they could carry larger stores on TER/MER. The Hornet could carry weapons on a the TER shoulder stations, but that wouldn't provide any advantage over the CVER. The CVER is more versitiale since it can carry 1000lb weapons. Also, that is another configuration to clear, and as Joe will tell you, the backlog is enought already. Not to mention the logisitcs of having all the different racks abour the carrier. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
AirRyan Posted November 20, 2007 Author Share Posted November 20, 2007 Bugs and super bugs still use MER's (now IMERs) for the small 25 lb and below practice bombs. The two place adapter is called a VER or CVER, they are used for larger ordnance and not the small practice bombs. Reddog I suppose those are differnet than the ones that come with the Hasegawa Weapons kit D? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Reddog Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 Actually, this is not true. If you look at the width difference between a TER and a CVER, the bombs on the TER are actually closer together.The reasons either model of Hornet do not carry 500lb and up class stores on a TER or MER is they hang down to far to meet the collapsed landing gear trap requirement on the bottom station. Both the A-7 and A-6 had higher set wings than the Hornet, so they could carry larger stores on TER/MER. The Hornet could carry weapons on a the TER shoulder stations, but that wouldn't provide any advantage over the CVER. The CVER is more versitiale since it can carry 1000lb weapons. Also, that is another configuration to clear, and as Joe will tell you, the backlog is enought already. Not to mention the logisitcs of having all the different racks abour the carrier. The reason I said no is because it is not cleared, not that it can't do it. I don't like giving out too much load information on active aircraft, you never know who's reading. Also, a TER is actually more versital, it can carry three 1000 lb stores, a CVER can only carry two. Reddog Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Reddog Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 I suppose those are differnet than the ones that come with the Hasegawa Weapons kit D? Not familiar with what is in the Hasegawa Weapons Kit D so I can't make that call. Reddog Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Joe Hegedus Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 Not familiar with what is in the Hasegawa Weapons Kit D so I can't make that call. Reddog Set D has a couple GBU-31 Mk-84JDAM, PWII LGB (GBU-10, 12.16 plus the AGM-123 motors to make Skippers), PW III GBU-24A/B, AGM-84E SLAM, TACTS pods, LANTIRN targeting and nav pods and a couple of TERs, plus a few other odds and ends. There aren't any VERs in there (just about every Legacy Hornet kit has a couple in it, those from Hasegawa or Revell/Monogram are the best), and there are no CVERs in injected plastic. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
AirRyan Posted November 20, 2007 Author Share Posted November 20, 2007 The reason I said no is because it is not cleared, not that it can't do it. I don't like giving out too much load information on active aircraft, you never know who's reading. :D Also, a TER is actually more versital, it can carry three 1000 lb stores, a CVER can only carry two. Reddog Would TER's with just two on the side be more plausible then? I'm trying to come up with the most potent CAS/FAC(A) loadout I can with all that I have. I have 2 AIM-9X, 2 AMRAAM, and 3 drop tanks that come with the kit. I'd like to incorporate a HARM or two and I have six Mavericks and six GBU-12's to play with. Any suggestions? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
camus27 Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 The Maverick triple launcher was the LAU-88, not the TER and that is not used on the F-18 (and probably not at all anymore). The Hornet always carries single Mavericks. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Joe Hegedus Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 Would TER's with just two on the side be more plausible then? I'm trying to come up with the most potent CAS/FAC(A) loadout I can with all that I have. I have 2 AIM-9X, 2 AMRAAM, and 3 drop tanks that come with the kit. I'd like to incorporate a HARM or two and I have six Mavericks and six GBU-12's to play with. Any suggestions? Again, NO. Hornets of ANY flavor do not carry ANY bombs on a TER. The only thing that goes on a TER are TALD or ITALD decoys, and those only go on Legacy Hornets. Hornets ONLY use the single rail LAU-117 launcher for AGM-65. Period. If you don't have one of those, Maverick can't go on the jet. GBU-12 can go either on the parent rack (pylon) or on a CVER (not the VER that is included in all the legacy Hornet kits). Super Hornets can only put the GBU-12 on the parent rack. If you want to put the most stuff on the jet, put a HARM on each outboard pylon, GBU-12 on each of the inner and middle pylons, and a centerline tank. Or, put a GBU-12 on all 6 wing pylons with the centerline bag. Put the TFLIR/ATFLIR on the left fuselage, a single AIM-9 on one of the wingtips and maybe or maybe not an AIM-120 on the right fuselage station. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Josh1971 Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 But here's a question that I have to ask- how different, visually, is the VER from the CVER? JB Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Reddog Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 (edited) Externally, the only difference between a VER and a CVER is that the racks on a VER point straight down, on a CVER they are canted 5.3 degrees outboard and it is about 4.5 inches wider. In my opinion, in 1/72 and 1/48 scale you really can’t tell but then that is my opinion and you know what they say about opinions. Reddog Edited November 20, 2007 by Reddog Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mizar Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 (edited) jk Super Hornets are good only for fly in circles,they don't carry any weapon cause the uberdrag handicap,if you put a winder on it the structure will collapse in a few seconds after the shot. Super Hornets are used aboard carriers to reach the 88mph needed to go back into the past,just for say hey guyz this Bug sucks,go back to '14 plz and trash this crap jk off Edited November 20, 2007 by Mizar Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Josh1971 Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 k..... Thought we were past all the super hornet trashing, but I guess not. Thanks for the info, Reddog. JB Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mizar Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 Well sorry but after reading some questions and other stuff he makes me wonder that the SH is useless or a waste of money.Don't want to flame or act like a trol but: Mer?No Ter?No Dual racks like CVER/VER with a couple of GBUs even the lightest type?No Fuel tanks?Yes lots of them AA missile?Nope,maybe,n/a depending on enemy AA threat Speed?Acceleration?Same or slowest as the Legacy one Now: Good markings?Nope all low-viz Past Good markings?Yep but they were all Tomcat-like and really sad for me I'll stop there Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Red_Baron_13 Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 The reason I said no is because it is not cleared, not that it can't do it. I don't like giving out too much load information on active aircraft, you never know who's reading. :wub: Also, a TER is actually more versital, it can carry three 1000 lb stores, a CVER can only carry two. Reddog :wub: Oops - my response was to the member who stated that the "design" flaw that the pylons are to close together. Mistakenly got replied to yours. Agree with not posting to much info, I work for the Rhino manufacturer, and I also won't post much either. :wub: Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Reddog Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 No problem Red, sorry if my post came across wrong. As far as the pylons being too close, I think they there about the same distance as the A-7 pylons were, just closer to the ground so it's easier to load. :wub: Reddog :wub: Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Red_Baron_13 Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 Well sorry but after reading some questions and other stuff he makes me wonder that the SH is useless or a waste of money.Don't want to flame or act like a trol but:Mer?No Ter?No Dual racks like CVER/VER with a couple of GBUs even the lightest type?No Fuel tanks?Yes lots of them AA missile?Nope,maybe,n/a depending on enemy AA threat Speed?Acceleration?Same or slowest as the Legacy one Now: Good markings?Nope all low-viz Past Good markings?Yep but they were all Tomcat-like and really sad for me I'll stop there Before we continue the trashing - most of the loadout limitations are due to MONEY and not anything to do with the Rhino's design. It takes a long time and a lot of flight hours to clear those configurations. Consider that the Tomcat didn't carry anywhere near the variaty of stores as the Hornet, and remember, each combination must be tested. The wall to wall AMRAAMs and dual weapons will be out in the fleet before long. I have personally seen the Rhino carry ten (no that is not misprint) GBU-32 1000 JDAMs and drop them. So be watching navy.mil, you'll be seeing multiple weapons soon. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Reddog Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 To add to Red's post. When I was in VX-23 we loaded 10 x Mk 83's, centerline drop tank, AT FLIR on the left shoulder station and a AIM-120 on the right shoulder station. The loads will come, give it time. The Tomcat wasn't a super star over night, it takes time. Reddog :wub: Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.