"Boeing's Super Hornet 'Blue Light Special'"

Boeing's Super Hornet 'Blue Light Special'
Aviation Week & Space Technology
02/04/2008 , page 24

Boeing pitches leap to a still-nebulous sixth-generation, multipurpose
fighter design

Boeing is trying to chip away at Lockheed Martin's lead in the future
fighter stakes by pitching further variants of the F/A-18 Super
Hornet, followed with the promise of a leap to what some now dub a
sixth-generation combat aircraft.

The company is continuing to push both the Super Hornet and the F-15
Eagle in the export arena, and may be eroding some potential Lockheed
Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter markets. In the mid-term, however,
Boeing requires a new platform if it wants to sell combat aircraft
beyond the final iterations of its current generation.

The underlying economic message is that in a time of flat defense
spending, there's money to be saved through extending the life of
Super Hornets by adding advanced technologies instead of buying some
versions of the F-35 (in particular, the U.S. Navy's F-35C). By
postponing fifth-generation fighter purchases, some technology
investments could be delayed to around 2024, when Pentagon officials
say potential air defense threats will make their next major advance.

Boeing is touting an even newer version of the Super Hornet that would
be paired with an advanced sixth-generation fighter that has a combat
radius of more than 1,000 mi., stealth against low-frequency radars,
and that would be available about 2024. In particular, Boeing analysts
have targeted the C-version designed for conventional aircraft carrier
operations, particularly if it slips schedule and gains cost. They
hasten to add that they're not suggesting the U.S. Air Force buy the
Super Hornet instead of the F-35A. Fifth-generation fighter
characteristics are generally held to be all-aspect stealth and the
ability to sustain supersonic speed without the use of afterburner.

The approach being pushed by Boeing is to use a further upgrade of the
Super Hornet as a bridge to a new combat aircraft. Options being
considered are to further improve the Super Hornet's stealth
characteristics in the forward hemisphere coupled with an increase in
range. This would provide enough capability to allow customers to
delay moving to a next-generation platform until a sixth-generation
design is available, rather than buying the fifth-generation F-35
first.

Boeing has already been looking around at potential customers for a
next-generation design, with South Korea's KF-X project a candidate.
The future of this project is uncertain, and Boeing would seek serious
domestic interest before committing to a development.

The Block 3 F/A-18E/F Super Hornet also would include distributed
target processing to optimize the integration of the sensors as well
as an advanced MIDS-JTRS data link that later could be changed to
satellite communications for even better connectivity. If the Navy
decides on changes of the magnitude that produced the Super Hornet E
and F models, the design would involve increased fuel volume in the
wings and fuselage, redesigned wings and a more efficient engine.

"The [Navy] C-version of the F-35 doesn't buy you a lot that the Super
Hornet doesn't provide," argues Bob Gower, Boeing's vice president for
F/A-18 and EA-18G programs. "Our strategy is to create a compelling
reason for the services to go [directly] to the next- [sixth-]
generation platform. How do you bridge F/A-18E/F to get us there? We
want to convince customers to stay with [Super Hornet] a few years
longer--by adding advanced capabilities and lowering price--so that they
can get to the sixth generation faster. If you go to JSF first, it's
going to be a long time."

Meanwhile, Lockheed Martin and the companies with which it may partner
are not ignoring their own next-generation designs. Advanced programs
researchers at Lockheed Martin say they want to build a multirole
aircraft that, with a few modifications, can handle the missions of
long-range surveillance, sixth-generation fighter and long-range
strike. Leaving aside the issue of price, they are looking at
operational altitudes of 80,000 ft., broad-spectrum stealth, a range
of about 3,000 mi. and multiple-Mach speeds.

Why be one-dimensional," says a Lockheed Martin official with insight
into some of these discussions. "It will be a multirole aircraft with
the ability to get there faster. It won't be unmanned, and there may
be the capability to control unmanned aircraft that are launched from
inside the combat area or from a carrier battle group closer to the
targets of interest."

Given the difference in performance the two companies appear to be
considering, it may well be that Boeing is looking at a low-end
aircraft while Lockheed Martin might be considering a higher-priced
option.

Another part of Boeing's argument is that the "Navy is comfortable
with the Super Hornet against the highest [enemy] threat through 2024,
with the [improved] capabilities we have in the flight plan," says
Gower. "The ability to counter the threat gets you to about the point
that [Boeing's] sixth generation is available."

The Navy is also interested in how the Next-Generation Jammer will
improve the Super Hornet's survivability, particularly when combined
with the EA-18G Growler's long-range, electronic attack weapons. Some
of the initiatives involve algorithms that will be able to mix or
separate up to 25 signals using the same time slot and frequency. With
electronic fingerprinting, the system could pluck threats and cell
tower data from other information, or compress much more data into a
single communications line (AW&ST Jan. 21, p. 48).

"We went to digital receivers so that when we go into a cluttered
[electronic] environment with lots of commercial activity [mixed with]
threats, we can separate them," says Gower. Another "part of what
you'll see in the future is the Growler making better use of its AESA
[radar] and electronic attack capability. There'll be seamless
[electronic attack] across the spectrum."

With today's advanced air defenses, "it doesn't matter if you're an F/
A-18 or a JSF, because you're not going into a heavy threat
environment without electronic warfare protection," he says. This,
coupled with continuing reductions in radar signature, improves
survivability.

"The signature of the Es and Fs has improved dramatically, and
technologies continue to advance in those areas," including radar
cross-section reduction of external stores and engine inlets. He also
contends that further improvements are possible by making wise choices
about what the aircraft carries.

"That involves signature size of the weapon, but not necessarily its
physical size," says Gower. There's ongoing work in the U.S. and
Europe into reducing the signature of external stores through the use
of radar-absorbent material shrouds, or blankets, as well as making
signature reduction a baseline design driver, particularly for
standoff weapons.

"The U.S. Air Force and Navy are now talking a lot more about where
they need to go with sixth generation to get beyond JSF
[performance]," says Gower. "It could be unmanned, but I think you
will see a combination of missions--some manned, some unmanned."

In addition to a small signature and greater range, carrying more
bombs internally is seen as a key discriminator.

"If I have to penetrate heavy enemy air defenses, I want to be
carrying more than one or two bombs," says Gower. "Our main focus will
be on fitting more [conventional bombs] into the weapons bay. That
will mean smaller bombs and weapons that look different from what we
see today--along the lines of [multiple-shot or disposable] high-power
microwave weapons. Standoff weapons are also a piece of the solution.
Those will be important factors in how far a multirole aircraft needs
to go."

Also, the Navy is facing an F/A-18 inventory shortfall. For its 2010
budget planning, the service has to decide if it wants to create a
life-extension program for its F/A-18A-Ds, even though the capability
would be far less than a Super Hornet's. Or they may decide to cut
their losses through buying an even more advanced, Block 3 version of
the Super Hornet. Foreign sales, which would cut costs, might sway
that decision.

"We're talking to the Japanese about both the F-15 and the F/A-18,"
says Gower. "For cruise missile defense, the requirements are an AESA
radar that can detect [the small, sometimes stealthy targets] and a
weapon that can take them out." The U.S. Air Force has developed the
AIM-120C-6 optimized for small, slow targets in head-on attack. The
integration of a weapon in the class of the MBDA Meteor rocket-ramjet
would give an even greater engagement envelope.

"If you want to go downtown [into heavy air defenses], we think we
have enough stealth," he says. "The Japanese looked at the F-22 and
really liked the low observability. That's helping our case because
they like the stealth that the Super Hornet brings to the fight. The
major difference between us and the [F-35] is that it has all-aspect
stealth, and we're optimized for forward stealth."

Boeing also has submitted a proposal to India for 126 aircraft with an
option for 63 more--mostly F/A-18Es and a few two-seat F-models.