Mfcttrf

Best gun to modify into a monsterhunter weapon?

Did WWII Japanese soldiers engage in cannibalism of their enemies?

Traveling from Germany to other countries by train?

How does The Fools Guild make its money?

How can glass marbles naturally occur in a desert?

Are there any financial disadvantages to living significantly "below your means"?

Improving software when the author can see no need for improvement

Is TA-ing worth the opportunity cost?

Infeasibility in mathematical optimization models

Creating a new project with Laravel throws an exception

Does a code snippet compile? Or does it gets compiled?

Creating graph out of particles images

Dereferencing a pointer in a for loop initializer creates a seg fault

Geometric programming: Why are the constraints defined to be less than/equal to 1?

Why was CPU32 core created, and how is it different from 680x0 CPU cores?

Look mom! I made my own (Base 10) numeral system!

Dropdowns & Chevrons for Right to Left languages

Double blind peer review when paper cites author's GitHub repo for code

Team goes to lunch frequently, I do intermittent fasting but still want to socialize

Can a character who casts Shapechange and turns into a spellcaster use innate spellcasting to cast spells with a long casting time?

New computer from Dell with pre-installed Ubuntu won't boot. Should I assume it's an error from Dell?

Can you use the Fly spell to move underwater at a speed of 60 feet?

What happen if I gain the control of aura that enchants an opponent's creature? Would the aura stay attached?

Tikzcd pullback square issue

Why did the RAAF procure the F/A-18 despite being purpose-built for carriers?

Russian-built and NATO (USN, European) probe-and-drogue — are they interoperable?What are the requirements for foreigners to join the RAAF as a fighter pilot?Why did the Avro Vulcan use a delta wing?Why do some aircraft carriers have an upward starting runway?Why are the largest civilian aircraft not adapted for military use?Were there any folding wing biplanes?AWACS - what do these antennas do?Why are special aircraft used for the carriers in the United States Navy?How many planes did the Soviet Union lose to Stinger missiles during Afghanistan War?Was the F4F-1 Wildcat ever built?

.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;

7

$begingroup$

Why did the Royal Australian Air Force (and others) procure the F/A-18 despite being purpose-built for carriers?

military f-18

share|improve this question

edited 9 hours ago

ymb1

77.5k99 gold badges249249 silver badges418418 bronze badges

asked 9 hours ago

Yudhi G.Yudhi G.

3611 bronze badge

New contributor

Yudhi G. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

7

$begingroup$

Why did the Royal Australian Air Force (and others) procure the F/A-18 despite being purpose-built for carriers?

military f-18

share|improve this question

edited 9 hours ago

ymb1

77.5k99 gold badges249249 silver badges418418 bronze badges

asked 9 hours ago

Yudhi G.Yudhi G.

3611 bronze badge

New contributor

Yudhi G. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

Why did the Royal Australian Air Force (and others) procure the F/A-18 despite being purpose-built for carriers?

military f-18

share|improve this question

edited 9 hours ago

ymb1

77.5k99 gold badges249249 silver badges418418 bronze badges

asked 9 hours ago

Yudhi G.Yudhi G.

3611 bronze badge

New contributor

Yudhi G. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

$endgroup$

share|improve this question

edited 9 hours ago

ymb1

77.5k99 gold badges249249 silver badges418418 bronze badges

asked 9 hours ago

Yudhi G.Yudhi G.

3611 bronze badge

New contributor

Yudhi G. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

share|improve this question

edited 9 hours ago

ymb1

77.5k99 gold badges249249 silver badges418418 bronze badges

asked 9 hours ago

Yudhi G.Yudhi G.

3611 bronze badge

New contributor

Yudhi G. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

edited 9 hours ago

ymb1

77.5k99 gold badges249249 silver badges418418 bronze badges

edited 9 hours ago

ymb1

77.5k99 gold badges249249 silver badges418418 bronze badges

asked 9 hours ago

Yudhi G.Yudhi G.

3611 bronze badge

New contributor

Yudhi G. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

asked 9 hours ago

Yudhi G.Yudhi G.

3611 bronze badge

3 Answers
3

active

oldest

votes

10

$begingroup$

Two reasons:

The airplane is extremely versatile, while having adequate performance, and is a good choice when a small airforce needs a do-everything airplane to replace multiple types.

Being designed for carriers, it's overbuilt for normal land operations in many key areas, which means a longer airframe structural life in its much easier life landing on runways. For an air force with a limited budget and the need to run the airplane a long time, it's worth giving up some of the speed/payload/range that was sacrificed by the structural needs of carrier ops.

share|improve this answer

answered 9 hours ago

John KJohn K

37.2k11 gold badge6464 silver badges124124 bronze badges

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

6

$begingroup$

There is a whole article on Wikipedia on the topic:

McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet in Australian service

It's worth reading if you want details, the summary is:

Wanting to replace the Dassault Mirage III, and after considering multiple fighters from multiple nations, it boiled down to the F-16 and F/A-18.

The F-16 had engine issues, inferior radar, no long-range missiles and BVR capability, single engine, and was technologically immature at the time.

share|improve this answer

answered 7 hours ago

ymb1ymb1

77.5k99 gold badges249249 silver badges418418 bronze badges

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  May be worth extending on this answer to highlight the F/A-18's root origin being an existing design that was expanded upon for carrier service, rather than something that was initially somehow a compromised design intended to work off a carrier.
  $endgroup$
  – TheLuckless
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

4

$begingroup$

Because it was the most suitable twin-engine fighter aircraft at the time. The distances between airfields are vast in Australia, and the experience with prior single engine fighter jets was that too many were lost after an engine fail.

share|improve this answer

answered 8 hours ago

KoyovisKoyovis

34.8k88 gold badges9090 silver badges186186 bronze badges

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  That raises the obvious question: is the F/A-18 ETOPS-certified?
  $endgroup$
  – Mark
  58 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Isn't ETOPS specific to passenger carrying aircraft?
  $endgroup$
  – Flexo
  40 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "528"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);

Yudhi G. is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faviation.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f67513%2fwhy-did-the-raaf-procure-the-f-a-18-despite-being-purpose-built-for-carriers%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

10

$begingroup$

Two reasons:

The airplane is extremely versatile, while having adequate performance, and is a good choice when a small airforce needs a do-everything airplane to replace multiple types.

Being designed for carriers, it's overbuilt for normal land operations in many key areas, which means a longer airframe structural life in its much easier life landing on runways. For an air force with a limited budget and the need to run the airplane a long time, it's worth giving up some of the speed/payload/range that was sacrificed by the structural needs of carrier ops.

share|improve this answer

answered 9 hours ago

John KJohn K

37.2k11 gold badge6464 silver badges124124 bronze badges

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

10

$begingroup$

Two reasons:

The airplane is extremely versatile, while having adequate performance, and is a good choice when a small airforce needs a do-everything airplane to replace multiple types.

Being designed for carriers, it's overbuilt for normal land operations in many key areas, which means a longer airframe structural life in its much easier life landing on runways. For an air force with a limited budget and the need to run the airplane a long time, it's worth giving up some of the speed/payload/range that was sacrificed by the structural needs of carrier ops.

share|improve this answer

answered 9 hours ago

John KJohn K

37.2k11 gold badge6464 silver badges124124 bronze badges

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

Two reasons:

The airplane is extremely versatile, while having adequate performance, and is a good choice when a small airforce needs a do-everything airplane to replace multiple types.

Being designed for carriers, it's overbuilt for normal land operations in many key areas, which means a longer airframe structural life in its much easier life landing on runways. For an air force with a limited budget and the need to run the airplane a long time, it's worth giving up some of the speed/payload/range that was sacrificed by the structural needs of carrier ops.

share|improve this answer

answered 9 hours ago

John KJohn K

37.2k11 gold badge6464 silver badges124124 bronze badges

$endgroup$

share|improve this answer

answered 9 hours ago

John KJohn K

37.2k11 gold badge6464 silver badges124124 bronze badges

answered 9 hours ago

John KJohn K

37.2k11 gold badge6464 silver badges124124 bronze badges

answered 9 hours ago

John KJohn K

37.2k11 gold badge6464 silver badges124124 bronze badges

6

$begingroup$

There is a whole article on Wikipedia on the topic:

McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet in Australian service

It's worth reading if you want details, the summary is:

Wanting to replace the Dassault Mirage III, and after considering multiple fighters from multiple nations, it boiled down to the F-16 and F/A-18.

The F-16 had engine issues, inferior radar, no long-range missiles and BVR capability, single engine, and was technologically immature at the time.

share|improve this answer

answered 7 hours ago

ymb1ymb1

77.5k99 gold badges249249 silver badges418418 bronze badges

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  May be worth extending on this answer to highlight the F/A-18's root origin being an existing design that was expanded upon for carrier service, rather than something that was initially somehow a compromised design intended to work off a carrier.
  $endgroup$
  – TheLuckless
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

6

$begingroup$

There is a whole article on Wikipedia on the topic:

McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet in Australian service

It's worth reading if you want details, the summary is:

Wanting to replace the Dassault Mirage III, and after considering multiple fighters from multiple nations, it boiled down to the F-16 and F/A-18.

The F-16 had engine issues, inferior radar, no long-range missiles and BVR capability, single engine, and was technologically immature at the time.

share|improve this answer

answered 7 hours ago

ymb1ymb1

77.5k99 gold badges249249 silver badges418418 bronze badges

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  May be worth extending on this answer to highlight the F/A-18's root origin being an existing design that was expanded upon for carrier service, rather than something that was initially somehow a compromised design intended to work off a carrier.
  $endgroup$
  – TheLuckless
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

There is a whole article on Wikipedia on the topic:

McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet in Australian service

It's worth reading if you want details, the summary is:

Wanting to replace the Dassault Mirage III, and after considering multiple fighters from multiple nations, it boiled down to the F-16 and F/A-18.

The F-16 had engine issues, inferior radar, no long-range missiles and BVR capability, single engine, and was technologically immature at the time.

share|improve this answer

answered 7 hours ago

ymb1ymb1

77.5k99 gold badges249249 silver badges418418 bronze badges

$endgroup$

share|improve this answer

answered 7 hours ago

ymb1ymb1

77.5k99 gold badges249249 silver badges418418 bronze badges

answered 7 hours ago

ymb1ymb1

77.5k99 gold badges249249 silver badges418418 bronze badges

answered 7 hours ago

ymb1ymb1

77.5k99 gold badges249249 silver badges418418 bronze badges

4

$begingroup$

Because it was the most suitable twin-engine fighter aircraft at the time. The distances between airfields are vast in Australia, and the experience with prior single engine fighter jets was that too many were lost after an engine fail.

share|improve this answer

answered 8 hours ago

KoyovisKoyovis

34.8k88 gold badges9090 silver badges186186 bronze badges

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  That raises the obvious question: is the F/A-18 ETOPS-certified?
  $endgroup$
  – Mark
  58 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Isn't ETOPS specific to passenger carrying aircraft?
  $endgroup$
  – Flexo
  40 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

4

$begingroup$

Because it was the most suitable twin-engine fighter aircraft at the time. The distances between airfields are vast in Australia, and the experience with prior single engine fighter jets was that too many were lost after an engine fail.

share|improve this answer

answered 8 hours ago

KoyovisKoyovis

34.8k88 gold badges9090 silver badges186186 bronze badges

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  That raises the obvious question: is the F/A-18 ETOPS-certified?
  $endgroup$
  – Mark
  58 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Isn't ETOPS specific to passenger carrying aircraft?
  $endgroup$
  – Flexo
  40 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

Because it was the most suitable twin-engine fighter aircraft at the time. The distances between airfields are vast in Australia, and the experience with prior single engine fighter jets was that too many were lost after an engine fail.

share|improve this answer

answered 8 hours ago

KoyovisKoyovis

34.8k88 gold badges9090 silver badges186186 bronze badges

$endgroup$

share|improve this answer

answered 8 hours ago

KoyovisKoyovis

34.8k88 gold badges9090 silver badges186186 bronze badges

answered 8 hours ago

KoyovisKoyovis

34.8k88 gold badges9090 silver badges186186 bronze badges

answered 8 hours ago

KoyovisKoyovis

34.8k88 gold badges9090 silver badges186186 bronze badges