• Military Menu                       

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Industry
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

	Director, Operational Test & Evaluation
FY97 Annual Report

F/A-18 E/F SUPER HORNET

	Navy ACAT IC Program 12 systems LRIP-1 548 planned production Total program cost (TY$) $47.3B Average unit cost (TY$) $55.7M * reflects QDR adjustments Full-rate production 3QFY00 Prime Contractor Boeing

SYSTEM DESCRIPTION & CONTRIBUTION TO JOINT VISION 2010

The F/A-18E (single-seat) and F/A-18F (dual cockpit) Super Hornet will be advanced derivatives of the F/A-18 C/D now in operational service with the Navy and Marine Corps. Designed to overcome existing deficiencies in F/A-18 C/D range, endurance, and carrier bring-back payload, the new design will feature a larger airframe with more fuel capacity and two additional store stations. Additionally, it will have a reduced radar signature, advanced F414 engines, extensive use of composites, and advanced integrated avionics. The projected firepower from Super Hornets operating from aircraft carriers are key components to the Joint Vision of dominant maneuver and precision engagement.

In April 1992, the DAB approved a Milestone IV/II for the F/A-18 E/F program. As a result of the DAB milestone, the Navy entered the EMD phase, which will conclude in FY99 with OPEVAL (OT-IIC). OPEVAL will be preceded by two EOAs (OT-I and OT-IA) and two periods of IOT&E (OT-IIA and OT-IIB) during EMD. A single DAB level decision was reached in March 1997 with a decision to enter Low Rate Production. The FRP decision is expected to be delegated to the service at MS-III in 2000.

OT-I was completed in February 1996. This EOA included an assessment of the survivability, range, and payload improvements, based on data from the first few flights of the new aircraft. Analysis, verified with this early flight test data, indicates that the F/A-18E/F will meet or exceed all range and payload bringback requirements COMOPTEVFOR concluded that the F/A-18E/F is potentially operationally effective and potentially operationally suitable.

OT-1A was completed in December 1996 with a determination that the F/A-18E/F is potentially operationally effective and operationally suitable. Four COIs were scored yellow and none were scored red; however, none of the issues are considered "showstopers". Flight test results were very close to predictions and provided a great deal of confidence in wind tunnel and other predictive models. Based upon these predictions, confirmed by early DT flight testing, the F/A-18E/F is expected meet all range thresholds with margin. However, the extent of the range impact of wing modifications required to correct the wing drop problem are currently unknown. Negative range impacts may significantly reduce these predicted margins in some configurations. Bringback thresholds appear to have been met.

OT-IIA was completed in NOV98 with an assessment of potential operational effectiveness and potential operational suitability. Flight testing focused on validation of the performance data base to assess the accuracy of range and performance predictions. All key performance parameters are expected to be met.

Other testing that pertains to F/A-18E/F survivability that is being monitored by DOT&E includes the ALE-50 Towed Decoy and the Integrated Defensive Electronic Countermeasures System (IDECM).

Building on the vulnerability reduction program for the early F/A-18 aircraft and joint live fire testing of the F/A-18C, as well as actual combat damage incidents, the Navy continues to pursue an aggressive LFT&E program for the F/A-18E/F. Recent LFT&E testing focused on the dry bay fire suppression system and blade out testing of the F-414 engine. Among the design improvements recommended were redundant paths in the gas generator ignition circuitry, intervention techniques to protect the gas generator ignition controller from electrical overloads, and revised engine casing components.

DOT&E concurs with the early operational assessment of the potential operational effectiveness and suitability of the F/A-18 E/F; however, it is too early in the program to assess key survivability issues. The OT&E and LFT&E program now planned for the EMD phase is judged adequate to resolve all critical operational issues by MS-III in 2000. DOT&E is closely involved in the ongoing DT and OT, is monitoring the program's LFT&E activities, and will provide an independent assessment of the final results via a B-LRIP report at MS-III. An assessment of the aircraft's survivability will include the contribution of the IDECM suite that is a separate EMD program, but is intended for the F/A-18E/F when it joins the fleet.

The following is a summary of some key testing issues:

• The current ALE-50 towed decoy cable burns off in flight with afterburner selected. The ALE-50 is expected to be critical to meeting the survivability criteria for the F/A-18E/F and will be the only Electronic Protection (EP) available for the airplane during OPEVAL. Flight testing has also demonstrated that the heat from engine exhaust in basic engine (no afterburner) can cause the dielectric material in the cable to soften, thus causing arcing that turns off electrical power to the decoy. The useable flight envelope is still being explored in flight test.

• Efforts to correct this problem have included a "goal post" attachment on the aft bottom of the airplane designed to hold the cable further from the jet exhaust. Though testing to determine the useable flight envelope is not complete, initial results show this attachment helps keep the cable from burning.

• IDECM will use a fiber optic tow cable that will have different properties from the current kevlar coated electric cable. The current design has the fiber optics wrapped around the outside of the cable's structural core to provide greater flexibility. Flight characteristics and reaction to exhaust heat of the fiber optic cable are currently unknown. Flight tests of IDECM on the E/F are planned for early FY99.

• "Wing Drop" describes an uncommanded wing drop, or change in roll angle, that occurs in the heart of the maneuvering flight envelope. It has occurred between 7-12 degrees angle of attack and .7-.95 mach. It is described as "repeatable" because it can be expected when flying is this regime; however, it is not "predictable" because the direction and severity of roll vary. Sometimes the pilot can easily correct with a small angle of bank change; other times full lateral stick is not enough to "lift" the wing. When this occurs the pilot must release the stick to allow the aircraft to recover nose low and build airspeed before flying again. Other times the wing drop does not occur.

• Although the final configuration has not been determined, various combinations of stall strips, leading edge flap extensions, grit tape, stall fences and vortex generators have proven effective at improving the airplane's flying qualities from unacceptable (defined as level 3) to good (defined as level 1). This determination is a qualitative assessment, made by developmental test pilots, using extensive instrumentation and data collection efforts. However, an assessment of these improvements from an operational perspective has not been made.

• Along with continued data collection in the air and in the wind tunnel, solution options will be assessed using a systems engineering approach to determine their impact on key performance parameters such as range, acceleration, and radar cross section. The goal is to maximize the improvements in flying qualities while minimizing impact on these other performance parameters. Any solution will involve tradeoffs. Mechanical attachments to the leading edge flap or wing surface are likely to result in increased drag and reduced range and acceleration.

• Testing to date indicates a suitable solution can be achieved with an 18-inch snag extension of the leading edge flap, modified flap scheduling and the addition of stall strips and sandpaper. Again, the biggest tradeoff in this case would be increased drag, and radar cross section, and decreased range and acceleration. Initial estimates predict a range decrease of 23 nm in the fighter escort configuration, which is a large part of the expected margin in the ORD specification profile. Therefore, this combination of relatively simple modifications could reduce the predicted range margin for this configuration and profile to essentially zero. When operational considerations of real pilots, flying missions under actual conditions are factored in, there is a potential for this range threshold not being met.

• The program hopes to avoid more complicated modifications such as the addition of a significant stall fence or camber flap design that would likely have an even greater impact on performance specifications. All the expected options can be accomplished within the scheduled timeline for the completion of EMD and start of TECHEVAL and OPEVAL. Data collection and analysis will continue for several months as the program works toward a final configuration. OT-IIB, currently scheduled for March 1998, is the next operational test period. Because the operational test community wants to be able to fly the jet throughout its entire anticipated operational flight envelope, including the wing drop regime, OT-IIB will likely slip to accommodate wing drop solution changes. Negotiations to determine when this test period will occur are under way.

• OT-IIA was conducted primarily in aircraft not configured with weapons systems, but focused on flight test validation of the performance data base in terms of range and acceleration performance. Of note, acceleration of the F/A-18E/F is comparable to both basic and enhance engined F/A-18C aircraft in subsonic and negative G regimes. However, the F/A-18E/F is slower to accelerate to supersonic speeds, in one G flight, compared to the F/A-18C. The tactical implications of this difference will be assessed during future operational testing

The F/A-18E/F Live Fire Test program, based on vulnerability analysis, threat analysis, and ballistic testing of components and major subassemblies, is thorough and aggressive. Despite receiving a waiver from full -up system level live fire testing at MSII, the final test article, SV-52, which was used in the structural drop tests and barricade testing, will be configured very close to a full-up system level test article.

The F/A-18E/F TEMP, approved by DOT&E in April 1996, is current and being executed. Additionally, the program office completed a Live Fire Alternative Plan that was submitted to Congress by DOT&E.

Adequacy of supporting modeling and simulation. A challenge to the OT program will be to design a test strategy that will be able to determine if the F/A-18E/F is more survivable than the F/A-18C/D; a key requirement of the program. Due to the similarity between the two aircraft, any digital model that attempts to predict comparative survivability in a missile fly-out scenario must be a high fidelity model that can account for the very dynamic environment (maneuver, DECM, towed decoy, RCS reduction, etc.). Existing models have many limitations in this regard. Efforts to improve these predictive models using JMASS architecture will likely not be mature in time to support this program.

T&E Program Management. The Integrated Test Team (ITT) conducting the EMD flight program at NAS Patuxent River consists of test pilots from the prime contractor, Navy system command and Navy OT communities. Maintenance and test support is also provided by a combination of government and contractor personnel. This unique management arrangement provides a very rapid cooperative systems approach to problem solving, using all available assets and knowledge while providing great insight with early OT involvement in developmental testing.