F/A-18 Hornet: Perbedaan antara revisi

The Hornet is also notable for having been designed with maintenance in mind, and as a result has required far less downtime than its heavier counterparts, the [[F-14 Tomcat]] and the [[A-6 Intruder]]. Its mean time between failure is three times greater than any other Navy strike aircraft, and requires half the maintenance time.<ref name=FedAmSci/> For example, whereas replacing the engine on the [[A-4 Skyhawk]] required removing the aircraft's tail, the engine on the Hornet is attached at only three points and can be directly removed without excessive disassembly. An experienced maintenance crew can remove and replace an F/A-18 engine in only a couple of hours.

 

 

The [[General Electric]] [[General Electric F404|F404]] engines powering the Hornet were also innovative in that they were designed with operability, reliability, and maintainability first. The result is an engine that, while unexceptional on paper in terms of rated performance, demonstrates exceptional robustness under a variety of conditions and is resistant to stall and flameout. By contrast, the [[Pratt & Whitney TF30]] engines that originally powered the [[F-14 Tomcat|F-14A]] were notoriously prone to compressor stall and flameout under certain flight conditions.