Aviation > Aviation News (General)

Poll: Should the F/A-18 Hornet be retired?

(1/1)

kyle172:
 F/A-18 Hornet has been on going for years now. But after this recent crash.
Should retirement be a option?

The RCAF in Canada plans to phase out the F/A 18 by 2017-2020. Only 103 remain active today with only 79 upgraded F/A-18A/B aircraft still operational. The new JSF-35 is Canada's official choice to replace its Hornet. It is estimated  that Canada's contribution in development and involvement will exceed  C$ 550 million about even with the USD investment. Meanwhile in Australia it is a different case, who plans to purchase 24 Super Hornets as gap filler. However Australia's involvement in the F-35 Lightning II program have been mired in controversy. Amid criticisms that the F-35A will (1) be unable to compete with proliferating SU-30 family fighters in the region, (2) lack the range or response time that Australia requires, and (3) be both late and very expensive during early production year

ridejumpfly:
Accidents happen, maintenance isn't always perfect.  No reason to retire this aircraft.  Look at the C-5, C130, DC-9s that the military fly's. Those aircraft are much older then the F/A-18. 

NoMad:
A 737 crashed.  Should we retire all of them too?

Robin Rebhan:
Carrier landings and simulated carrier landings will really make any aircraft old in a short time. If you look at the landing gear on any navy plane you can see and understand why.
That said. Would I move into a residence right smack on the glide path of a major military airport? Ummm.....No!  :-o

Navigation

[0] Message Index