Well , look like I won't need more HP I will bid in this one

[SykoBMW]

Look at the other stuff they have for sale, some $10,000,000 flying thing.

[lukasbmw]

Awesome! Just incredibly awesome! I'd give so much just to get a ride in a fighter jet. Is there anywhere to do this?

[bimmerphile]

Awesome! Just incredibly awesome! I'd give so much just to get a ride in a fighter jet. Is there anywhere to do this?

Unless you know some people in the AF in HIGH places, or you are a newscaster for an city where there's an airshow, no.

That F/A-18A is a single-seater anyway.

Then again, AJ flies F-15E's, and those have a spot for WSO's in the back :-D

[Erick]

Well when it comes to 2 seaters, the F-14s are 2 seaters and they'll own an F-18E/F any other day

I still dont know why didnt they pass the idea of the Tomcat2 over the F-18E/F. The E/F is a piece of shit compared to the F-14bs ( excluiding on avionics and electronics ) and the Tomcat 2 project would be upgrading all F-14Ds, so you wouldnt need to build new planes from scratch ( like the F-18 E/F )

[bimmerphile]

Well when it comes to 2 seaters, the F-14s are 2 seaters and they'll own an F-18E/F any other day

How do you figure? I was talking with my friend's cousin at his graduation party, he's a naval aviator, used to fly tomcats a few years ago, and couldn't wait to get bumped to a super hornet.

[Erick]

read it off a magazine..... "flight Journal" was the name if I'm not mistaken.

Maybe the author could be opinionated towards the F-14 and was just bashing the Navy's decision to go with the F/A-18. However he did have solid points in his articles. Things such as the F-14 having a bigger payload, longer range, and travels a lot better at supersonic speeds because of it's retractable wings. The F-18 with their wings can barely withstand Mach 1.

Again, that's what I got from that article..... so I guess out of that and a naval aviator, you have the better edge.

[bimmerphile]

read it off a magazine..... "flight Journal" was the name if I'm not mistaken.

Maybe the author could be opinionated towards the F-14 and was just bashing the Navy's decision to go with the F/A-18. However he did have solid points in his articles. Things such as the F-14 having a bigger payload, longer range, and travels a lot better at supersonic speeds because of it's retractable wings. The F-18 with their wings can barely withstand Mach 1.

Again, that's what I got from that article..... so I guess out of that and a naval aviator, you have the better edge.

From the navy's own spec sheets:

Criteria : (F/A-18/F-14)
Combat Radius: (880nm/500nm)
Max Speed: (Mach 1.86/Mach 1.88)
Armament (Max): (17,750lbs/13,000lbs)

:-)

[Erick]

I would try to research to defend my cause...... but for now.... you won this battle :P.... I am too lazy

[bimmerphile]

I would try to research to defend my cause...... but for now.... you won this battle :P.... I am too lazy

:nice:

[OreoGaborio]

you wanna research & be lazy at the same time?... check out this website

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/index.html

[Erick]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/ptech/0....ap/index.html

Guess it was true after all...

[E30godz]

i cant imagine the government letting that plane go....i bet there is some pricey not so public type of technology on that thing that they wouldnt want falling into enemy (whoever it is) hands....

[bimmerphile]

i cant imagine the government letting that plane go....i bet there is some pricey not so public type of technology on that thing that they wouldnt want falling into enemy (whoever it is) hands....

No weapons systems, no navigation systems, etc etc etc


Blue angels, like our track E30's, get stripped.

[Jon325i]

Top Speed: 1270+ mph
0-60mph: 4.98 Seconds (Full Afterburner)
0-100mph: 6.12 Seconds
0-200mph: 9.45 seconds
0-Mach 1 (740mph, estimated): 24.45 seconds

That is scary-fast. Don't go taking it for a spin on a full stomach

Other than that, its VERY cool. Flying one of those things has to be an amazing experience.

Jon