An F/A-18F Super Hornet launches from USS Abraham Lincoln in February 2012.
US Navy/PO3 Jonathan Idle
F/A-18E/F Super Hornets have mostly replaced F/A-18 Hornets as the US Navy’s carrier-based fighters.
The Super Hornet is bigger, has more powerful engines and longer range, and can carry a larger payload.
But when it comes to readiness to fly, the older Hornet still beats its younger cousin.
Though the US Navy’s Hornet and Super Hornet fighters share a name and look fairly similar, they are far from the same plane.
The earliest version of the Hornet, the F/A-18A, first flew in 1978. The Super Hornet — which includes the single-seat F/A-18E and the two-seat F/A-18F — made its maiden flight in 1995.
Despite a similar name, the Super Hornet is essentially a new aircraft, with a bigger airframe, more powerful engines, a longer range, and the ability to carry a larger payload.
When it comes to readiness to fly, however, the older Hornet beats its younger cousin. In fact, the F/A-18E/F has lower availability rates than US Air Force jets, and that has experts wondering about the long-term viability of the Super Hornet fleet.
The Super Hornet has mostly replaced the Hornet as the Navy’s carrier-based fighter. The service is also adding the F-35C to its carrier air wings. But the Marine Corps will continue flying F/A-18C/D Hornets until they are replaced by the F-35B.
Sailors replace a valve on an F/A-18E Super Hornet aboard USS Nimitz in December 2022.
US Navy/MCS3 Kevin Tang
Because the Super Hornet entered service in 1999 — a decade later than the original Hornet — it’s a newer plane and thus tends to have higher average availability, which the Congressional Budget Office defines as the “percentage of time an aircraft can be flown on training or operational missions.”
Super Hornet availability is now about 41% compared to about 26% for the Hornet, whose readiness dropped sharply at about the 25-year mark. But the CBO asked a more specific question: How did Hornets compare to Super Hornets at a similar age?
“When compared with F/A-18C/Ds of the same age, the Super Hornet fleet has had lower availability rates,” according to a CBO report published in February. “For example, Super Hornet availability at age 10 was about 18 percentage points lower than F/A-18C/D availability at age 10 and is comparable to F/A-18C/D availability at age 20.”
Was the discrepancy caused by Super Hornets flying more hours than Hornets? Typical lifetime flying hours for F/A-18E/Fs were higher than for F/A-18C/Ds until the six-year mark, after which the Hornet surpassed its successor.
An F/A-18F Super Hornet, left, and an E/A-18G Growler on one of USS Gerald R. Ford’s aircraft elevators in January 2020.
US Navy/MCS Seaman Jesus O. Aguiar
On the other hand, F/A-18E/Fs have higher availability than the E/A-18G Growler, the electronic-warfare version of the Super Hornet. But the Growler, which is packed with jamming gear, is a more complex aircraft and would be expected to have more frequent maintenance issues.
What is particularly interesting is how the Super Hornet compares to US Air Force fighter and attack aircraft. The Air Force has suffered major problems with aircraft readiness, including a mission-capable rate of about 52% for F-22 fighters and B-1 bombers in 2022. (The aircraft with the highest mission-capable rate the time was actually the MQ-9 Reaper drone, at 91%.)
But availability has been more a problem for the Navy: A 2022 CBO study found that while both Air Force and Navy availability rates decreased between 2001 and 2019, the drop was steeper for the Navy, particularly because aging F/A-18C/Ds were not ready to fly.
Despite the Super Hornet being a newer aircraft than many Air Force combat jets, it actually had lower availability compared to Air Force planes, such as the older F-15C/D fighter and the A-10 Warthog. Yet there may be good reason for this.
First, Navy planes simply fly more. CBO research has found that “the Navy flies its fighter and attack aircraft more hours per month than the Air Force flies its aircraft.”
An F/A-18F Super Hornet launches from USS George H.W. Bush in February 2022.
US Navy/MCS Seaman Felix Castillo Reyes
Just as important is the natural wear and tear on Navy fighter jets that operate from floating airfields. “Air Force aircraft do not take off from and land on aircraft carriers, so they are not subject to the related stresses and the saltwater corrosion that Super Hornets face,” the CBO said.
The question is what all this means for the Super Hornet’s long-term prospects. The Navy already plans to stop buying Super Hornets after 2025 and focus instead on the F/A-XX project, about which details are murky, as well as on the F-35 and carrier-based drones. (Navy officials say they hope to have drones compose 60% of future carrier air wings.)
Aircraft do enter a period of graceful aging at some point. For example, availability rates for the F-15E stabilized at the 10- to 25-year mark, and for the A-10 at age 25 to 35. Because the Super Hornet is relatively new — especially compared to 1970s aircraft like the A-10 and F-15 — the Navy might be able to keep F/18E/Fs in service longer.
For example, the Department of the Navy “could replace existing parts with new ones that have been redesigned for greater reliability or longevity,” CBO concluded. “Or it could devote more resources to routine maintenance (such as keeping on hand a more robust supply of spare parts).”
Michael Peck is a defense writer whose work has appeared in Forbes, Defense News, Foreign Policy magazine, and other publications. He holds a master’s in political science. Follow him on Twitter and LinkedIn.